Ultra-Sharpen is on sale!

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:26:25 GMT, "Ken" <ken@ken.ken> wrote:

>
>"Jeremy Nixon" <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in message news:10sbndg8ebo8g4e@corp.supernews.com...
>> John Doe <john_doe@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I posted it to 4 newsgroups out 30,000+ and posted to each one separately.
>> > Hardly the moves of a spammer.
>>
>> Had you crossposted, it wouldn't be spam. Posting to each one separately
>> makes it spam.
>
>Usenet cops are sometimes more annoying than the people they are policing. Think about it.
>

See if you think that when the invitations to go to XXX webcam sites
start permiating this group.
-Rich

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Ken wrote:

> Usenet cops are sometimes more annoying than the people they are policing.
> Think about it.

Sometimes annoying, but the results are useful. People do get plonked, scorned
and ignored. So, usenet copping in moderation does have its positive, if
annoying effects, that benefit the group.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- 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: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <EhLwd.12979$_3.143051@typhoon.sonic.net>, john_doe@nospam.com
says...
> Other than being a customer, no. I don't often find many products that I
> love US is one of them. So when they had a sale I posted.
>
> John

I don't suppose the "John Doe" has anything with them not believing
you?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <liLwd.12980$_3.142994@typhoon.sonic.net>, john_doe@nospam.com
says...
> I posted it to 4 newsgroups out 30,000+ and posted to each one separately.
> Hardly the moves of a spammer.

Note: If you had cross-posted it to those 4 groups instead of 4 separate
times, then everyone with a decent newsreader and read all four groups would
have seen the article ONCE and it would have been marked as read in the
other three. As it is, they had to read or mark read the same exact thing
four times.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <cq4803$1am$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca
says...
> RichA wrote:
>
> >
> > Exactly how are they "discrete?"
> > -Rich
>
> Pancake lenses are very flat. A camera with one mounted hardly looks like a
> camera (compared to even an ordinary 50mm f/1.8). One can stalk their city
> scene without attracting much attention. A stock in trade for the street shooter.

Yeah, I can imagine a Nikon F5, or a D2X with a pancake lens would look
very discrete.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Randy Howard wrote:

> Yeah, I can imagine a Nikon F5, or a D2X with a pancake lens would look
> very discrete.

Of couse not, but an FM-2 or D70 would be.


--
-- 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: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <cq4ni3$fhc$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca
says...
> (I took 4 rolls of a chamber orchestra a few years ago with my Maxxum 9. Most
> people didn't know that Mozart, Bach and Albinoni had "loud Maxxum Mirror slap"
> notations in the score.)

I suspect the musicians were very happy that you destroyed their performance.
*sigh*

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Randy Howard wrote:

> In article <cq4ni3$fhc$1@inews.gazeta.pl>, alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca
> says...
>
>>(I took 4 rolls of a chamber orchestra a few years ago with my Maxxum 9. Most
>>people didn't know that Mozart, Bach and Albinoni had "loud Maxxum Mirror slap"
>>notations in the score.)
>
>
> I suspect the musicians were very happy that you destroyed their performance.
> *sigh*

Get your humor module tuned.



--
-- 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: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

 

[ken]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message news:c0rbs05tfm573na4htdqc7rohnucgu58ng@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:26:25 GMT, "Ken" <ken@ken.ken> wrote:

> See if you think that when the invitations to go to XXX webcam sites
> start permiating this group.
> -Rich

Rich, I am all for keeping the groups free of legitimate spam but I never understood
the need to jump all over someone who was simply passing along information on a
product that was not only topical to the group but conceivably useful to someone
here who needs to perform image enhancements of this type. Hardcore Usenet
junkies know the difference between cross-posting and multi-posting but I don't
expect everyone to know the difference or even why it is important. In the 10 years
I have been on Usenet I have never once seen a legitimate spammer reply to someone
who is flaming him for posting spam but I have seen many people who wanted
to be useful contributors burned at the stake for making a minor mistake. The way
I reckon it, you guys can afford to cut the poor dumb schmuck a little slack.

CHEERS,

Ken

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:22:12 GMT, "Ken" <ken@ken.ken> wrote:

>
>"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message news:c0rbs05tfm573na4htdqc7rohnucgu58ng@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:26:25 GMT, "Ken" <ken@ken.ken> wrote:
>
>> See if you think that when the invitations to go to XXX webcam sites
>> start permiating this group.
>> -Rich
>
>Rich, I am all for keeping the groups free of legitimate spam but I never understood
>the need to jump all over someone who was simply passing along information on a
>product that was not only topical to the group but conceivably useful to someone
>here who needs to perform image enhancements of this type. Hardcore Usenet
>junkies know the difference between cross-posting and multi-posting but I don't
>expect everyone to know the difference or even why it is important. In the 10 years
>I have been on Usenet I have never once seen a legitimate spammer reply to someone
>who is flaming him for posting spam but I have seen many people who wanted
>to be useful contributors burned at the stake for making a minor mistake. The way
>I reckon it, you guys can afford to cut the poor dumb schmuck a little slack.
>
>CHEERS,
>
>Ken
>

There are certain patterns spammers have. First, the salutation as if
they know everyone on the group. The second is the effusive praising
of a product that isn't even out yet, trying to ingratiate the product
into the ranks by making it sound "cool" or desirable to be part of
the "in crowd" (cult lens?) by owing one. Third is the "cheers"
ending. It's pure salesmanship.
I've seen it dozens of times. So, even if the person was simply
passing on information he sounded much like someone spamming.
-Rich

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Dumb schmuck... You mean like...

