thrid Posted September 16, 2009 Share #201 Posted September 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I wanted to call Howard and Erwin on their BS but that had nothing to do with this supposed lawsuit. Why didn't you just write a rebuttal and have Mike post it on his site, right next to the comments by French and Puts, instead of dragging the L-camera-forum in to this mess? Starting a thread over on a different site to respond to comments from another doesn't make much sense. You do a lot of self promotion on this site, but frankly this disagreement you are having really doesn't have any place here, because it looks like a clumsy attempt to sway public opinion in what you know is going to become a widely discussed topic. Also, if you were or are considering taking legal action against one or more people, why would you pour gasoline on the fire by posting here, when you must know full well that it's going to turn in to a three ring circus? You can't be so naive to not know that half the planet is going to be watching this flare up across the internet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 Hi thrid, Take a look here The Sour Grapes Duo. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Veteran Posted September 16, 2009 Share #202 Posted September 16, 2009 Is it really necessary that everyone continues to perpetuate this nonsense...? There certainly are no friends on this web site... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted September 16, 2009 Share #203 Posted September 16, 2009 It seems to me from what I have read that Sean and Mike have sorted this out between them. Can we now all shut up and let this matter rest, please? Mods - I suggest that this thread be closed..... now! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted September 16, 2009 Share #204 Posted September 16, 2009 It is so curious that someone can protest they are non-biased when they are being wined and dined and treated to VIP status. At Stephan Reichmann's M9 video (posted on another thread), to listen to the "journalists" fall all over themselves to get Reichmann's approval is almost embarrassing. To hear Reid comment that he had emailed Reichmann something like 200 times about the lens coding made me think that it borders on stalking. Why would you email him so many times? No wonder they can't get updates out... they're answering your emails. Incompetent people never know they are incompetent and people with biased views never believe that they can be corrupted and biased. Protest all you want it doesn't change the fact that you received gratuities and special treatment and that will bias your view. If you don't believe me then listen to the video of yourself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted September 16, 2009 Share #205 Posted September 16, 2009 At Stephan Reichmann's M9 video (posted on another thread), to listen to the "journalists" fall all over themselves to get Reichmann's approval is almost embarrassing. To hear Reid comment that he had emailed Reichmann something like 200 times about the lens coding made me think that it borders on stalking. Why would you email him so many times? No wonder they can't get updates out... they're answering your emails. You mean Stephan Daniel in Michael Reichmann's interview? Then you should not understate the number of e-mails mentioned about the manual lens detection: it was 15 Million! I back spylaw4's suggestion, that this thread should be closed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Cristophe Posted September 16, 2009 Share #206 Posted September 16, 2009 never ever underestimate the "psyche" of a person, let alone his/her ego. It is more than often the combination of these two that leads to a person action. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted September 16, 2009 Share #207 Posted September 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, I mean the Stephan Daniel presentation. But, I think it was closer to 200 emails from Sean, not "15 million!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted September 16, 2009 Share #208 Posted September 16, 2009 You mean Stephan Daniel in Michael Reichmann's interview? Then you should not understate the number of e-mails mentioned about the manual lens detection: it was 15 Million! I back spylaw4's suggestion, that this thread should be closed. Sean started this thread, thus opening this discussion to the public. Should it be closed, because some people are questioning certain aspects of the story or are voicing opinions that are not necessarily in agreement, instead of just making positive or encouraging remarks? If you are trying to manage PR and are paying for the airtime you have the right to cut a discussion short if you do not like where it is heading, after all it's your dime, but that isn't the case here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 16, 2009 Share #209 Posted September 16, 2009 It seems to me from what I have read that Sean and Mike have sorted this out between them. Can we now all shut up and let this matter rest, please? Mods - I suggest that this thread be closed..... now! I agree 100% It serves no useful purpose and is potentially disruptive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted September 16, 2009 Share #210 Posted September 16, 2009 The guy wanted exposure and he got it....... unfortunately not everything went his way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 16, 2009 Share #211 Posted September 16, 2009 I disagree Jaap. The points of view are valid whether you agree or disagree with the posts being made. My personal opinion is that I think it was a mistake for Sean to start this thread. As I said many, many posts ago, if he'd said nothing the whole episode would quickly have been forgotten - in fact I for one would never have known about it. As it is I think it has done more harm to him than the original article that he objected to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 16, 2009 Share #212 Posted September 16, 2009 It is not about agreeing or disagreeing.The conflict has been resolved. Any further arguing by outsiders can only serve to rekindle it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 16, 2009 Share #213 Posted September 16, 2009 If the mods closed every thread that drifted off topic there wouldn't be much to read. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUF Admin Posted September 16, 2009 Share #214 Posted September 16, 2009 You're right - good night. Andreas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.