[Pål Jensen]

I mean really if they were trying to get some buzz I think it hardly could be done with this kinds of low credibility posters.

Radu

You have assigned her low credibiliy. I don't know her credibility but I see no reason to doubt it. Particularly as her comments, vague as they may be, are consistent with what others claiming to be in the know say.

[benjikan]

I dont see anything wrong with what Wendy has wrote, my view is that some of her content was taking the wrong way and that now because she has preferred to keep her real name and indentity from being named on this forum she is being targetted.

If and when Wendy does come out by giving her the benifit of the doubt now will save having egg on some peoples faces.

What if Wendy is actually quite well known in certain sectors?


Neil

While I was with Pentax, I was not privy to those sponsored by the different regions. I therefore cannot attest to Wendy B's credibility. But then again, I am not in a position to do so, nor would I wish to be. I can remember not so long ago when the attack dogs were ready to rip my larynx out for making what was considered outlandish claims at the time. None the less, I am certain that there will be some rather pleasant surprises in the not too far future.

Thanks
Ben

[Pål Jensen]

While I was with Pentax, I was not privy to those sponsored by the different regions. I therefore cannot attest to Wendy B's credibility. But then again, I am not in a position to do so, nor would I wish to be. I can remember not so long ago when the attack dogs were ready to rip my larynx out for making what was considered outlandish claims at the time. None the less, I am certain that there will be some rather pleasant surprises in the not to far future.
Ben

Yes..and everyone claiming to know something have been attacked by the dogs. Best ignored. It is just a fact of life...
In the 90's I was attacked by the dog(s) for stating that the next Limited lens was going to a 77/1.8 lens. It was labeled as the most silly lie ever; surely I could have made up something better.
And of course the pro camera below (sadly never to be released), leaked by me was a figment of my imagination.
In the 90's I had contacts....

[Gooshin]

as someone who has been to the darkside and back in terms of internet interaction since the advent of AOL 3.0.. i would like to say a few things about identity presentation.

i am a big forum junkie, pentaxforums is just one of the places i visit daily, half of my day is spent communicating with various groups of people and discussing various topics and sharing new information.

for the most part i am open about my identity, in the past there were times when such information ended up being hurting me, but that was entirely my own fault, in the way i behaved online and the "crowd" with which i got sucked into. Some forums and online hangouts are not as mature as others.

I'm also no stranger to online dating, where true identity presentation is key, many people lie about alot of things when behind a monitor and the truth spills out when you meet them in person, its really quite sad.

anyway, the point i'm trying to make.


On a forum such as this, where 99% of the individuals are here to seek information and discuss important issues, honesty and the ability to back your words is, in my opinion, of utmost importance.

Ben for instance has no qualms about telling everyone here who he is and what he does and where he will be staying next week, with room key passwords hidden behind the picture frame of the white sailboat...

I myself am very open on this forum, i dont hold back.

This, in my eyes, gives people like Ben credibility in what he has to say.

credibility is the most important part to any argument or discussion

and unfortunetly, the only way to be credible online is to provide proof of your existence.

if Wendy B wants to keep her true identity hidden, that is entirely her cause, but unfortunately this does nothing to ad to her credibility.

[gkopeliadis]

... Rice HIgh needs to be left alone and ignored...

Why ?

[ManuH]

Why ?

Because it would only feed his nevrosis?

Why ?

I don't know what "needs" to be done with RH but I have a pretty clear idea about what I'll do regarding him. Since, by his own admission he has no modern Pentax gear and doesn't test either Pentax I consider his expertise above the k100D irrelevant. Also by his own admission the blog he maintains it's a compilation of "negatives" (truths, half truths or just urban myths) about Pentax cameras and lenses so his credibility in my eyes it's not only low but on a negative level.
So, except the improbable case that he will start a constructive discussion I only plan to refute his lies if I have the hard facts to prove him being so. For the rest I tend to agree with Gooshin and totally ignore him.

IMO any unfounded on facts counter-reaction to his (many times) provocative actions it's just as bad. I also would be against banning him as long as he doesn't break this forums rules.

Radu

[Asahiflex]

All good and nice, but I still have not seen any photos from WendyB. What's the point to be a photographer if you cannot share and show your work? I'm just interested in the allegedly outstanding shots which made Pentax decide to send her all the Pentax bodies to test. Surely I'm not asking too much in this time of Imageshack, Tinypic and other photo sharing sites?

