If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
Annika1980 wrote:
http://www.mendosus.com/photography/doug.html Give him time, Bret. First, he has to harass my ISP. He has to convince them that it is in their best interests to deny my access, and thus lose my business. On previous occasions, they have (sensibly, and not unexpectedly) contacted me first. I am in a dialogue with a nice chap about this, though he has not mentioned any threats for a few days or so. ....anyways... it all takes time. I expect Douggie's threats to surface in a few days. Geez - it'd be sad if a few anonymous mirrors of the site turned up then, wouldn't it! ===== Hehehe... You know, the funniest aspect of all this is that Doug is twisting his panties into wads because I have simply re-posted what he posted earlier - and in doing so, have pointed out the hollowness of his arguments and the sadness of his personal abuse(s). IOW, he accuses me of being derogatory by simply pointing out what *he* said himself. Anybody else spot the sad irony? -- Jeff R. +23 hours and 16 minutes |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:30:17 -0700 (PDT), Annika1980 wrote:
On Aug 10, 9:17*am, "Jeff R." wrote: Geez - it'd be sad if a few anonymous mirrors of the site turned up then, wouldn't it! Almost as funny as a few new Pbase sites featuring his best work. Yes, but he has 5 meg of ram! His photos appear to be from the same place because he lives in a 2 dimensional universe... he's only visiting! Can you have 5 meg?? Sounds fishy... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:17:20 +1000, "Jeff R." wrote:
: Hehehe... : : You know, the funniest aspect of all this is that Doug is twisting his : panties into wads because I have simply re-posted what he posted earlier - : and in doing so, have pointed out the hollowness of his arguments and : the sadness of his personal abuse(s). : : IOW, he accuses me of being derogatory by simply pointing out what *he* : said himself. : : Anybody else spot the sad irony? Forgive me for asking a sensible question, Jeff, but why do you give a **** how good or bad a photographer Doug is? There are only 24 hours in a day. Is it worth it to spend as many of them on this topic as you do? Why don't you just pull the pictures down and get on with your life? People never look at them anyway, do they? Bob |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
Robert Coe wrote:
Forgive me for asking a sensible question, Jeff, but why do you give a **** how good or bad a photographer Doug is? There are only 24 hours in a day. Is it worth it to spend as many of them on this topic as you do? Why don't you just pull the pictures down and get on with your life? People never look at them anyway, do they? Bob Extraordinarily good question Bob. I'm not evading it, but I really have to get back to work now. I'll give a considered response tonight. (Its about 2:15pm here.) The main reason, in summary, revolves aroubd Doug's bullying, and my personal aversion towards that sort of behaviour. -- Jeff R. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
Jeff R. wrote:
Robert Coe wrote: Forgive me for asking a sensible question, Jeff, but why do you give a **** how good or bad a photographer Doug is? There are only 24 hours in a day. Is it worth it to spend as many of them on this topic as you do? Why don't you just pull the pictures down and get on with your life? People never look at them anyway, do they? Bob Extraordinarily good question Bob. I'm not evading it, but I really have to get back to work now. I'll give a considered response tonight. (Its about 2:15pm here.) The main reason, in summary, revolves aroubd Doug's bullying, and my personal aversion towards that sort of behaviour. There's only a handful of blokes and blokettes here that don't share that aversion. So it is possible to feel that way and ignore it. If someone new needs 'protecting', then have at it. However, no one has been new to usenet since 2007. Some, such as Larry/Rita, need to be stood up for, but everyone else can fend for him/herself. -- john mcwilliams |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:52:05 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:17:20 +1000, "Jeff R." wrote: : Hehehe... : : You know, the funniest aspect of all this is that Doug is twisting his : panties into wads because I have simply re-posted what he posted earlier - : and in doing so, have pointed out the hollowness of his arguments and : the sadness of his personal abuse(s). : : IOW, he accuses me of being derogatory by simply pointing out what *he* : said himself. : : Anybody else spot the sad irony? Forgive me for asking a sensible question, Jeff, but why do you give a **** how good or bad a photographer Doug is? Seconded. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:16:02 +1000, "Jeff R."
