Commenting On Unused Equipment
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Neil Harrington on 28 Oct 2009 12:59 "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:25qee5h8skamoc67bpvbdbu8kc8qdjhq53(a)4ax.com... > > Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, > it makes you a dSLR owner. And buying a tractor doesn't make you a farmer. Nevertheless, real farmers buy tractors and real photographers buy DSLRs.
From: Neil Harrington on 28 Oct 2009 13:08 "George Kerby" <ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:C70C71FC.3744B%ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com... > > > > On 10/26/09 10:27 PM, in article > acpce5drnv7l03118nnsrbh6sirvur1nj5(a)4ax.com, > "Curiouser and Curiouser" <questioning(a)anyisp.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:02:31 -0700, Savageduck >> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >> >>> On 2009-10-26 19:52:48 -0700, Michael <adunc79617(a)mypacks.net> said: >>> >>>> On 2009-10-26 22:33:32 -0400, John A. <john(a)nowhere.invalid> said: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:26:05 -0500, Curiouser and Curiouser >>>>> <questioning(a)anyisp.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I sometimes wonder why people feel the need to make authoritative >>>>>> comments >>>>>> on equipment they've never used, never touched, and never even >>>>>> considered >>>>>> as part of their camera gear. >>>>> >>>>> You tell us. Why do you praise P&S cameras to high heaven while >>>>> denigrating DSLRs you've never used, touched, nor even considered? >>>>> >>>>> We know why, of course: you're the infamous P&S Troll. We simply don't >>>>> know specifically why you are a troll, or why you chose to target this >>>>> group in particular. Nor do we care, actually. >>>> >>>> I was wondering how many responses I'd read before someone recognized >>>> our infamous friend. >>> >>> It's all in the words. >> >> I'd wonder how many of those DSLR psychotics would reply, never realizing >> that I HAVE used DSLRs, sold them all when I found out P&S cameras were >> better. So I *DO* have first-hand knowledge of what I speak about. How do >> you think I know of so many of the glaring faults wrapped in the DSLR >> design concept? Found the faults by using the cameras. >> >> You will also note, that I *NEVER* go out of my way to slam any camera >> unless some psychotic troll is inventing stories about P&S cameras >> they've >> never used. I don't slam DSLRs, I only defend P&S cameras against the >> wild >> imaginings of insecure and psychotic DSLR-Trolls. It's that simple. >> >> I'm so far ahead of you psychotic, useless, ignorant, and inexperienced >> trolls in experience and knowledge about photography and the required >> equipment that you don't even have a clue. >> > I've concluded that you are suffering from a severe case of > Anatidaephobia... <guffaw!> Well, that was worth looking up! :-)
From: Curiouser and Curiouser on 28 Oct 2009 13:15 On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:39:19 -0400, "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote: > >"Miles Bader" <miles(a)gnu.org> wrote in message >news:buo8wex1oxp.fsf(a)dhlpc061.dev.necel.com... >> Michael <adunc79617(a)mypacks.net> writes: >>>> We know why, of course: you're the infamous P&S Troll. We simply don't >>>> know specifically why you are a troll, or why you chose to target this >>>> group in particular. Nor do we care, actually. >>> >>> I was wondering how many responses I'd read before someone recognized >>> our infamous friend. >> >> Using one of his standard trolling techniques too. He may be an idiot >> when it comes to photography, but he's actually pretty skillful at >> trolling... > >I wouldn't say he's particularly skillful at it, but he does have an >effective (if transparent) procedure for it. The procedure is simple enough >that I think anyone could do it; it requires little if any skill: > >1. Enter a newsgroup making any ordinary trollish comment > >2. Crudely insult anyone who replies, while accusing *them* of being a troll > >Simple as that. > Since you failed to address or answer the question, here it is again. Any further off-topic trolling proves you to be nothing but a troll, again. Answer the question or prove yourself to be a troll, again. It's that simple. > >I sometimes wonder why people feel the need to make authoritative comments >on equipment they've never used, never touched, and never even considered >as part of their camera gear. > >There have been outlandish claims being made. Mostly by dSLR proponents >over what can and cannot be done with the myriad P&S cameras available for >the last decade. Yet, when pressed for clarity, you find out they've never >even been near the cameras they are commenting on so strongly, assuredly, >and adamantly with their self-appointed authoritative and seemingly (to >themselves) concrete stance. They will loudly and incessantly claim that >some camera does not have a feature, when in fact a large range of cameras, >sometimes all of those styles of cameras do indeed have that feature or >capability. They would instantly know this if they would only go out and >test it for themselves with real cameras. But no, to them they have >imagined something about some equipment that they've never touched which is >nothing but a total fabrication in their own minds. Believing their >imaginations as if it is some kind of fact. Like any psychotic religious >zealot would. > >What causes them to do this? I've never commented on nor given advice about >anything in life other than that with which I have had first-hand knowledge >and experience of my own in that field. If I haven't personally tested >something for myself, then I am in no position to make comments about it. >Even reading about something doesn't mean what I am reading is true >representation of whatever might be in question. I MUST test things for >myself before I feel I can comment on anything with any sense of authority >whatsoever. I also never strongly rely on some "credible"(?) 3rd-party's >review of photography equipment. I learned long ago after having purchased >equipment that even those well-meaning reviewers failed to understand how >to use a camera, a feature of that camera, or other equipment properly. Or >their simplified testing methods to begin with had huge faults in them. >(GIGO) Which I only discovered later when my findings didn't match their >findings, and I started to wonder why. Their testing methods were to blame. > >So what causes this need for people to pretend to be authorities on things >that they have no real knowledge about? > >Are they just psychotic trolls? And I'm not using the term "psychotic" >pejoratively. I believe they really are psychotic if they can so adamantly >believe what they say, when in fact, reality and genuine experience proves >them out to be in complete error. If so, if that's all they are, psychotic >trolls, they seem to be wall-to-wall in these newsgroups. Far more in >abundance than those who have genuine experience and knowledge about the >subjects at hand.
