[Leica] The diatribes of Mr. Puts

["Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <peterk@lucent.com>]

Well Erwin,

Since you won't be reading this reply to your diatribe and since you quoted
the McCarthy era, let me point out that this reinds me of the OJ trial.
Since you refuse to explain who you are, and people have told you not to
respond to these posts (which I did not start by the way) it is only logical
that you attack the questioner.  Its easier to attack a person to hide the
facts, if indeed they are to be hidden.  It appears you have never found a
Leica lens to your disliking, hence the questions. You are entitled to
ignore my posts, so be it, this is your right.  All that was asked of you
was who you are.  Outside of taking some girlie pictures that you post on
your website (nice looking girls for the most part) we know nothing else.  

Peter K

> ----------
> From: 	Erwin Puts[SMTP:imxputs@knoware.nl]
> Reply To: 	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Sent: 	Tuesday, May 11, 1999 6:55 AM
> To: 	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: 	[Leica] the dialectics of Mr Kotsinadelis
> 
> Mr Kotsinadelis seems to follow a dialectical logic. He professes to be
> our
> staunchest attacker of every perceived glimpse of censorship, especially
> when he happens to note a glimmer of it in his self defined enigmatic
> "gang
> of five". He defends his right to say whatever he likes based on a simple
> law of freedom that says that whenever you do not like his (or any other
> persons) postings, you simply  ignore them or use the delete button. I
> fully agree with this position. As I noted some time ago I will not
> respond
> to any of Mr K's postings (referring to the same basic freedom). So I
> filter out all messages by this sender as I am fully entitled to do. Now
> Mr. Kotsinadelis asks me a question which I am free to ignore. But what
> happens then. Now the cruisader against censorship becomes the enforcer of
> some self appointed rules, stating that I must answer his question and
> immediately so and if I fail to comply to Mr Kotsinadelis' demands I will
> loose any credibility I might have.
> This train of dialectical logic reminds me of the McCarthy period in the
> fifties.
> 
> I am grateful for the many posts (public and private) of Luggers who find
> my writings enjoyable, instructive and informative. The many discussions
> resulting from my reports 'force' me to make them better through time. I
> learn from what people tell me. I write to inform and to evaluate. And I
> am
> a Leica fan.
> On the other hand I am deeply troubled by all these posts trying to
> convince Mr. Kotsinadelis and his followers. By responding we give
> substance to Mr. Kotsinadelis' stance. That is a pity. Some person noted
> that no one on the LUG should get involved in "Mr Puts' fight".  Well I am
> not aware of any fight on my side. I conduct  research on Leica image
> quality and report my findings on the Lug and elsewhere. If someone wants
> to challenge my content, he or she is free to do so. If one does not
> believe what I report, be my guest. I write for the large group of persons
> who like to share my findings and respond to its conclusions by phone or
> mail or letter.
> Now Mr. Kotsinadelis and followers:
> first of all: as a writer for Shutterbug Mr K. may know Mr Bob Shell. I
> talked indepth with Mr. Shell about my  work and my background. Feel free
> to ask him what his opinion is.
> secondly: if you challenge my quality I would gladly invite you to comment
> in a rational way to my findings in any of my reports.  If you find faults
> in my assessment, have proven evidence that contradicts or undermines my
> conclusions. I will be most happy to correct my reports. If you feel that
> my reports are too subjective to be acceptable, then go to PopPhoto where
> you will find any hard numbers to your liking or go to Photodo, which also
> has any string of graphics that supposedly are based on rockhard facts.
> Then study these graphs and numbers, compare them to my semi-standardized
> formulations and if you find my reports faulty, please tell me. I will be
> most grateful for your effort to improve the standards of quality of the
> Lug.
> 
> As an aside: im my Report on the 70-180 I gave the following info:
> 
> "BTW 1: I am not an employee of Leica. I just happen to have some interest
> in
> "the products of this company and use part of my free time to collect some
> "facts about some of the products. I get some help from the Dutch importer
> as
> "he provides me with samples of lense to test and I am allowed to use them
> as
> "long as I like. In the case of the 70-180 more than two months."
> 
> 
> 
> Erwin
>