Never fear, Frank. I'm done. I put Bill back where he belongs. On Jan 30, 2012, at 6:16 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> Now, now then boys. This sort of behaviour only hurts both of you. Shake > hands and make up. It's time to come in for dinner anyway. Why I bet by > tomorrow you'll have forgotten all about this and be playing like this never > happened. > ************** > Oh, sorry, I must have just had a childhood flashback or something. I'm okay > now. > > Carry on... > > ;-) > > cheers, > frank > > "What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." -- > Christopher Hitchens > > --- Original Message --- > > From: Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> > Sent: January 30, 2012 1/30/12 > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Why Not RAW Format on ALL Digital Cameras? > > > On Jan 30, 2012, at 5:18 PM, William Robb wrote: > >> On 29/01/2012 8:46 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 29, 2012, at 9:23 PM, William Robb wrote: >>> >>>> On 29/01/2012 11:42 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I would find the trend toward more technology disturbing if there were no >>>>> options. >>>> But since I can focus manually at will, or I can choose to use a single >>>> autofocus point >>>> -- with the plus of being able to choose the location of that pint -- >>>> the presence of other options doesn't bother me in the least. >>>> Camera makers, for the most part, aren't brain dead. They're not going to >>>> take away the >>>> options that many of us require. More technology is fine, since it doesn't >>>> get in my way. >>>>> >>>> You are thinking only in your own terms, not in the terms of photography >>>> in general.It's hard to discuss things with someone who only has an ego >>>> centrist viewpoint, but I'll try. >>> >>> Ever the ass, eh Bill? Have another drink. >> >> I was quite sober when I wrote that, are you sober now? You seem a little >> aggressive. > > In assuming you were drunk, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. I > would think that anyone who begins a discussion with a personal insult is > either drunk or mindless. > > >> >>> >>> <Egotistical nonsense snipped> >>> >>> >> As I said, it's hard to have a discussion with someone who is so full of >> themselves that all they see is what they think. >> Harder still to have a discussion with someone who refuses to have a >> discussion at all, unless it's to lay down their own dogma. >> You'd make a good Tea Bagger. >> >> -- >> >> William Robb >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