Poppa...poppa their is a dead squirrel on the highaway, does that mean we
get steak for dinner poppa? 8^)

John


"Ken" <ken@ken.ken> wrote in message
newsanxd.971$wZ2.374@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> Rich, I am all for keeping the groups free of legitimate spam but I never
> understood
> the need to jump all over someone who was simply passing along information
> on a
> product that was not only topical to the group but conceivably useful to
> someone
> here who needs to perform image enhancements of this type. Hardcore Usenet
> junkies know the difference between cross-posting and multi-posting but I
> don't
> expect everyone to know the difference or even why it is important. In the
> 10 years
> I have been on Usenet I have never once seen a legitimate spammer reply to
> someone
> who is flaming him for posting spam but I have seen many people who wanted
> to be useful contributors burned at the stake for making a minor mistake.
> The way
> I reckon it, you guys can afford to cut the poor dumb schmuck a little
> slack.
>
> CHEERS,
>
> Ken
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Randy Howard <randyhoward@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote in
news:MPG.1c2fb89d5d85df27989d3a@news.verizon.net:

> Yeah, I can imagine a Nikon F5, or a D2X with a pancake lens would look
> very discrete.

It would look stupid. Like using roller skate wheels on your car.


/Roland

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Sorry Randy, that is the name my parents gave me. Emma and Mathew Doe and me
their son John. My dad thought it was funny and I have had to live with that
joke for 42 years. Trust me it isn't funny.

John


"Randy Howard" <randyhoward@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c2fb7897453e9b6989d38@news.verizon.net...
> In article <EhLwd.12979$_3.143051@typhoon.sonic.net>, john_doe@nospam.com
> says...
>> Other than being a customer, no. I don't often find many products that I
>> love US is one of them. So when they had a sale I posted.
>>
>> John
>
> I don't suppose the "John Doe" has anything with them not believing
> you?
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Well, thank you for pointing that out. I was under the impression from all
of the flames others have gotten from cross posting that it was the wrong
way to go. I think people need to decide on one way to do something and
stick with it.

I am willing to be that even if I had cross posted the message I would still
have gotten my ass chewed out. As far as I am concerned it makes all of your
ass chewer far worse than me. Your being jerks I was trying to do something
nice.

John


"Randy Howard" <randyhoward@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c2fb83b88e71ce1989d39@news.verizon.net...
> In article <liLwd.12980$_3.142994@typhoon.sonic.net>, john_doe@nospam.com
> says...
>> I posted it to 4 newsgroups out 30,000+ and posted to each one
>> separately.
>> Hardly the moves of a spammer.
>
> Note: If you had cross-posted it to those 4 groups instead of 4 separate
> times, then everyone with a decent newsreader and read all four groups
> would
> have seen the article ONCE and it would have been marked as read in the
> other three. As it is, they had to read or mark read the same exact thing
> four times.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in
news:cq52qt$8e6$1@inews.gazeta.pl:

>> Usenet cops are sometimes more annoying than the people they are
>> policing. Think about it.
>
> Sometimes annoying, but the results are useful. People do get
> plonked, scorned and ignored. So, usenet copping in moderation does
> have its positive, if annoying effects, that benefit the group.
>

Entirely correct.

But those I find totally useless are USENET cop cops.
Why they bother I don't know. An argument from the orignal
poster I can take and even appreciate. But someone that just
comes in from nowhere and jumps at someone that says that
ads are not allowed is just ... ehem ... strange.


/Roland

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"John Doe" <john_doe@nospam.com> wrote in
news:_lGxd.13421$_3.151956@typhoon.sonic.net:

> Well, thank you for pointing that out. I was under the impression from
> all of the flames others have gotten from cross posting that it was
> the wrong way to go.

Cross posting is not correct according to netiquette.
What the charter says I don't know. If you have something
to say you are supposed to say it in one group. Rules
can always be broken of course, if there are good reasons.
In rpd we have made things somewhat more complex by having
rpd and rpd.slr-systems, two groups that overlap heavily.
Currently I read both and I post in one of them, hoping
that the other readers also read both.

> I think people need to decide on one way to do
> something and stick with it.

