Flower macros

On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said:

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: Richard wrote:
:
: "MC" wrote in message
: ...
: Robert Spanjaard wrote:
:
: A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
:
: They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and
: 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
:
: You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly
: publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest
: critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
:
: May I ask why you think these are worthy?
:
: MC
:
: No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: worthy of asking the question.
:
: Richard
:
: Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: but merely as vehicle of politeness.

Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the politeness in
that?

Bob

Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny, the
critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling, syntax,
tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention...

He really should be his own harshest critic...

Take Care,
Dudley

The OP wrote:
"A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."

I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).

This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.

--
Pete

Pete wrote:
On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said:

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: Richard wrote:
:
: "MC" wrote in message
: ...
: Robert Spanjaard wrote:
:
: A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
:
: They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4
and
: 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
:
: You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone
unashemedly
: publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own
harshest
: critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
:
: May I ask why you think these are worthy?
:
: MC
:
: No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: worthy of asking the question.
:
: Richard
:
: Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: but merely as vehicle of politeness.

Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the
politeness in
that?

Bob

Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny,
the critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling,
syntax, tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention...

He really should be his own harshest critic...

Take Care,
Dudley

The OP wrote:
"A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."

I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).

This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.


There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-)

Not to criticalicate anything, though....
--
john mcwilliams

On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:52:51 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:
: Pete wrote:
: On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said:
:
: "Robert Coe" wrote in message
: ...
: On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: : Richard wrote:
: :
: : "MC" wrote in message
: : ...
: : Robert Spanjaard wrote:
: :
: : A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
: :
: : They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4
: and
: : 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
: :
: : http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
: :
: : You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: : wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone
: unashemedly
: : publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: : worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own
: harshest
: : critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
: :
: : May I ask why you think these are worthy?
: :
: : MC
: :
: : No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: : worthy of asking the question.
: :
: : Richard
: :
: : Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: : but merely as vehicle of politeness.
:
: Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the
: politeness in
: that?
:
: Bob
:
: Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny,
: the critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling,
: syntax, tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention...
:
: He really should be his own harshest critic...
:
: Take Care,
: Dudley
:
: The OP wrote:
: "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."
:
: I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).
:
: This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.
:
:
: There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-)

Actually, the word you were groping for there is "comma".

Bob

"Pete" wrote in message
news:2010053123493461221-availableonrequest@aserverinvalid...
On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said:

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: Richard wrote:
:
: "MC" wrote in message
: ...
: Robert Spanjaard wrote:
:
: A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
:
: They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4
and
: 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
:
: You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone
unashemedly
: publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own
harshest
: critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
:
: May I ask why you think these are worthy?
:
: MC
:
: No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: worthy of asking the question.
:
: Richard
:
: Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: but merely as vehicle of politeness.

Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the
politeness in
that?

Bob

Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny, the
critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling, syntax,
tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention...

He really should be his own harshest critic...

Take Care,
Dudley

The OP wrote:
"A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."

I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).

This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.

--
Pete


True, but it's a RECREATIONAL photo group...

The idea behind usenet, as far as I understand, is for people to exchange
ideas, techniques, etc, so each can learn from the experience / talents of
others. The critic seemed to suggest that some arbitrary standard of
proficiency needs to be attained prior to exhibiting ones work, yet
displayed a woeful disregard for certain accepted linguistic standards.

If others need meet his idea of graphic excellence in order to be welcomed,
then perhaps he needs to live up to the standards others like for ease of
understanding.

"What's good for the goose, ..."

Take Care,
Dudley

Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:52:51 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:
: Pete wrote:

: "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."
:
: I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).
:
: This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.
:
:
: There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-)

Actually, the word you were groping for there is "comma".

No groping at all: Just seeing if anyone knew the difference and was
paying attention; I wasn't! .... :-)

Besides, you left out the more interesting target:

Not to criticalicate anything, though....

--
john mcwilliams

On Mon, 31 May 2010 17:20:57 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:
: Robert Coe wrote:
: On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:52:51 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:
: : Pete wrote:
:
: : "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."
: :
: : I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).
: :
: : This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.
: :
: :
: : There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-)
:
: Actually, the word you were groping for there is "comma".
:
: No groping at all: Just seeing if anyone knew the difference and was
: paying attention; I wasn't! .... :-)
:
: Besides, you left out the more interesting target:
:
: Not to criticalicate anything, though....

Well, I think I'd have said "criticalicize", but ...

