Going back to full frame

Started Sep 27, 2011 | Discussions thread
John King
John King Forum Pro • Posts: 14,941
For Newman, Rask and Olyflyer, and the other serial trolls in this thread

Newman, "Rikke Rask" and "Olyflyer"

Hercules Grytpype-Thynne wrote:

John King wrote:


Hercules Grytpype-Thynne wrote:

...glad to see you gloss over the bulk of the post in which I showed that your 'helpful advice' was nonsense, most likely simply motivated by melavolence.

It is extremely predictable that you would see it that way. It is characteristic of your behaviour. It is precisely that behaviour that advertises your state of mind to the whole world, or most of it anyway ...

Did you do the test yet?

This one:

Did you get the perfect score I predicted?

I think you certainly should; after all, you deserve it ...

Your post above bears little if any resemblance to your response in that original thread ...

After you have applied your "special interpretation" to things that mean something else, it appears to you that everyone is out to get you. Eventually, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy ...

BTW, you and your trolling buddies have completely destroyed this person's thread in your usual indecent haste to bash anyone who you hate ...

But then, that's how you psychopaths behave, isn't it? ;).

Let's examine what you have just written in a little more detail, John, taking into account the context that you claim to be a psychologist.

And you claim to be a human being ...

First you refer me to a website, which purports to undertake a diagnosis of psychopathy. However, it is not a site associated with any reputable psycologist or institution, what it is a US political website aimed against the Clintons, run by who knows what kind of crank, it is totally anonymous. So,we may conclude that your aim was not to help or make any kind of serious psychological diagnosis.

Your conclusion is wrong, as usual. I only mentioned that site because it has an easy to understand version of that very well known 20 point test. Even you should be able to comprehend it with a little effort.

You could try the British Journal of Psychiatry site if you wish to disparage the validity of the test. They are publishing the same test. Are they wrong too? You really are are poseur , Newman. The assessment of this test and its validity is published by them here:

Moving right along ...

I enjoyed your "interaction" with Mr Joinson here:


Shame that it appears to have been deleted. I wonder why?

You know how it goes, you can usually spot who stepped over the limit by whose post was deleted, and took with it all the dependent posts. In this case the deleted post was Simon's, perhaps because it contained a libellous statement about the conduct of another photographic publication.

I see that Mr Joinson has said all that needs to be said about your "valuable contributions" to this site here:

But the rest of the thread makes for a good laugh as well. He also re-states his deleted post.
You are the joke, Newman.

For "Olyflyer ":

olyflyer wrote:
OF: Really, who is more of a "non-photographer fool" between Sergey and you?

JK: Is this a competition too?

OF: No, it's a test of self criticism...

It is nothing of the sort. You are merely being very rude about my photography. However, you seem to have no insight into your own motivations; even less than your reading comprehension, which beggars the imagination as to how you end up with the "meanings" you do so regularly from plainly written English that says nothing like what you apparently think it says ...

My quoting Green's statement that I was a " non-photographer fool " back at him is suddenly offensive in some way? Why wasn't it offensive when Green described me in that way?

I notice how you also failed even to comment on one of your fellow travellers asking if my " parents were siblings " in this very thread. I presume from your failure to make any statement concerning such an incredibly offensive thing to say that you are tacitly supporting the "person" who said it.

I also note that you made two posts within 15 minutes, apparently in order to close this thread before I could post a response in it. THEN you seek to claim some sort of moral high ground here? What a joke.

AND for "Rikke ":

Who said:

" Rikke made fun of the oft repeated claim that she doesn't own Oly equipment. A claim even made by some people from Oz when she published test images to illustrate advantageous features of combining the 14-54 with the x1.4 tele converter (mounted on her E-3). Somebody named John for some reason didn't grasp that Rikke was showing a strong point of the system and chose to ridicule her choice of test target instead ."

I note that you are writing of "yourself" in the third person. I can understand why that is the case ...

I also note that "Rikke" can make a supposedly "positive comment" seem more like trashing and bashing with very little apparent effort ... An occurrence that is so frequent as to become very obvious to most here ...

BTW, for those who wish to criticise me for posting when, how and what I see fit within what is allowed by DPR, I might suggest to you that I have more important and pressing matters in my life than answering the "questions" of the worst serial trolls on this forum.

Really it is a matter of getting the incessant crap you all spout here into perspective. And when one assigns it its proper place in the scheme of things, it is somewhere near the bottom of the swamp ...

-- hide signature --


 John King's gear list:John King's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 II +17 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow