Path: newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!swrinde!news.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!news.idt.net!news
From: dannyg1
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Compuserve Photoforum -Opinions?
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 05:18:36 +0000
Organization: IDT Corporation
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <320C1BAC.71C2@idt.net>
Reply-To: dannyg1@idt.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-69.ts-12.nyc.idt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)

Don,

Listen to yourself:: "several Mfrs have reps on the forum who give their view
s, but we are
allowed to counter their views..."

Why do you feel a need to be on a forum where you must consider whether your
opinion is
*allowed*? Why should anyone pay $ to be manipulated in this fashion? I'm tell
ing you Don;
that forum exists for the benifit of the on-board manufacturers and _not_ the
paying
membership.

It's all about money and Mr. Wilmer isn't about to 'allow' views that respect
any aspect of true
consumer advocacy (unless germane to products not 'repped' on the forum).
You're not likely to encounter germaine advice from any but a certain kind of
photographer
(and more likely, an armchair 'photographer'. read lawyer/accountant....) and
no matter how
in-depth the reporting you post or your qualifications as a photographer, your
assigned caste
level is predicated by your _complete_ deference to Mr. Wilmer's appointed (by
free accounts
I presume) royalty.

The above is an insult to the intelligence and accomplishments of the profess
ionals who are
silenced there.

Danny Gonzalez


Don Hinds Writes:


>Dannyg1 writes, in reply to bhphoto@aol.com:
>That's a very interesting comment in light of my assertion that CI$s
>photofora
>exist more for
>business purposes than photographic value.
>
>bhphto@aol.com writes:
>> I know that another reply villified the CIS forums, and while I
>> specifically DO NOT wish to debate that poster I must say that my
>> experience has been other than his.
>> --------------------------------------

Considering all the APS bashing I do on the photoforum, I';d say they are
pretty tolerant of other views, and aren't 'pro mfr' that much. Granted
several Mfrs have reps on the forum who give their views, but we are
allowed to counter their views... Like many tend to put down the Contax
G1, I did even after Blake sent me one to test...

Don



Path: newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!chi-news.cic.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!news.idt.net!news
From: dannyg1
Newsgroups: rec.photo.misc
Subject: Re: Compuserve Photoforum -Opinions?
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 05:52:32 +0000
Organization: IDT Corporation
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <320C23A0.7476@idt.net>
References: <320C1BAC.71C2@idt.net>
Reply-To: dannyg1@idt.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-69.ts-12.nyc.idt.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
To: dannyg1@idt.net

Don,

A further point I forgot to mention: True level of experience and professional

accomplishment are not considered fair elements of argument on Photoforum. Why
not tell
everyone here what CI$ Photoforum policy is on the question 'Are you qualified
to make that
statement?'
Only 'royalty' are 'allowed' to post opinion as fact and any argument to the
contrary is dealt
with by group efforts to undermine the credibility of the distasteful question
er whom dared to
disagree. Don't you agree that this a a rude form of 'conversation'? It's cer
tainly not
enlightening, by any stretch of the imagination.



DG