Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/09/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: wrong context
From: ABreull@aol.com
Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 01:53:01 -0400 (EDT)

Hey Leicon35, 

will you, please, snip the text in the correct way next time.

I never made the comments you are citing. I always favoured a solution, in
which the Leica dealers stay sitting on Leitz's broken M6s, not the customer,
who just hopes for the wonder of  a correct working camera body.

The text you're citing is from Patrick, who showed (also), that the
probability, that a
"...randomly-selected M6 has a problem is somewhere between about 9% and 37%
- --
if Fernando's sample is unbiased..."

Alf

- ---------------------------------------------------------- your message:
 
In einer eMail vom 06.09.1997  05:52:21, schreiben Sie:

>Thema:	Re: M6 problem survey
>Datum:	06.09.1997  05:52:21
>From:	Leikon35@aol.com
>Sender:	owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Reply-to:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>To:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>
>In a message dated 97-09-05 17:06:04 EDT, you write:
>
><< ubj:	Re: M6 problem survey
> Date:	97-09-05 17:06:04 EDT
> From:	ABreull@aol.com
> Sender:	owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Reply-to:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> To:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> 
> In einer eMail vom 05.09.1997  12:11:41, schreiben Sie:
> 
> >let me say as I said before (and several other people have
> >said) that Fernando's statistical methods are unsound.  They are bad, bad,
> >bad.  
>  >>
>   As usual, you are probably correct but there is no way of getting
> away from the fact that too many M6s have a faulty plastic gear. End
> mm