[thibs]

All good and nice, but I still have not seen any photos from WendyB. What's the point to be a photographer if you cannot share and show your work? I'm just interested in the allegedly outstanding shots which made Pentax decide to send her all the Pentax bodies to test. Surely I'm not asking too much in this time of Imageshack, Tinypic and other photo sharing sites?

Well she said she would point or hint to who she is when NDA is over. Asking every 3 posts why she did not post picture will not help anything IMO.

[Blue]

Well she said she would point or hint to who she is when NDA is over. Asking every 3 posts why she did not post picture will not help anything IMO.

She could link to Nat. Geographic work already published.

She could link to Nat. Geographic work already published.

This person is a "site suporter" so she payied electronically with some means of confirmed id. Of course it's unethical for site owners to reveal his/her identity to us but if she was really a beta tester for Pentax and revealed that much I guess Pentax would tryied to obtain this info amiably or in court and pretty much sewered any link with prejudice.

Radu

[Blue]

This person is a "site suporter" so she payied electronically with some means of confirmed id. Of course it's unethical for site owners to reveal his/her identity to us but if she was really a beta tester for Pentax and revealed that much I guess Pentax would tryied to obtain this info amiably or in court and pretty much sewered any link with prejudice.

Radu

She is a U.S. citizen and Pentax could play hell getting that kind of personal information if the site forced them to get a court order. The court would unlikely do it in a civil case. Verizon fought and won that battle with the "Music Industry" when the Music people wanted carte blanch access to all Verizon customers hard drives to look for music.

However, that wasn't my point. My point is she has published her work in National Geographic in the past and that is obviously disclosed to the world.

[Pål Jensen]

This thread is getting absurd. Fist some claim that wendy is saying nothing of value, and just making it up. Maybe so. But then the same persons claim that Pentax should stop her for leaking information. This doesn't make sense. Either it is real info or make believe...
The info is so vague that it hardly constitute leaking classified information anyway. Besides, all camera manufacturers leak. Not at least Canon, and particularly Nikon.
Her identity is totally irrelevant. What about the identity of everyone posting on this forum? Many, if not most are, anonymous (except me). And their images will never illustrate NatGeo either.

So I suggest waiting with the bashing until we know the facts; thats only common courtesy. We will know in due course. At Photokina in a month; PMA at the latest. Then let the bashing begin if necessary.

[dschlamp]

This thread is getting absurd. Fist some claim that wendy is saying nothing of value, and just making it up. Maybe so. But then the same persons claim that Pentax should stop her for leaking information. This doesn't make sense. Either it is real info or make believe...
The info is so vague that it hardly constitute leaking classified information anyway. Besides, all camera manufacturers leak. Not at least Canon, and particularly Nikon.
Her identity is totally irrelevant. What about the identity of everyone posting on this forum? Many, if not most are, anonymous. And their images will never illustrate NatGeo either.

So I suggest waiting with the bashing until we know the facts; thats only common courtesy. We will know in due course. At Photokina in a month; PMA at the latest. Then let the bashing begin if necessary.

I partially agree, especially about the absurdity. However, someone who doesn't entirely respect an NDA isn't exactly a person I would consider trustworthy, especially if there is nothing at all to substantiate their claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

There are two ways I have seen people deal with NDAs. One is to reassure and say something such as "Look, I can't give any details because of an NDA, but what is coming is very exciting, there will be plenty to look forward to in September, great news for pros, etc".

The other type I have observed are the ones who seek attention, try to tease people by revealing portions of confidential information, and glory in having information that is not publicly available. People like that might say things such as this ("The algorithms have been finally worked out and on a sunrise at 6:45 in September the full view in 24P will arise over the horizon", or this (Due to "NDA" "after the PHK645 FF" may not be quite correct, but very close. Food for thought and speculation.)

I wouldn't want anyone in the second category as a friend, even if their information turned out to be correct after all. You don't need facts to start bashing. Their actions and how they write should be enough to go on. This is the internet, after all.

As for me, why worry about what is coming in September? There will surely be another new product after that, followed by another, and another. Time to start taking pictures already, or perhaps to start saving up to buy whatever new toys might be revealed.

[falconeye]

Did it ever occur to you that I am a real person?

@Wendy,

as much as I enjoy your entertainment show ... are you aware that speaking on behalf of an existing person w/o permission ("Wendy Wright Bradley", school phsychologist, Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan, USA) may have legal consequences if it isn't you?