Bob

On Mon, 31 May 2010 23:32:55 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote:
:
: "Pete" wrote in message
: news:2010053123493461221-availableonrequest@aserverinvalid...
: On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said:
:
: "Robert Coe" wrote in message
: ...
: On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: : Richard wrote:
: :
: : "MC" wrote in message
: : ...
: : Robert Spanjaard wrote:
: :
: : A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
: :
: : They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4
: and
: : 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
: :
: : http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
: :
: : You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: : wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone
: unashemedly
: : publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: : worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own
: harshest
: : critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
: :
: : May I ask why you think these are worthy?
: :
: : MC
: :
: : No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: : worthy of asking the question.
: :
: : Richard
: :
: : Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: : but merely as vehicle of politeness.
:
: Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the
: politeness in
: that?
:
: Bob
:
: Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny, the
: critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling, syntax,
: tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention...
:
: He really should be his own harshest critic...
:
: Take Care,
: Dudley
:
: The OP wrote:
: "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."
:
: I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).
:
: This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.
:
: --
: Pete
:
:
: True, but it's a RECREATIONAL photo group...
:
: The idea behind usenet, as far as I understand, is for people to exchange
: ideas, techniques, etc, so each can learn from the experience / talents of
: others. The critic seemed to suggest that some arbitrary standard of
: proficiency needs to be attained prior to exhibiting ones work, yet
: displayed a woeful disregard for certain accepted linguistic standards.
:
: If others need meet his idea of graphic excellence in order to be welcomed,
: then perhaps he needs to live up to the standards others like for ease of
: understanding.
:
: "What's good for the goose, ..."

I believe it's "What's SAUCE for the goose ...". ;^)

Bob

On 2010-06-01 01:20:57 +0100, John McWilliams said:

Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:52:51 -0700, John McWilliams wrote:
: Pete wrote:

: "A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."
: : I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).
: : This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.
: : : There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-)

Actually, the word you were groping for there is "comma".

No groping at all: Just seeing if anyone knew the difference and was
paying attention; I wasn't! .... :-)

I should've groped for that comma. I get in a muddle, I thought comma
groping was something I ought to stop doing.

You could've written: there should be a catastrophe after the word
"newsgroup" :-)

Besides, you left out the more interesting target:

Not to criticalicate anything, though....

An excellent word. No results from Google, which must be a first.

--
Pete

On 2010-06-01 00:32:55 +0100, Dudley Hanks said:

"Pete" wrote in message
news:2010053123493461221-availableonrequest@aserverinvalid...
On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said:

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: Richard wrote:
:
: "MC" wrote in message
: ...
: Robert Spanjaard wrote:
:
: A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
:
: They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4 and
: 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
:
: You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone unashemedly
: publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own harshest
: critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
:
: May I ask why you think these are worthy?
:
: MC
:
: No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: worthy of asking the question.
:
: Richard
:
: Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: but merely as vehicle of politeness.

Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the politeness in
that?

Bob

Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny, the
critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling, syntax,
tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention...

He really should be his own harshest critic...

Take Care,
Dudley

The OP wrote:
"A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."

I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).

This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.

--
Pete


True, but it's a RECREATIONAL photo group...

The idea behind usenet, as far as I understand, is for people to
exchange ideas, techniques, etc, so each can learn from the experience
/ talents of others. The critic seemed to suggest that some arbitrary
standard of proficiency needs to be attained prior to exhibiting ones
work, yet displayed a woeful disregard for certain accepted linguistic
standards.

If others need meet his idea of graphic excellence in order to be
welcomed, then perhaps he needs to live up to the standards others like
for ease of understanding.

"What's good for the goose, ..."

Point taken. I didn't read the post that way because it gave me
something to think about for my own work.

--
Pete

On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:52:51 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

Pete wrote:
On 2010-05-31 23:31:54 +0100, Dudley Hanks said:

"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 May 2010 17:26:08 GMT, "MC" wrote:
: Richard wrote:
:
: "MC" wrote in message
: ...
: Robert Spanjaard wrote:
:
: A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize).
:
: They might do well in the Wallpaper Shootin too, especially 4
and
: 5. But I already submitted a different shot.
:
: http://www.arumes.com/temp/macro/
:
: You should first ask yourself, as should every photographer who
: wishes to put their photos on public dispaly (let alone
unashemedly
: publicise the websites containing said pictures), are they really
: worthy of public scrutiny? You must, firstly, be your own
harshest
: critic and then (and only then) allow others to critcise.
:
: May I ask why you think these are worthy?
:
: MC
:
: No. If you have to ask permission to ask a question, you are not
: worthy of asking the question.
:
: Richard
:
: Hmm... I was not asking permission in the context of asking permission
: but merely as vehicle of politeness.

Politeness? You were sneering at the man's photos. Where's the
politeness in
that?

Bob

Perhaps, before posting a criticism to a public group for scrutiny,
the critic should ask himself whether or not the grammar, spelling,
syntax, tone, etc of his message is worthy of public attention...

He really should be his own harshest critic...

Take Care,
Dudley

The OP wrote:
"A couple of flower macros for you to enjoy (and/or critisize)."

I enjoyed them (thanks Robert S).

This is a photography newsgroup not an English lesson.


There should be an apostrophe after the word "newsgroup"....! :-)

An example of Skitt's Law: Spelling or grammar flames always contain
spelling or grammar errors

You impropergatedly typed an ellipsis...one too many periods/full
stops.

Not to criticalicate

That could be considered to be a nonce word.

anything, though....


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida