Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-08-2007, 07:12 AM   #16
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bristol, England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 112
RiceHigh,

Why do I suggest you are troll?

When you contribute to threads started by others, you often make sensible remarks (not always, but then few of us are perfect ).

However, when you start a thread it is always... "I have found out that your camera stinks", or "I can see the terrible direction Pentax is going". Now, I don't have any problem with that if it is well substantiated and if you propose an alternative.

For example, you might say, "AF on the K10D has its faults, in these certain situations, but here is a workaround". Or, you might say "I don't like the way Pentax is going; I think we should all jump ship for Canon, for the following reasons".

The fact is you don't. You take the tabloid journalist approach of blowing out of proportion what is often a minor story and suggesting that the world is falling to pieces, without even hinting that you have put any thought into helping it to be stuck back together again.

Most of us are here to share views, swap information and get on with photography.

The only possible reaction to most of your posts (where you are starting your own thread) is to disagree, and that ends up in an argument every time; that is the definition of a troll. What makes it worse is that you do all this for the purpose of self-promotion, or rather the promotion of your nit-picking little blog.

I am not a moderator here, and indeed I am a relative newcomer. If I am thrown off for these remarks, then that's fine, but I suspect I will receive more support than condemnation.

(That's enough troll-feeding from me for one day...)

Simon


Last edited by Simon; 03-08-2007 at 07:26 AM. Reason: typo
03-08-2007, 07:13 AM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Virginia Beach VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,364
John,
I'm not sure, form your post, if you have an issue with my responses to RH. If you do please PM me, I'll try to explain my reaction. For the record, I personally do not have any problem with your posts.
03-08-2007, 07:17 AM   #18
Junior Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bendigo, Victoria, AU
Posts: 43
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Also, *what* "rules" here does NOT allow anyone to post URLs here within a post?

II. Posting
There is no limit on the number of posts made by each user, but topics must always be created in the correct corresponding forum category. Flooding, spamming, and advertising are not tolerated. Although users may post links to useful resources and personal galleries, any other sites may not be promoted. All posts are also to be written in a mature fasion with correct spelling and grammar.

(Shouldn't that be fashion?)
03-08-2007, 07:17 AM   #19
Veteran Member
joele's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,309
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Joele, I really feel extremely shameful on you as you again use your "moderator" role to impose a threat on me against *my* opinion which is different from yours.
I do not impose a threat based on a different opinion.. A request was made repeatedly of you yet you ignore it..

QuoteQuote:
you're simply a poster who will become a moderator when it is
needed
yes like the other moderators here I obviously also participate in the discussion as well as cleaning up any problems that may occur.. thankfully those problems have been few and far between..

QuoteQuote:
for a different opinion which you can't tolerate)
No this has nothing to do with a difference of opinion, this is to do with simple requests made of you which you REFUSE to follow..

QuoteQuote:
the truth is *only* Mo / Adam sent me some PMs before
Where you not asked to refrain from posting blog links like this one? Have your links not been removed from your posts before?

QuoteQuote:
BTW, you're the *only* one here who've threatened me (but I'm not afraid of you as the *internet* community will judge, even you kill me here).
I am saying it how it is, simple as that.

QuoteQuote:
In the meantime, I shall not leave here myself just because of one person who have the power over the forum try to penalise on me,
Then just follow the request that has already been made of you...

QuoteQuote:
unless you murder me by your power here as what George suspected (you would do) long ago.
Doesn't take a genius to realise you will antagonise your way into being made a matyr (in your own eyes at least) yet again.. Don't blaim me, I had nothing to do with the exact same situations occurring at a number of previous forums!


Last edited by joele; 03-08-2007 at 07:24 AM.
03-08-2007, 08:11 AM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,420
QuoteOriginally posted by joele Quote
Where you not asked to refrain from posting blog links like this one? Have your links not been removed from your posts before?
Joel, this is one of the less egregious posts by RH. While it might have been nice to include a link to the Tokina site, I don't see this particular post as being much different from posts by many others. At least he included text to describe to what he was linking. I think we're being a bit harder on RH because of his abrasive personality.

To RH:
You are absolutely correct about the terrible pics. The blue/green fringing is terrible on most of them, hard to say how the flare is but I suspect not so great. I disagree with one point you made - I think that camera stinks. Maybe it is over-sharpened to my tastes, but I see nasty JPEG artifacts and sharpening halos all over. This would have nothing to do with the lens! It is also hard to tell overall lens sharpness by these pictures.

I think Pentax should be warned that these pictures do tell an overall ugly story about the lens, no matter how lame the photographs are. I don't like some of the recent Pentax offerings - even the Limiteds have lots of CA and purple fringing with the right (wrong) subjects. I do believe that SMC coatings make a difference in regards to flare and contrast (probably color, too) so I expect that the Pentax lens will be better than the Tokina one. I hold little hope that it will fully correct some of the more blatant flaws, though. We shall see, hopefully Benji can post some difficult conditions for us to pixel-peep.

