Rich's reviews "Highly Questionable" is highly questionable

Twibil wrote:
(Ray Fischer) wrote:

Well, no, from a disinterested observer's point of view his point is
perfectly valid, but *you* don't seem to understand it.

He doesn't like the review. *He isn't smart enough to find anything
wrong with it so he whines about the conclusion.

Ah, got it.

But how odd that you only seem able to read the minds of people you
don't like,

How odd that you seem to think that I'm "reading minds" when everyone
can see him complaining about the conclusion.

--
Ray Fischer

Twibil wrote:
On Jul 30, 11:03*pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

Well, no, from a disinterested observer's point of view his point is
perfectly valid, but *you* don't seem to understand it.

He doesn't like the review. *He isn't smart enough to find anything
wrong with it so he whines about the conclusion.

Ah, got it.

But how odd that you only seem able to read the minds of people you
don't like,

How odd that you seem to think that I'm "reading minds" when everyone
can see him complaining about the conclusion.

Oh, not odd at all. Follow the bouncing ball...

Is this where you profess the ability to read minds?

Firstly, you made a statement: "He isn't smart enough to find anything
wrong with it so he whines about the conclusion." Now that could be
either (A) mind-reading on your part or (B) a simple flame based on
your fondest wishes and desires, but one having little or nothing to
do with objective reality.

It's a reasonably objective opinion based upon observing his past behavior.

But you weren't _quite_ smart enough to consider that possibility.

--
Ray Fischer

On 7/31/09 12:01 PM, in article ,
"Ray Fischer" wrote:

Twibil wrote:
On Jul 30, 11:03*pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

Well, no, from a disinterested observer's point of view his point is
perfectly valid, but *you* don't seem to understand it.

He doesn't like the review. *He isn't smart enough to find anything
wrong with it so he whines about the conclusion.

Ah, got it.

But how odd that you only seem able to read the minds of people you
don't like,

How odd that you seem to think that I'm "reading minds" when everyone
can see him complaining about the conclusion.

Oh, not odd at all. Follow the bouncing ball...

Is this where you profess the ability to read minds?

Firstly, you made a statement: "He isn't smart enough to find anything
wrong with it so he whines about the conclusion." Now that could be
either (A) mind-reading on your part or (B) a simple flame based on
your fondest wishes and desires, but one having little or nothing to
do with objective reality.

It's a reasonably objective opinion based upon observing his past behavior.

But you weren't _quite_ smart enough to consider that possibility.
In your mind, FishBreath, NO one is as smart as you. Only in your own
mind...

"Steven Wandy" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:51:32 -0700 (PDT), Rich
wrote:



IQ letting you down again? The problem wasn't the review, it was the
scoring of the review relative to others. Try to keep up.

If you actually read the review you would see that he (the reviewer)
was not comparing the EP1 to the D300, which is certainly out of it's
class. He was comparing it to other either advanced P&S cameras or
intro level DSLRs, which is what it would be compared to. And in
relation to THOSE CAMERAS the EP1 deserved (in my mind and that of the
reviewer) the "Highly Recommended" rating. I don't seriously think he
was comparing it with regards to every other camera that has received
that rating previously.

Actually the EP-1 should never have gotten a highly recommended rating with
poor handling, bad menu system, no viewfinder FFS when the screen is poor in
good light and particularly slow focusing.

Twibil wrote:
On Jul 31, 10:01*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

How odd that you seem to think that I'm "reading minds" when everyone
can see him complaining about the conclusion.

Oh, not odd at all. Follow the bouncing ball...

Is this where you profess the ability to read minds?

Er, no, it's where I employ a thing called "logic". See below. \I/

Firstly, you made a statement: "He isn't smart enough to find anything
wrong with it so he whines about the conclusion." Now that could be
either (A) mind-reading on your part or (B) a simple flame based on
your fondest wishes and desires, but one having little or nothing to
do with objective reality.

It's a reasonably objective opinion based upon observing his past behavior.

Free hint: We don't usually go to someone's enemies when we want to
get an objective opinion.

Non sequitur.

Neither do we go to his best friends. We go
to someone who's going to be objective.

And that's not you.

So you do try to read minds after all.

But you weren't _quite_ smart enough to consider that possibility.

The problem with relying on good old Usenet cliche' #3 ("You're
stupid") is that it's just another masturbatory fantasy -unless
perchance it's based on fact.

Look in the mirror.

--
Ray Fischer

Twibil wrote:
On Jul 31, 8:16*pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

How odd that you seem to think that I'm "reading minds" when everyone
can see him complaining about the conclusion.

Oh, not odd at all. Follow the bouncing ball...

Is this where you profess the ability to read minds?

Er, no, it's where I employ a thing called "logic". See below. \I/

Firstly, you made a statement: "He isn't smart enough to find anything
wrong with it so he whines about the conclusion." Now that could be
either (A) mind-reading on your part or (B) a simple flame based on
your fondest wishes and desires, but one having little or nothing to
do with objective reality.

It's a reasonably objective opinion based upon observing his past behavior.

Free hint: We don't usually go to someone's enemies when we want to
get an objective opinion.

Non sequitur.

Um, only if you don't know what "non-sequitur" means, and apparently
you don't.

I certainly do, and I even know that it's not hyphenated. But if you
think that your comment is relevant then let's see your explanation.

Neither do we go to his best friends. We go
to someone who's going to be objective.

And that's not you.

So you do try to read minds after all.

No, I just read posts and understand their content.

Ditto.

For instance:
yours from earlier in the thread have quite clearly demonstrated that
you dislike RichA,

I dislike dishonest bigots.

so therefore you fall into the "his enemies"
category and no opinion of yours concerning him can be said to be
objective.

And so nothing you say about me is objective.

--
Ray Fischer

RichA wrote:


Ray Fischer wrote:
Twibil wrote:
On Jul 31, 8:16�pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:

How odd that you seem to think that I'm "reading minds" when everyone
can see him complaining about the conclusion.

Oh, not odd at all. Follow the bouncing ball...

Is this where you profess the ability to read minds?

Er, no, it's where I employ a thing called "logic". See below. \I/

Firstly, you made a statement: "He isn't smart enough to find anything
wrong with it so he whines about the conclusion." Now that could be
either (A) mind-reading on your part or (B) a simple flame based on
your fondest wishes and desires, but one having little or nothing to
do with objective reality.

It's a reasonably objective opinion based upon observing his past behavior.

Free hint: We don't usually go to someone's enemies when we want to
get an objective opinion.

Non sequitur.

Um, only if you don't know what "non-sequitur" means, and apparently
you don't.

I certainly do, and I even know that it's not hyphenated. But if you
think that your comment is relevant then let's see your explanation.

Neither do we go to his best friends. We go
to someone who's going to be objective.

And that's not you.

So you do try to read minds after all.

No, I just read posts and understand their content.

Ditto.

For instance:
yours from earlier in the thread have quite clearly demonstrated that
you dislike RichA,

I dislike dishonest bigots.

so therefore you fall into the "his enemies"
category and no opinion of yours concerning him can be said to be
objective.

And so nothing you say about me is objective.

Yes, everyone who disagrees with you or whom you disagree with is out
to get you.

That's a fairly bizarre claim for you to make, but fairly typical of
the illogical crap that you usuall write.

--
Ray Fischer