wrote: Robert Coe wrote: Forgive me for asking a sensible question, Jeff, but why do you give a **** how good or bad a photographer Doug is? There are only 24 hours in a day. Is it worth it to spend as many of them on this topic as you do? Why don't you just pull the pictures down and get on with your life? People never look at them anyway, do they? Bob Extraordinarily good question Bob. I'm not evading it, but I really have to get back to work now. I'll give a considered response tonight. (Its about 2:15pm here.) The main reason, in summary, revolves aroubd Doug's bullying, and my personal aversion towards that sort of behaviour. That seems to me exactly what you are doing. Boring as ****e on both sides. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
John McWilliams wrote:
Jeff R. wrote: .... The main reason, in summary, revolves aroubd Doug's bullying, and my personal aversion towards that sort of behaviour. There's only a handful of blokes and blokettes here that don't share that aversion. So it is possible to feel that way and ignore it. Yes, of course it's possible to ignore it. I admit that I should just ignore Doug and his supercilious falsehoods, but he invites the response(s) himself. I really haven't gone to all that much effort to show him up. He posted a page full of abuse and lies, and I posted a reply to that page, debunking it comprehensively. This was over a year ago. Since then, whenever Doug got my goat with more of his sanctimonious lying, I simply re-posted the link. It's not like I spent a lot of time on his case. I just made a point, then repeated it when necessary. Many times I have offered to remove the page, if Doug would simply prove me wrong - but he can't, so I don't. The page serves its purpose well, as shown by Doug's hysterical attempts to get me to take it down. If someone new needs 'protecting', then have at it. However, no one has been new to usenet since 2007. Some, such as Larry/Rita, need to be stood up for, but everyone else can fend for him/herself. I take your point, but I don't think it hurts to keep the evidence available. If anyone finds the references tiresome, I would invite then to killfile me, or just pass over my posts. To those folks I am boring with this stand - I apologise. To Doug - no apology. Doug is a liar who needs to be exposed. I am comfortable with that. Debate is fun. Vigorously exchanging opinions is fun. This is what I used to enjoy about usenet, so when people like Doug don't play by the rules and take the fun out the medium I still think it's appropriate to have a go at them for their deceit. I'm rambling. 'nuff for now. -- Jeff R. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
tony cooper wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:16:02 +1000, "Jeff R." wrote: The main reason, in summary, revolves aroubd Doug's bullying, and my personal aversion towards that sort of behaviour. That seems to me exactly what you are doing. Boring as ****e on both sides. Horses for courses. If you think I am bullying Doug by pointing out his lies, then so be it. You're welcome to your opinion, even if I (obviously) don't share it. If it's boring as ****e, then skip over it. I'm easy to kf. I haven't changed my 'nym for years. Do what you think is right. -- Jeff R. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
August 10, 2009
tony cooper wrote:
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:52:05 -0400, Robert Coe wrote: Forgive me for asking a sensible question, Jeff, but why do you give a **** how good or bad a photographer Doug is? Seconded. That's not the issue at hand. Doug's photographic incompetence is a given, which few would seriously dispute. The issue, from my point of view, is Doug's dishonesty. I'm just trying to extract some truth from him. It keeps me off the streets. -- Jeff R. (yeah, yeah - I know about wrestling with pigs...) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
may 2009 | Ulf Pedersen | Digital Photography | 0 | June 1st 09 08:43 AM |
april 2009 | Ulf Pedersen | Digital Photography | 0 | May 1st 09 07:56 AM |
2009 | MJK | Digital Photography | 0 | January 5th 09 12:12 PM |
Canon 3D @ PMA 2009? | Allen Smithee | Digital Photography | 0 | December 7th 08 10:31 AM |
Canon 3D @ PMA 2009? | Allen Smithee | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | December 7th 08 10:31 AM |