[Leica] RE: "Folks"

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

At 09:07 PM 7/11/01 -0400, Austin Franklin wrote:

> >
> > Wow - you mean no-one on the LUG is using their employers
> > computer? My god,
> > what do you lazy buggers do all day - sit around on the deck with gin and
> > tonics and a laptop?
>
>Oh, I'm sure they do.  Most don't advertise it in their "From".  I really
>don't care if anyone posts using employers facilities, and certainly Henry
>has a lot of knowledge that he has garnered by being at B&H, but it is the
>liability that it carries I am curious about.


Most folks posting on the LUG from work, work at something other than a 
photo store. In mine and Brian Reid case, it is an engineering company. I 
would think that it is perfectly legitimate for Henry Posner to post on 
photography lists all day long and his employer would condone it.

What I don't like is the advertising banner in my face all of the time. 
Other LUG folks with photo stores that contribute to the normal list 
chatter don't do this.

What I doubly don't like is, in the middle of these banners flying (both 
"from" banner and signature), the by line is, when the subject is 
controversial, "this is my opinion, not my employers."

I agree that Henry has very good "photography" information to contribute. 
And if he is contributing photography information, he would not have to 
hide behind a disclaimer. The whole thing just looks ugly.

I have always enjoyed Henry's participation on the HUG while it was 
photography related.

I personally think Henry should loose the advertising completely and just 
participate as a normal HUGger and a LUGger rather than a representative of 
B&H. I think he is way out of line. Both advertising and claiming anonymity 
in the same breath. Constant advertising alone is a no no on these lists.

Anybody remember when Don Chatterton was run off simply because he WAS a 
dealer. And he didn't advertise at all.

IMHO,

Jim