3rd RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr

Lionel wrote:

I am
opposing it under the current name, & will vote 'No' on the ballot

Thanks a lot, Lionel.

--

Thaddeus Lip****z

Lionel wrote:

I am
opposing it under the current name, & will vote 'No' on the ballot

Thanks a lot, Lionel.

--

Thaddeus Lip****z

Steve Young wrote:

Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?

No
--

Thaddeus Lip****z

Steve Young wrote:

Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?

No
--

Thaddeus Lip****z

Steve Young wrote:
Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?

"Alan Browne" wrote

no.

why? you have no problem pillaging the groups? no new charters as your
gratitude?

Steve Young wrote:
Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?

"Alan Browne" wrote

no.

why? you have no problem pillaging the groups? no new charters as your
gratitude?

Steve Young wrote:
Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?

"Alan Browne" wrote

no.

why? you have no problem pillaging the groups? no new charters as your
gratitude?

Lionel wrote:

The number of DSLRs that don't have interchangeable lenses is so miniscule


That may technically true, but due to misleading marketing by
manufacturers, some some people with ZLRs actually think they own an
SLR.


For example-

http://www.adorama.com/IFJS20.html

Fuji markets this camera as an SLR. Alan agrees with me that this is a
ZLR, and I'm sure most photographers would also agree. To avoid future
abiguity, the need to defone the range of included cameras in advance is
necessary. The above cmaera is high-end, and it will be at home in Bill
and David's proposed ZLR group - if passed. The same applies to the Oly
E20.

--

Thaddeus Lip****z

Lionel wrote:

The number of DSLRs that don't have interchangeable lenses is so miniscule


That may technically true, but due to misleading marketing by
manufacturers, some some people with ZLRs actually think they own an
SLR.


For example-

http://www.adorama.com/IFJS20.html

Fuji markets this camera as an SLR. Alan agrees with me that this is a
ZLR, and I'm sure most photographers would also agree. To avoid future
abiguity, the need to defone the range of included cameras in advance is
necessary. The above cmaera is high-end, and it will be at home in Bill
and David's proposed ZLR group - if passed. The same applies to the Oly
E20.

--

Thaddeus Lip****z

Kibo informs me that Thad stated that:

Lionel wrote:

I am
opposing it under the current name, & will vote 'No' on the ballot

Thanks a lot, Lionel.

Sorry Thad, it's nothing personal, & I wish I didn't feel it neccessary
to take this stance. I'm doing it because I believe that the problems
that I & others have raised about the charter are so serious that
they'll severely impact the usability of the group, & related
newsgroups.
I've clearly stated changes to the charter that I believe will fix the
problems, & restore my support for the proposal.
If you & Alan are correct in believing that my objections are in the
minority, then you'll presumably get enough votes to create the group, &
hopefully it'll turn out that my concerns were unfounded.
If I am correct, the vote will go against the proposal, & perhaps
you'll reconsider my suggestions for a second attempt at creating the
group.
Either way, I'm hopeful that we will, eventually, end up with a
thriving DLSR group.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------