Spotty PJ photos

Alan Browne wrote:
Modesta are fast moving news. The photos in the series in the LA Times

Ooops: meant Goleta, not Modesto.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne wrote:
Vagabond wrote:

That is also puzzling me. It is as though someone has made a clumsy
attempt to discredit the photographer.


See my other reply to Robert Coe. That was certainly not the intent.
And as a self declared "newbie" here you should not even make such
hedged declarations.


What on earth are you on about?

Hedged?

What I said was quite clear, there was no hedging involved.

I responded to the discussion on this image.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/...Beirut& only=
I was agreeing with Mark Thomas' comments, not anything that you had said.
Threads do tend to wander a little, perhaps it would behove you to check
what a person is responding to before attempting to remonstrate with them.

As for the rest, I am not a "self declared newbie" at all, I have been
involved with usenet since its inception and ARPANET before that. Like many
of the old hands I started with limping into the backbone with a 300 baud
accoustic modem and Unix. Close to three decades from "newbie" status.

I simply took the opportunity to give some introductory detail about myself.

Regards

Tony

Vagabond wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Vagabond wrote:

That is also puzzling me. It is as though someone has made a clumsy
attempt to discredit the photographer.


See my other reply to Robert Coe. That was certainly not the intent.
And as a self declared "newbie" here you should not even make such
hedged declarations.


What on earth are you on about?

Hedged?

What I said was quite clear, there was no hedging involved.

I responded to the discussion on this image.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/...Beirut& only=

I was agreeing with Mark Thomas' comments, not anything that you had
said. Threads do tend to wander a little, perhaps it would behove you to
check what a person is responding to before attempting to remonstrate
with them.

As for the rest, I am not a "self declared newbie" at all, I have been

Your words: "I am new here,"

involved with usenet since its inception and ARPANET before that. Like
many of the old hands I started with limping into the backbone with a
300 baud accoustic modem and Unix. Close to three decades from "newbie"
status.

wrt this ng. You had no cause to say "... attempt to discredit the
photographer." Your words. Your assumptions. Your hedging.

As to your long and extinguished usenet experience, please turn up your
amps while I yawn loudly. Such claims are no more impressive than the
photographer who has been turning out 1 year of bad photos 30 years in a
row.

I simply took the opportunity to give some introductory detail about
myself.

Great.

You have 1 week to contribute a photo to the current [SI]:
http://www.pbase.com/shootin/fraud

This is not mandatory, of course.

Cheers and welcome aboard.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:30:14 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Modesta are fast moving news. The photos in the series in the LA Times

Ooops: meant Goleta, not Modesto.

And, you meant "Big Sur".

Alan Browne wrote:
Vagabond wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Vagabond wrote:

That is also puzzling me. It is as though someone has made a clumsy
attempt to discredit the photographer.

See my other reply to Robert Coe. That was certainly not the intent.
And as a self declared "newbie" here you should not even make such
hedged declarations.

What on earth are you on about? Hedged?

What I said was quite clear, there was no hedging involved.

I responded to the discussion on this image.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/...Beirut& only=

I was agreeing with Mark Thomas' comments, not anything that you had
said....

...You had no cause to say "... attempt to discredit the
photographer." Your words. Your assumptions. Your hedging.

Alan, did you get out of bed on the wrong side? Re-read the thread MUCH
more carefully, and you will see it had wandered off your original theme
and Vagabond did *not* direct those words at you, nor were they about
the images you posted.

He was referring to the rather famous and very poorly photoshopped
images by Adnan Hajj, eg:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1678653/posts
(Note, I just grabbed that as the first link I found, didn't read it, am
not endorsing content... (O

... and he wondered, as I did, how on earth *those* images (not the Big
Sur ones!!) could possibly get to press, unless there was a story behind
the story...

So when he referred to the 'clumsy attempt to discredit', it was most
definitely not aimed at you. (And I can't see any bad attribution that
would make you think otherwise...)

Sheeesh indeed!

Allodoxaphobia wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:30:14 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Modesta are fast moving news. The photos in the series in the LA Times
Ooops: meant Goleta, not Modesto.

And, you meant "Big Sur".

Sure did.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Mark Thomas wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Vagabond wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Vagabond wrote:

That is also puzzling me. It is as though someone has made a clumsy
attempt to discredit the photographer.

See my other reply to Robert Coe. That was certainly not the
intent. And as a self declared "newbie" here you should not even
make such hedged declarations.

What on earth are you on about? Hedged?

What I said was quite clear, there was no hedging involved.

I responded to the discussion on this image.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/...Beirut& only=

I was agreeing with Mark Thomas' comments, not anything that you had
said....

...You had no cause to say "... attempt to discredit the
photographer." Your words. Your assumptions. Your hedging.

Alan, did you get out of bed on the wrong side? Re-read the thread MUCH
more carefully, and you will see it had wandered off your original theme

You're absolutely right Mark.

Appologies Vagabond. Thing is I read the e-mail in series rather than
as a tree, which is no excuse.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne wrote:
Mark Thomas wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Vagabond wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Vagabond wrote:

That is also puzzling me. It is as though someone has made a
clumsy attempt to discredit the photographer.

See my other reply to Robert Coe. That was certainly not the
intent. And as a self declared "newbie" here you should not even
make such hedged declarations.

What on earth are you on about? Hedged?

What I said was quite clear, there was no hedging involved.

I responded to the discussion on this image.
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/...Beirut& only=

I was agreeing with Mark Thomas' comments, not anything that you had
said....

...You had no cause to say "... attempt to discredit the
photographer." Your words. Your assumptions. Your hedging.

Alan, did you get out of bed on the wrong side? Re-read the thread
MUCH more carefully, and you will see it had wandered off your
original theme

You're absolutely right Mark.

Appologies Vagabond. Thing is I read the e-mail in series rather than
as a tree, which is no excuse.

Not a problem. It is nice to have someone courteous enough to apologise,
that is becoming a rare thing.

Regards

Tony

Vagabond wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
You're absolutely right Mark.

Appologies Vagabond. Thing is I read the e-mail in series rather than
as a tree, which is no excuse.

Not a problem. It is nice to have someone courteous enough to apologise,
that is becoming a rare thing.

Regards

Tony

I second that - well done Alan. (I too have been guilty of misreading
threads..., but I try to take it on the chin!)

Mark Thomas wrote:
Vagabond wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
You're absolutely right Mark.

Appologies Vagabond. Thing is I read the e-mail in series rather
than as a tree, which is no excuse.

Not a problem. It is nice to have someone courteous enough to
apologise, that is becoming a rare thing.

Regards

Tony

I second that - well done Alan. (I too have been guilty of misreading
threads..., but I try to take it on the chin!)

I'd rather scrap it out. That way I get plonked by the most miserable
a-holes and you find out where the best water is.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.