"Please don't tell me how to react/respond to all this craziness because you are not the one being repeatedly subjected to it."
Did I tell you how to react or respond? Cause and effect. Introspection. Tom C. >From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> >Subject: RE: More 85mm f2.0 smc-M bokeh >Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:16:21 -0400 > >HUH? If someone else is WRONG when >they imply I must not know what the hell I am >doing to defend their WRONG contention, they >are going to get a reply to set he record straight. >I dont have any other choice but to defend >myself.. > >And I dont "feel" persecuted, I AM being persecuted >here. I get long third party letters saying I shouldnt >be calling someone "clueless" after being wrongly >provoked while other as posting My name and the A-word >in caps right in the subject headers WITHOUT any provocation >whatsoever. Please don't tell me how to react/respond >to all this craziness because you are not the one being >repeatedly subjected to it. >jco > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >Tom C >Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 6:20 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: RE: More 85mm f2.0 smc-M bokeh > > >I'm curious if this is the only place you feel persecuted or if it >occurs >elsewhere in life and online as well. > >You know people have their own perceptions and opinions. Those >perceptions >and opinions will almost always be different from one another. It does >not >make your's right and someone else's wrong. > >And even if someone else was wrong, so what? > > >Tom C. > > > > >From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > >To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> > >Subject: RE: More 85mm f2.0 smc-M bokeh > >Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:01:09 -0400 > > > >NO this was not a general discussion that I responded to harshly, he > >specifically stated the the M85 F2.0 lens which the thread was > >originally written about "has just about the smoothest bokeh of any > >lens I have seen" and suggested that the reason was most likely bad > >digital processing completely ignoring the fact that I had already > >stated teh M85 F2.0 lens had very bad bokeh visible IN THE VIEWFINDER > >which should have been a clue for him as well as the photos > >I posted. If he suspected that sharpening or processing > >might be causing the problem he should have asked about it, not > >assumed it must be, implying that I dont know what bad bokeh > >is when I see it or cant do basic digital image processing. > > > >Regarding "taking my side" on that other thread, continuing that thread > > >by posting replies without bothering to change the thread header > >containing JCO and the offensive "A-word" right in the subject > >header was NOT taking my side the way I see/saw it, it only made it far > >worse & > >I found it hard to believe it wasnt being done intentionally at the > >time. > >The whole point of my complaint was that was being said in the headers > >and you all just continued to do it at the time... > >jco > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > > >Shel Belinkoff > >Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 5:33 PM > >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >Subject: RE: More 85mm f2.0 smc-M bokeh > > > > > >Looks like I'm going to need tighter filtering, but, as long as I saw > >this ... > > > >JCO, the thread has moved from your specific comment through the > >general rendering of the 85mm lens bokeh to some general comments about > > >bokeh. It's no longer about YOUR specific comments. Threads and > >discussions on the PDML, as well as other mail lists, tend to wander. > > > >Further, you are now making a personal attack by calling a contributor > >to the thread "clueless." True, it's only a mild attack, but one > >that's going to leave you open to some negative comments and possibly > >start another flame war, more than likely causing you to, once again, > >use abusive language and post your messages using lots of upper case > >letters, and get any number of people here to the point where they'll > >start responding in kind, as which already seems to be the case. > > > >I just don't understand you. A couple of days ago Norm and I > >apologized for contributing to the last outburst, and Tim strongly took > > >your side of that issue, and your response was "fuck you" in three > >separate posts, one to Norm, one directed at me, and least > >understandable, one to Tim. > > > >Relax, chill out, enjoy your camera, or your DVD player, or your HDTV > >... vent your anger in other ways - go out and take a walk, get some > >exercise, > >cut back on the sugar intake. LIGHTEN UP - not every comment is about > >you > >or directed to you. > > > >Kind regards, > > > >Shel > > > > > > > > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > > From: "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Secondly, this WR guy's posts, really show > > > > he is completely clueless. His deductions make > > > > no sense because he either doesnt understand > > > > or never noticed how unsharp mask works > > > > or he doesnt read the posts in entirety because I clearly stated > > > > that this bokeh problem is easily visible in the viewfinder. > > > > Either or both ways its just plain bad to be posting completely > > > > wrong stuff > > > > > > like that based on lack of knowledge in the manner in which he > > > > posts > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > >-- > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >[email protected] > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > >-- > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >[email protected] > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