People do not really decide. It is not up to us here and
decide what is allowed or not. There are charters for USENET
and groups and there are netiquette advices. The ways on
USENET do change, but slowly. There are no one here that
manages the group - there are no referees or owners or
anything. USENET works without supervision. Therefore are
rules a good help. Kindly informing when someone is not
conforming to the rules is a good thing. Even harsh words
when he insists might be called for.

Sometimes, as always, breaking the rules is the best thing.
But mostly it is not. And it is always good to know the rules.

> I am willing to be that even if I had cross posted the message I would
> still have gotten my ass chewed out. As far as I am concerned it makes
> all of your ass chewer far worse than me. Your being jerks I was
> trying to do something nice.

I have not called you an ass and I have not called you a jerk.
So, it would be nice if you did not call me so.

And yes - I really do believe you tried to do something nice,
and I have already written so. But sometimes when trying to
do right - you do wrong, and you did. Time to accept that
knowledge and go on.


/Roland

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Roland Karlsson" <roland_dot_karlsson@bonetmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95C5DF0767EC0klotjohan@130.133.1.4...
SNIP
> Cross posting is not correct according to netiquette.

Actually it is, if constained to a few relevant groups. Multi-posting
consumes hue ammounts of bandwidth/storage, whereas crossposting
doesn't. So in fact is is encouraged to cross-post, if you are
compelled to do so...

Bart

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Bart van der Wolf" <bvdwolf@no.spam> wrote in news:41c73ede$0$142
$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl:

> Actually it is, if constained to a few relevant groups. Multi-posting
> consumes hue ammounts of bandwidth/storage, whereas crossposting
> doesn't. So in fact is is encouraged to cross-post, if you are
> compelled to do so...

Here is the mother of all netiquette guidelines

http/www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html

It says that cross-posting may be done - if you have a good
reason and also tell in the subject that you cross-post.

Now - lots of people use a rule for crossposting in their
SPAM-filters. So - you will miss those in your post.


/Roland

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

If your supposed to say it in one group then there should only be one group.
When someone has something to say, be it a question or product
recommendation that is on topic with the groups in question then one should
post to all pertinent groups. The fact remains that not everyone reads all
of the groups.

There are two groups on Photoshop, not everyone reads both of them. There
are now two groups for this one, so either we need one digital photography
group or people need to pull their heads out of their asses and get used to
people posting the same thing to several groups.

Now spam as far as I am concerned is when you post things like "look at my
ass" to every newsgroup there is. What I did is not spam, those that
consider it that have their own mental problems and will not affect me in
any way, plain and simple.

John


"Roland Karlsson" <roland_dot_karlsson@bonetmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95C5DF0767EC0klotjohan@130.133.1.4...
> "John Doe" <john_doe@nospam.com> wrote in
> news:_lGxd.13421$_3.151956@typhoon.sonic.net:
>
>> Well, thank you for pointing that out. I was under the impression from
>> all of the flames others have gotten from cross posting that it was
>> the wrong way to go.
>
> Cross posting is not correct according to netiquette.
> What the charter says I don't know. If you have something
> to say you are supposed to say it in one group. Rules
> can always be broken of course, if there are good reasons.
> In rpd we have made things somewhat more complex by having
> rpd and rpd.slr-systems, two groups that overlap heavily.
> Currently I read both and I post in one of them, hoping
> that the other readers also read both.
>
>> I think people need to decide on one way to do
>> something and stick with it.
>
> People do not really decide. It is not up to us here and
> decide what is allowed or not. There are charters for USENET
> and groups and there are netiquette advices. The ways on
> USENET do change, but slowly. There are no one here that
> manages the group - there are no referees or owners or
> anything. USENET works without supervision. Therefore are
> rules a good help. Kindly informing when someone is not
> conforming to the rules is a good thing. Even harsh words
> when he insists might be called for.
>
> Sometimes, as always, breaking the rules is the best thing.
> But mostly it is not. And it is always good to know the rules.
>
>> I am willing to be that even if I had cross posted the message I would
>> still have gotten my ass chewed out. As far as I am concerned it makes
>> all of your ass chewer far worse than me. Your being jerks I was
>> trying to do something nice.
>
> I have not called you an ass and I have not called you a jerk.
> So, it would be nice if you did not call me so.
>
> And yes - I really do believe you tried to do something nice,
> and I have already written so. But sometimes when trying to
> do right - you do wrong, and you did. Time to accept that
> knowledge and go on.
>
>
> /Roland

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Thank you, I will make a note of that and try to do that in the future. This
actually makes sense.

John


"Bart van der Wolf" <bvdwolf@no.spam> wrote in message
news:41c73ede$0$142$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
>
> "Roland Karlsson" <roland_dot_karlsson@bonetmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns95C5DF0767EC0klotjohan@130.133.1.4...
> SNIP
>> Cross posting is not correct according to netiquette.
>
> Actually it is, if constained to a few relevant groups. Multi-posting
> consumes hue ammounts of bandwidth/storage, whereas crossposting doesn't.
> So in fact is is encouraged to cross-post, if you are compelled to do
> so...
>
> Bart