Originally posted by Peter Zack What I'm sick of is how certain members just relish is posting completely unreferenced and unverified rumours that have no basis in fact.
And yet you've chosen to attack a member who posted something referenced, citing the specific document from which his information came, rather than the member earlier in the thread who posted the original rumor to which Falk was posting a clarification based on a specific citation.
The fact of the matter here is that Falk cited information that you personally don't believe, and so you've chosen to publicly attack him with absolutely no information whatsoever to back up your own assertions. Falk states that a Pentax-provided document states that these lenses are now EOL (end-of-life) in the German market. Care to provide any source showing that this is *not* the case?
If you can't do so, why not give him the opportunity to provide further information (either on the record, or privately outside the forum) backing this up, before making a personal attack on another member's character?
Quote: I notice the people who posted this misinformation haven't taken me up on the challenge to post an official release or any other backup info. it's interesting they are silent and other have spoken for them.
The member in question hasn't made a single post of any kind on this forum since two hours before you made your personal attack, a fact you could easily verify yourself.
Are you seriously suggesting that because he hasn't participated in the forum for a few hours, he must therefore somehow be hiding from answering you?
Or are you simply clutching at straws in an attempt to support your extremely inappropriate, personal attack as member of this site's staff, who should know far better, and take the time to contact the member outside of this thread before posting inflammatory remarks without any information to back up your own assertions?