From: John McWilliams on 28 Oct 2009 13:35 Neil Harrington wrote: > "Miles Bader" <miles(a)gnu.org> wrote in message > news:buo8wex1oxp.fsf(a)dhlpc061.dev.necel.com... >> Michael <adunc79617(a)mypacks.net> writes: >>>> We know why, of course: you're the infamous P&S Troll. We simply don't >>>> know specifically why you are a troll, or why you chose to target this >>>> group in particular. Nor do we care, actually. >>> I was wondering how many responses I'd read before someone recognized >>> our infamous friend. >> Using one of his standard trolling techniques too. He may be an idiot >> when it comes to photography, but he's actually pretty skillful at >> trolling... > > I wouldn't say he's particularly skillful at it, but he does have an > effective (if transparent) procedure for it. The procedure is simple enough > that I think anyone could do it; it requires little if any skill: > > 1. Enter a newsgroup making any ordinary trollish comment > > 2. Crudely insult anyone who replies, while accusing *them* of being a troll > > Simple as that. Why are so many unable to resist? Well, a handful continually rise to the bait. -- john mcwilliams
From: Savageduck on 28 Oct 2009 13:41
On 2009-10-28 10:08:32 -0700, "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> said: > > "George Kerby" <ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:C70C71FC.3744B%ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com... >> >> >> >> On 10/26/09 10:27 PM, in article >> acpce5drnv7l03118nnsrbh6sirvur1nj5(a)4ax.com, >> "Curiouser and Curiouser" <questioning(a)anyisp.net> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:02:31 -0700, Savageduck >>> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2009-10-26 19:52:48 -0700, Michael <adunc79617(a)mypacks.net> said: >>>> >>>>> On 2009-10-26 22:33:32 -0400, John A. <john(a)nowhere.invalid> said: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:26:05 -0500, Curiouser and Curiouser >>>>>> <questioning(a)anyisp.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I sometimes wonder why people feel the need to make authoritative >>>>>>> comments >>>>>>> on equipment they've never used, never touched, and never even >>>>>>> considered >>>>>>> as part of their camera gear. >>>>>> >>>>>> You tell us. Why do you praise P&S cameras to high heaven while >>>>>> denigrating DSLRs you've never used, touched, nor even considered? >>>>>> >>>>>> We know why, of course: you're the infamous P&S Troll. We simply don't >>>>>> know specifically why you are a troll, or why you chose to target this >>>>>> group in particular. Nor do we care, actually. >>>>> >>>>> I was wondering how many responses I'd read before someone recognized >>>>> our infamous friend. >>>> >>>> It's all in the words. >>> >>> I'd wonder how many of those DSLR psychotics would reply, never realizing >>> that I HAVE used DSLRs, sold them all when I found out P&S cameras were >>> better. So I *DO* have first-hand knowledge of what I speak about. How do >>> you think I know of so many of the glaring faults wrapped in the DSLR >>> design concept? Found the faults by using the cameras. >>> >>> You will also note, that I *NEVER* go out of my way to slam any camera >>> unless some psychotic troll is inventing stories about P&S cameras >>> they've >>> never used. I don't slam DSLRs, I only defend P&S cameras against the >>> wild >>> imaginings of insecure and psychotic DSLR-Trolls. It's that simple. >>> >>> I'm so far ahead of you psychotic, useless, ignorant, and inexperienced >>> trolls in experience and knowledge about photography and the required >>> equipment that you don't even have a clue. >>> >> I've concluded that you are suffering from a severe case of >> Anatidaephobia... > > <guffaw!> > > Well, that was worth looking up! :-) Reciprocal snicker! -- Regards, Savageduck |