--Sean

(PS - Rice, quit the sandpaper personality and you'll have a better time. Otherwise, why are you here?)
03-08-2007, 12:21 PM   #21
Veteran Member
FotoPete's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,710
Omg haha now we know where the D-FA 100mm/2.8 Macro came from haha. I didn't notice much CA in the old RMc Tokinas. I always thought that they were pretty solid.

I do have a Tokina SD 70-210/4-5.6 (SD for Super Low Dispersion) and I've noticed some pretty bad fringing at times with that lens despite the supposed "SD"

Yea there are problems with the Tokina shots on the link RH gave us. I think that the SMC should help improve the overall quality. But I definately agree that the "star" designation is being passed around rather too easily nowadays, perhaps in a bid to compete with the "premium" lines from other camera companies. (like L and EX lenses)
03-08-2007, 02:00 PM   #22
Veteran Member
joele's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,309
QuoteOriginally posted by FotoPete Quote
But I definitely agree that the "star" designation is being passed around rather too easily nowadays, perhaps in a bid to compete with the "premium" lines from other camera companies. (like L and EX lenses)
Its sad but I think to gain market share Pentax need to unfortunately play these marketing 'games'..
03-08-2007, 06:07 PM   #23
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 43,283
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Joele, I really feel extremely shameful on you as you again use your "moderator" role to impose a threat on me against *my* opinion which is different from yours.

Also, *what* "rules" here does NOT allow anyone to post URLs here within a post?

For what you accuse me of in your this *post* (I'm afraid you can't do your moderator job well in a fair and unbiased way for what I can see, you're simply a poster who will become a moderator when it is needed - for a different opinion which you can't tolerate), the truth is *only* Mo / Adam sent me some PMs before, I do believe we have some kinds of friendly and frankly conversations instead of what you supposed, i.e. warnings.

BTW, you're the *only* one here who've threatened me (but I'm not afraid of you as the *internet* community will judge, even you kill me here).

In the meantime, I shall not leave here myself just because of one person who have the power over the forum try to penalise on me, unless you murder me by your power here as what George suspected (you would do) long ago.
Look, Michael. If you just do as our moderators request, there wouldn't be any fuss, arguing, trolling, or hurt feelings. Looking strictly at the general reaction to and outcome of several of your posts, I'd have to agree with Joel in this case.

I know that we've exchanged friendly/sincere PMs which I thought had resolved any disagreement, but I was wrong. Please, for the sake of our community, stop devising these controversial and often unappreciated replies, or the moderation team will have to take further action.

I believe that through common judgment, the entire community would agree with any administrative decision at this point. Please, just stop and let's start discussing things normally in your threads, for once. For example, instead of posting the above-quated reply, you could just write "Sorry Joel, I'll try to take it easy next time." I think that would stop all the flaming for a long, long time...

QuoteOriginally posted by joele Quote
Its sad but I think to gain market share Pentax need to unfortunately play these marketing 'games'..
They've been taking poor marketing decisions since manual times, but I think the quality of their equipment makes up for it. Still, though, I'm not sure I like this constant collaboration with Tokina.


Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

03-08-2007, 06:59 PM   #24
Veteran Member
joele's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,309
QuoteOriginally posted by Mo Quote
Still, though, I'm not sure I like this constant collaboration with Tokina.
I have to agree, luckily at the moment they are only sharing zooms not primes so to me there is still an obvious advantage to Pentax's lens range.. If they start sharing primes, especially the limiteds, then, I will get worried..

P.S. Just picked up the DA70/2.4 today (finally in Australia)... looking forward to trying it out..
03-08-2007, 06:59 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
Original Poster
Mo, I can't agree with you anymore nor I'm convinced with what you said.

Now we look at the point of argument and dis-agreement is that I have made new threads and reply posts which point directly to my blog articles. I think we should agree with this *true* "source of problem" here, shouldn't we?

But I just wonder what's the *actual* problem of that? Let's look into the problem more objectively. May I take a very close example here: Ned Bunnell posts more frequently than I for *first* writing a new blog article and then make a post at the DPR forum for what he wants to share, by *simply* pointing to his blog. Same here. But then the forum posters react very positively to his posts, nor any of forum administrators have ever thought that he is doing spam or advertising.

So, my case and Ned Bunnell are exactly the same. The only difference is only the opinions, information and contents of the articles are different. So, this should be the *true cause* of the problem seen and this shoudl be the only reason, I believe.

I know that quite some existing Pentaxian don't like what I say and share, but I do know many others who read here agree with me and wish me to continue to share new information and reply to their questions here (or also in the PZ). (Just see the reply comments in my blog pages, and also I know this for those emails I receive from the net community)

So, back to the practical question, if you or Joele etc. ask me not to point to my post article links anymore here, if someone just asks a simple question here, like this recent one:-

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/4133-light-meter-c...ion-k100d.html

What can I do? How can/should I paste the whole of my homepage into the reply post without reference to my homepage or blog links here? (It's not feasible in this end except I don't reply)

Ditto for new article, I do believe if the *contents* is the same, the *outcomes* happened here will be of no difference, even I copy and paste my first published article in the whole OT here, I do believe.

