TIFF vs JEPG
in [Scanners]
|
Prev: canon F914900
Next: Canon FB 630 U - Driver
From: Golden on 24 Apr 2006 12:04 >But what Don will not do is back up his craziness with a single image. You're not gonna get him to reply by calling him crazy, that's for sure. >When Rafe supplied an image that showed this was wrong Don said the >image must not be right, in a rather long winded way. Actually that's not what he said. He just called it unsuitable. >Words are cheap but how do we know if the person spewing them out >really knows what they are talking about? By sticking to facts instead of calling him crazy. But anyway, I don't wanna get into a brawl with yous guys. I agree with Joe. It's really sad to try and pick a fight with a guy who's ignoring you. The more you try the more desperate you look. So cool it guys. Come on. For our sakes. Golden
From: rafe b on 24 Apr 2006 16:29 "Golden" <goldenlasky(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1145894698.755160.219000(a)i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > I agree with Joe. It's really sad to try and pick a fight with a guy > who's ignoring you. The more you try the more desperate you look. It's a no-win situation at this point. You're probably right, there's no point addressing Don any more. He's on the "high road" to nowhere, as far as I'm concerned. Bon Voyage. But what to do with Don's misinformation, which is now on public record? Should we leave it there for newbies to step into? rafe b www.terrapinphoto.com
From: Joe on 25 Apr 2006 10:23 >Be glad that some are >willing to challenge his false claims, otherwise the misinformation >would rule in this newsgroup. I do not know who is right and who is wrong because all that is over my head. But he does not go on and on trying to pick a fight and provoke someone who is ignoring him. To me that is a Good Thing. So even if what you say is true I like much more what he does to what his many critics do. But instead of stopping all this I just made it worse so I am going back to lurking. Joe
From: Don on 25 Apr 2006 10:27 On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:21:05 -0400, Raphael Bustin <foo(a)bar.com> wrote: >Don's posts are some of the >longest you'll see anywhere on USENET. .... >He responds point-by-point to any criticism, however >slight, to explain with mountains of words that the >fault can't possibly lie in his logic. I know it's a very hard concept to grasp, but that's called being thorough, consistent and respecting every counter point. Is that short enough for you? ;o) Don. P.S. Have you seen any of Kennedy's posts? I'd say that's a good company to be in if (according to *your* metric) size is all that matters. Oh, is that what this is all about? Message length envy? ;o)
From: rafe b on 25 Apr 2006 11:07
"Joe" <Joe_Nanaimo(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1145975034.891385.85490(a)v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com... > I do not know who is right and who is wrong because all that is over my > head. Why make that assumption? Why not just try it and see? There's no need to believe Don, or me, or Scott or Bart. None of this stuff is rocket science. What's unfortunate is that you feel this discussion is "over your head." It's not. The statements made in this thread can be tested by anyone. All it takes is a few minutes' worth of experimenting - assuming you already have a computer, monitor and image editor. I invite you to de-lurk. Try some of the things that folks have remarked on in this thread, and report back *your* experience. That would be a real contribution to the group, and you might learn a bit in the process. rafe b www.terrapinphoto.com |