Bo_Lorentzen Posted September 13, 2009 Share #101 Posted September 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Stunt, You don't wonder what will happen... we all know that if somebody "really" intend to file a complaint and win, one gotta lock down the hatches, control information out. Hopefully, and that is what all these posts would suggest, Sean is unhappy and want to make a point, but have no intention to take this to court, it would be a waste of his and everybody's time, this ought to be resolved over a beer, if its really bad maybe two beers. Personally I really don't want to see my favorite reviewer (and by far most trusted) take this any further than "rattling the sabers" , I'm sure the intended people have already gotten the message. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 13, 2009 Posted September 13, 2009 Hi Bo_Lorentzen, Take a look here The Sour Grapes Duo . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted September 13, 2009 Share #102 Posted September 13, 2009 You don't wonder what will happen... we all know that if somebody "really" intend to file a complaint and win, one gotta lock down the hatches, control information out I agree, which is why I now wonder if Sean started this thread in an attempt to set and control the agenda and has no intention in pursuing any litigation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivek Iyer Posted September 13, 2009 Share #103 Posted September 13, 2009 ..that is why I said it is a stunt. Rockwell style?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted September 14, 2009 Share #104 Posted September 14, 2009 A bunch of so called mates having a falling out again................... to our amusement they air their dirty laundry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarker13 Posted September 14, 2009 Share #105 Posted September 14, 2009 Really can't figure out what Sean is upset about here - or why he is choosing to make it a topic on the forum. Someone who spends a fair amount of time reviewing products needs to develop a thicker skin. The reviewer is simply being reviewed here. Regardless, being upset really doesn't offer much in the way of grounds for any sort of lawsuit. The courts in the U.S. generally offer considerable protection to those who criticize others - particularly public officials and public figures. And given Sean's efforts at self promotion, I'd have to guess he qualifies as a public figure. And let's be honest. The idea that a reviewer given special access might offer favorable treatment isn't all that far-fetched. I've enjoyed Sean's reviews in the past. And I think he does a very nice job with them. At the same time, I don't have 100 percent faith that he attempts to be totally unbiased. He clearly has a relationship with Leica. Does that relationship influence his writing? Only he knows the answer to that. I'm not going to suggest that he change that relationship. It seems to work for him. But perhaps he should rethink the sabre-rattling by those raising legitimate questions. In the end, his work will speak for itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cirrus Posted September 14, 2009 Share #106 Posted September 14, 2009 Tim -- Your points all seem right to me. I don't know what Sean said about the M9, but taking a little vacation in Germany from the manufacturer isn't the best way to guarantee objectivity. The sour grapes sound like Seans. Dan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted September 14, 2009 Share #107 Posted September 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The idea of a trip to Solms for someone who is busy is not that attractive: I travel a lot and wouldn't be so hot to trot off to Solms, and I would prefer a vacation elsewhere. And having read Sean's reviews I can see that they are highly objective and have important elements that have been critical of some aspects of the M8 and M9. The idea that he would be influenced by a trip to Solms is absurd if you know his work — and the way Dan puts it is offensive. Overall, I wouldn't make any judgments of their disagreements without hearing all sides of the story — and even then it wouldn't be my business to make that judgment. In my experience all three Sean, Mike and Howard have been reasonable people and all I would do is to encourage a "beer summit" for a mutually satisfactory solution to emerge, but if they have reasons to continue in this way that is a judgments that they should make. I think that Sean provides the best reviews available anywhere and they have been very helpful to in buying cameras, including the GRD, D-Lux-3, GX100, GRD2, the M8.2 and, now, the M9. Mike's blog is one of the best things of this type on the web and is also unique. And Howard's posts on the LUF have always been interesting. —Mitch/Potomac, MD Bangkok Hysteria©: Book Project Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentleman Villain Posted September 14, 2009 Share #108 Posted September 14, 2009 We all go online and read about certain reviewers...and how they're always getting trashed in the forums. However, when I read about Sean in forums he's usually well respected. Do ya'll think that the guys that get trashed in forums might be a wee bit envious of the guys that don't get trashed in forums? hrmm... Sean has lotsa good mojo going for him...and some other guys have lotsa bad mojo going for them. The only thing that guys with good mojo can get by tangling with guys that have bad mojo ...is ...bad mojo. My advice, stay away from the guys with bad mojo. There is nothing good that can come from it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted September 14, 2009 Share #109 Posted September 14, 2009 Perhaps we DO need a judge, now even forum members can't reach an agreement. A beer summit of how many? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted September 14, 2009 Share #110 Posted September 14, 2009 MIke Johnston has posted the follow gracious update on TOP: COOLER HEADS (UPDATE #2, SUNDAY 9 p.m.): I've been monitoring a few threads out on the wild woolly internet this evening, and it's come to my attention that some people are saying they're going to cancel their subscriptions to Reid Reviews as a result of Sean's threat to sue me. Please don't do that. I understand that some people are doing it to show support for me, and I appreciate all the love, but it's misguided. Nobody has sued anybody yet. The guy's angry, you know? Ever been there? Let's reel out a few yards of slack here. What I want is for cooler heads to prevail, and for this whole matter to blow over. I don't want one person to deprive themselves of Reid Reviews. It's a great site, one I've recommended many times. And nothing has changed. —Mitch/Potomac, MD Bangkok Hysteria©: Book Project Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nostatic Posted September 14, 2009 Share #111 Posted September 14, 2009 My guess would be that one or more people had a bad day. The problem with the interwebs (and email though that often is a more private mistake) is that "the moment" is memorialized and then dissected and analyzed ad nauseum. And in the end, the biggest tempests are in rather small teapots. One of my favorite quotes: "The reason that academic politics are so vicious is because so little is at stake." Anyone who has been to faculty meetings knows what I'm talking about... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted September 14, 2009 Share #112 Posted September 14, 2009 MIke Johnston has posted the follow gracious update on TOP: —Mitch/Potomac, MD Bangkok Hysteria©: Book Project MJ has made several good gestures on his site as far as I can see, Mitch. Perhaps forum members should also stop choosing side and/or adding fuel on fire, it'll be all over more quickly. If Sean hasn't brought it over here I'll probably never know about the spat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc yyy Posted September 14, 2009 Share #113 Posted September 14, 2009 .... to our amusement they air their dirty laundry.the business of reviewing must be a dirty business Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted September 14, 2009 Share #114 Posted September 14, 2009 I have read the posts on TOP and this thread and the one on GETDPI and frankly I am puzzled by Sean's reaction and in particular Sean's reaction against TOP. I know there are a lot of attorneys that post in this forum and I am one of them. I can also say that I don't see any basis for a law suit against TOP or even Howard but there will be another attorney that will. I like Sean's work and his reviews and I am a subscriber. However, I do think he should rethink his relationship to Leica. As a government employee our rules of ethics state that we cannot engage in any activity that would give rise to the "appearance" of a conflict of interest. In other words it doesn't have to be a real conflict of interest only that others would see it as such to be a breach. Having worked on both sides of the issue in former jobs I fully understand the way companies think. Even buying you dinner and drinks is enough to buy me the benefit of a doubt when you might not give it to me otherwise. That's why salesman have expense accounts. If it didn't pay off companies wouldn't spend it. I think the point Howard was raising is that it gives the appearance of favoritism whether the individual reviewer stays objective or not. I think Sean does a better than average job from my reading of his reviews; however, once you know that the company has paid for a trip and given him a review camera you can't help but wonder is he telling me everything bad he knows or is he giving the company the benefit of the doubt. That can be as simple as is the flaw I'm seeing a one off or is it likely in other cameras, oh it is probably just due to be a pre-production unit and then never reporting it. Don't get me wrong I AM NOT SAYING SEAN DOES OR WOULD DO THIS. I am saying that is what taking favors can lead to in a persons mind. The next question is how should a reviewer deal with this problem and still not be scooped by the competition? You can do like Consumer's Reports and wait until you can buy a unit commercially or you can do like many magazine reviewers do. 1. State up front that the company has provided you with a review unit. 2. Publicly publish and state that you accept review units with no guarantee that you will write a favorable review and that your review will be your honest opinion and judgment of what you observe. 3. You do not accept trips, meals, hotels or drinks for any item to be reviewed as they give the appearance of a conflict of interest. and finally 5. You disclose to your readers any bias or predisposition you have toward a product up front. Last but not least you return any reviewed item or purchase it at the fair market price so you avoid the appearance of being bought. Does this guarantee a fair and unbiased review? No but it helps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted September 14, 2009 Share #115 Posted September 14, 2009 Villain, agree, Sean, don't know what really happened, but let it blow. we have cameras to talk about, You have the nerve to use CV lenses for your M9 review, don't know what more you have to do to prove your unbiased position. - if you were on leica's payroll that would have been a 35lux or summicron or something similar. Anyone who read your stuff will know you are not a "fanboy" and not a "collector", but somebody terribly detailed about reviewing lenses and cameras. That you happen to like rangefinders is a advantage to me. (and others like me) . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pklein Posted September 14, 2009 Share #116 Posted September 14, 2009 This remark is not directed at anyone in particular. May I suggest that given the situation, the less said, the better? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjmike Posted September 14, 2009 Share #117 Posted September 14, 2009 . . . Nor Reichmann, nor Askey wrote any positive review about M8, . . m Actually, Reichmann's review is, to say the least, positive. As he says (towards the end), "After re-reading this report one final time before publishing it I am almost embarrassed by how "gushing" it appears to be. I don' t think that in all my years of writing camera reviews I've ever been as generous in my comments about a new camera as I have been here with regard to the Leica M8. But, try as I might I find little to fault in any regard." Did you even read the review itself? Seems not. If you want to differ with someone, fine. But to say they said something that they didn't is a bit much. Really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fingerprinz Posted September 14, 2009 Share #118 Posted September 14, 2009 If social media really works (I'm not fully convinced yet), this thread has the potential for a little PR crisis at Leica. At a time, where the company needs it the least. Sean, please consider this when making your next steps. Your reviews are far ahead of the rest. They have to be, because your the only one who gets paid by his readers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Cristophe Posted September 14, 2009 Share #119 Posted September 14, 2009 An initially well coordinated publicity stunt, perhaps to further increase M9 awareness or A totally insane "one-man" action, perhaps caused by the stress undergone "having" to review the M9 and being constantly reminded of the results/effects of the M8 review. Just sorry to see TOP being in the middle of this childish stupidity Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted September 14, 2009 Share #120 Posted September 14, 2009 Last night I was doing a little research for a project and watched a movie called 'All about Eve' (1950). This morning I woke up and read on the TOP that Sean Reed is suing Michael Johnston for publishing comments written by other people. Talk about killing the messenger. Are Howard French and Erwin Puts next on the list, since they are the actual authors of the comments deemed so offensive? I think I'm having a flashback to last nights movie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.