Also by doing so, I must re-iterate that this will waste the bandwidth and storage of your forum and I have true difficulty to edit twice for the first time as well as for future updating when I found some errors in my original posted article (which is of course not perfect).

Afterall, I do believe the whole source of the controvercy is about what I say, which is truly technical originally (I do believe again). What do your think? And, what else can you suggest I can do, in practical terms ( I have the feeling that at the current position I can ONLY choose to post or NOT post here :-( )

If you can let me know again what you think and suggest a viable way to resolve the conflict, I will be much grateful!

QuoteOriginally posted by Mo Quote
Look, Michael. If you just do as our moderators request, there wouldn't be any fuss, arguing, trolling, or hurt feelings. Looking strictly at the general reaction to and outcome of several of your posts, I'd have to agree with Joel in this case.

I know that we've exchanged friendly/sincere PMs which I thought had resolved any disagreement, but I was wrong. Please, for the sake of our community, stop devising these controversial and often unappreciated replies, or the moderation team will have to take further action.

I believe that through common judgment, the entire community would agree with any administrative decision at this point. Please, just stop and let's start discussing things normally in your threads, for once. For example, instead of posting the above-quated reply, you could just write "Sorry Joel, I'll try to take it easy next time." I think that would stop all the flaming for a long, long time...



They've been taking poor marketing decisions since manual times, but I think the quality of their equipment makes up for it. Still, though, I'm not sure I like this constant collaboration with Tokina.
03-08-2007, 07:09 PM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Queensland, Australia
Posts: 668
Ricehigh! Let me explain something to you. This is a forum. There are rules. Rules are to be followed and not argued with incessantly. Just obey them.

Also, being a privately owned forum, you have absolutely no right to argue with the administrators or the people who they have given moderator responsibility to.

Well, you can, but it will sooner get you banned for being disruptive than anything else. If you have already been requested to stop posting links to your blog, end of story, you don't - I think it's a sign of the Mo's generosity that they haven't banned you.

Grow up. And learn to use BB code formatting instead of asterisks everywhere.
03-08-2007, 07:34 PM   #27
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 296
"He who pays the piper calls the tune".

Or, in this case, the originator/owner/maintainer/and principal dogsbody, has the absolute and unfettered right do decide the 'who, what, where, when and how' of his own creation.
And we, who benefit by his efforts and those of the many dedicated contributors, have the ultimate choice of involving ourselves or not within those parameters.
A bit like the TV: If you don't like the program, change channel or turn the damn thing off. Your call.
03-08-2007, 07:39 PM   #28
Veteran Member
-=JoN=-'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,000
thats funny, you compared yourself w/ ned bunell.

big difference, i actually read ned's stuff, as opposed to skipping yours in it's entirety.

i'll stop it at that.....
03-08-2007, 08:25 PM   #29
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pensacola, FL
Posts: 182
I feel dirty responding to ANY thread by RH

but I have to say something to Michael. There is a reason why you've been banned from multiple forums. If this experience doesn't make those reasons clear to you, then nothing will.

I suspect there are many, many, MANY reasons why the majority of forum participants dislike your posts but I can only speak to my objections. So why do I generally ignore your posts? You seem unable to understand that many people view photography as an artistic hobby, not a technical exercise. The only analogy I can think of is you taking up cooking and declaring a dish to be excellent, average, or poor because of the results from the mass spectrometer and HPLC. I can only remember 1 post from ANY forum where you posted pictures (I mean besides your insipid canned test shots).

You seem unable to understand how to relate to people (Remember the incident where you thought the post by Eric C on dpreview was real? Do you also remember your "holier than thou" attitude in that post?) and you don't seem to care that you're antagonizing others.

That's all I have to say to you, RH/Michael.
03-08-2007, 08:54 PM   #30
Rak
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 106
We've been monitoring you closely, RiceHigh, and you've convinced us that some further action is necessary to maintain stability.

Mo is the final authority on this board. When he gives you a suggestion, you don't argue with it. And especially not in your own thread.

To prevent more fuel being added to the fire (and to do what is appropriate with a virtually dead topic), I am locking this thread until Mo or another moderator solves this issue.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, pentax lens, photos, sample, slr lens, tokina
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tokina 28-70mm F2.6-2.8 ATX PRO chrism_scotland Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 03-11-2011 09:14 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tokina ATX Pro 28-70mm /2.6 to 2.8 knyghtfall Sold Items 7 02-22-2009 08:37 AM
Tokina 28-70 f2.8 ATX Pro NaClH2O Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 03-10-2007 10:32 AM
Tokina 28-70 f2.8 ATX Pro II NaClH2O Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 02-24-2007 06:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:33 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top