[joele]

I did not see you raising that issue about many people here putting such links to their blogs in signature ("...All images (c) 2008 Robin Parmar. Visit my Flickr images, website, or blog. ..."), even to their websites created for profit (pro photogs)... huh ?

And we have no issues with anyone including ricehigh putting a link to their photos or blog in their sig, RH has done this like many others with no objections raised.

The issue is not even with RH linking to his blog in the body of his post, it is just simply starting a thread with nothing more than a link to his blog which he had a regular habit of doing. He was asked some time back to kindly post at least a short description in the post, he agreed, and has ignored it.

[rparmar]

In my opinion the poisonous posts of those who hate RiceHigh do more to damage this forum than RiceHigh posting a single ignorable link to his blog. If you truly think that he is so evil in his attention-grabbing stunts, why are you helping him by adding more traffic to his post? That would be what we in the business call "a contradiction".

The arguments of the anti-RH brigade are so weak I will not bother with a full rebuttal. Apparently we are on a downwards slope to a place where everyone posts multiple links to their commercial sites which forever ruin the good name of Pentax. Give me a frickin' break!

If I was to post a link to my blog I should have the right, so long as it is on topic. I have done this before and will do so again. No, I will not rewrite the whole thing here just so the few who find clicking a link too difficult a task can be happy.

[rparmar]

And we have no issues with anyone including ricehigh putting a link to their photos or blog in their sig, RH has done this like many others with no objections raised.

The issue is not even with RH linking to his blog in the body of his post, it is just simply starting a thread with nothing more than a link to his blog which he had a regular habit of doing. He was asked some time back to kindly post at least a short description in the post, he agreed, and has ignored it.

Our posts crossed. Thanks for this clarification.

[RiceHigh]

And we have no issues with anyone including ricehigh putting a link to their photos or blog in their sig, RH has done this like many others with no objections raised.

The issue is not even with RH linking to his blog in the body of his post, it is just simply starting a thread with nothing more than a link to his blog which he had a regular habit of doing. He was asked some time back to kindly post at least a short description in the post, he agreed, and has ignored it.

Joele, its very clear that you are the one who have been imposing penalisation to me owing to my "different" opinion than yours (and quite some others here). I have already very respectfully replied that I will follow your *own* requirement of making a "synopsis" with direct URL links next time when I post. However, it should be noted that it doesn't mean that I admit any fault at my side but just I know that I should respect your *authority* and *power* here.

In fact, I have made the subject title clear enough from the beginning. First, it is official and from Pentax. Second, a new Pentax DSLR is coming from the official source. Third, it is confirmed that a new Full Frame Pentax DSLR model is said to be under planning. What ELSE "synopsis" do YOU need?? You just clearly have an agenda on me and your penalisation is very obvious from the very beginning and for so *many time*.

On the other hand, when I post my "lengthy" opinions about my newly found *Pentax* news and stuff, another mod or other members will start to accuse me of spamming the PentaxForums and personal attack me seriously and inhumanly.

So, you two "mods" just has being very unfair to me for long already. IF you are just NOT a "Moderator" with the power to delete and edit others' posts, I just ignore you altogether as you have been very unreasonable. As Adam is the site owner and he is the only guy which I have found to be reasonable and fair to me, I am asking his opinions on the issue. Afterall, he can change the rules of game here at the PentaxForums, as long as the new rules are published and these rules apply to every members here, but not *selectively* or not like now: PENALISATION by AUTHORITY.

Anyway, this is the last post I will respond to you in this thread and you can continue to make flames on me here that is totally not true (and I will not respond further).

---

Last edited by RiceHigh; 08-04-2008 at 05:08 AM.

[RiceHigh]

I think I need to respond to the "not allowed by "social" standards" and that "direct traffic to my blog site" theories above.

First, I must not agree a society should follow the majority of voices and those different voice should be suppressed and that if there is someone who speak differently, he should be considered as "not allowed by the society" and "causes damages to the society". The reverse should be true. A liberate or just civilised enough society should allow for different voices, not matter how minority the opinions are.

As for the "direct traffic" "concern". It is pointless. The WWW is a system full of hyperlinks which any web pages can link to any. My posts at the PentaxForums link to my Blog BUT so does my backlinks at my blog articles link back to the PentaxForums. So, what is the problem of having links from one site to another in the WWW or vice versa??

Both "points" are pointless and worthless afterall, frankly. The only cause and issue is just that some of the guys here hate me just because of my *different* opinions and views than them - its just as simple as that and enough said.

[séamuis]

The only cause and issue is just that some of the guys here hate me just because of my *different* opinions and views than them - its just as simple as that and enough said.

no. its because you go out of your way to make sure all of us know again and again and again, how 'different' your opinions are. and since quite nearly everything you post here is of a strictly negative point of view what would you expect? you spend all of your time finding every negative you possibly can, you are weary of using you own K100D yet claim to be a 'proud owner', or so says your signature yet you use an outdated canon that well has its own flaws and plenty of them but you are here constantly to reiterate your negative views.

people tend to not like other people who spend all of their time nit picking every negative aspect of something, and then yell it to the world every chance they get.... it gets annoying.


nothing in this world is 'just as simple as that.' you might want to keep that in mind my friend.

[joele]

Joele, its very clear that you are the one who have been imposing penalisation to me owing to my "different" opinion than yours (and quite some others here). I have already very respectfully replied that I will follow your *own* requirement of making a "synopsis" with direct URL links next time when I post. However, it should be noted that it doesn't mean that I admit any fault at my side but just I know that I should respect your *authority* and *power* here.

I was just reiterating to other forum members my reasoning that lead me to delete the link from your post, unfortunately once I did that your post was empty. That post wasn't directed at you again.

Anyway, this is the last post I will respond to you in this thread and you can continue to make flames on me here that is totally not true (and I will not respond further).

What is the lie? that Adam asked you not to do this? LOL I have logs of it in the moderator forum, it was around the 15 feb 2007, over a year later and same thing continues..

You can claim you were never asked and play the victim all you like, but we are far more accommodating than any other forum I have been a member of, most of which have banned you.

First, I dont have anything against RH. Actually I find him amusing and ocassionally I agree with his comments. Regarding the Adam vs moderators issue I find RH attitude a little bit naive though. IMO, it is obvious that Adam agrees with the moderators. What I fail to understand is why RH's links are closed cos they have the purpose to direct people to his site, when other people use the forums to direct people to vote for them at any contest in which they are participating. I think that both kind of post share similar ethics (use of the forum for personal interest) but they dont share the same destiny. If you ask me, I am cool with both type of posts. I dont see abuse in anyone of them. What I found abusing are the aggressive posts towards RH and I am waiting to see one of them being closed.

I also find incongruent to have RH on the ignore list and then participate on his threads. Then there are also the people who feel they have to warn new members about RH, you dont need to warn other people about him as if they were teenagers that cant think by themselves. To set up other people thoughts about somebody has a name and it is not better than troll.

[vinzer]

You can claim you were never asked and play the victim all you like, but we are far more accommodating than any other forum I have been a member of, most of which have banned you.

Well, this site does extend much leeway to everyone who uses it for personal gain, be it Pentax fans or otherwise.

First, I dont have anything against RH. Actually I find him amusing and ocassionally I agree with his comments. Regarding the Adam vs moderators issue I find RH attitude a little bit naive though. IMO, it is obvious that Adam agrees with the moderators. What I fail to understand is why RH's links are closed cos they have the purpose to direct people to his site, when other people use the forums to direct people to vote for them at any contest in which they are participating. I think that both kind of post share similar ethics (use of the forum for personal interest) but they dont share the same destiny. If you ask me, I am cool with both type of posts. I dont see abuse in anyone of them. What I found abusing are the aggressive posts towards RH and I am waiting to see one of them being closed.

I also find incongruent to have RH on the ignore list and then participate on his threads. Then there are also the people who feel they have to warn new members about RH, you dont need to warn other people about him as if they were teenagers that cant think by themselves. To set up other people thoughts about somebody has a name and it is not better than troll.

I also agree with most of your points, but I think joele's has explained in a previous reply that the mods were only asking RH to include a brief overview of the blog entry, and doing so give RH free reign to post links to his blog again and again. It's not too much of a burden to follow, in my opinion. RH doesn't have to spill all the contents of the blog entry.

But for the record, at least RH's posts are on-topic with the forum he's placing it in. There are a lot of misplaced threads in these forums, most notably some of the posts in the News and Rumors section.

[deejjjaaaa]

And we have no issues with anyone including ricehigh putting a link to their photos or blog in their sig, RH has done this like many others with no objections raised.

I was responding to a specific person, I personally do not have issues w/ any links not prohibited specifically by the owner of this website.

But I want to reiterate that some people take (or the right word will be - hate) RH and his postings way too personal for whatever reason.

[beverid]

rparmar seriously what are you talking about. It has nothing to do with his right to do anything. The facts are RiceHigh is a troll who has continuously used this site to run up the traffic to his own personal website. If he wants to express his opinion here at Pentaxforums let him knock himself out. But that is not what he does. He starts a thread with no content except a link to his personal website. How is his opinion being censored when no opinion was even expressed.

The best thing is SakiBoy pretends like he is the victim. That is a classic M.O. of an internet troll.

why do you call him sakiboy?

[jamonation]

Goodwin's Law hath been hinted at, perhaps now is a good time to invoke it and lock this thread since the signal to noise ratio is just being skewed exponentially more and more towards the noise end of the spectrum.

Way to generalize. So if you're against RH, you're a racist...oh, why don't you whip out the Hitler card too while you're at it.

Quit defending RH. The guy is abusing this forum and I for one would like to see his ass banned from here. I dont give a hoot about his skin/eye/hair color. He should see a doctor who can help with his obvious problems.

Boucicaut

[deejjjaaaa]

Way to generalize. So if you're against RH, you're a racist...oh, why don't you whip out the Hitler card too while you're at it.

Quit defending RH. The guy is abusing this forum and I for one would like to see his ass banned from here. I dont give a hoot about his skin/eye/hair color. He should see a doctor who can help with his obvious problems.

Boucicaut

Not before you & your kameraden stop resorting to personal insults.

[alohadave]

why do you call him sakiboy?

Saki is rice wine.

[Tom S.]

Saki is rice wine.

Should that be rice "whine"?