RE: [Leica] Mis-information and innuendo

[Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>]

Thank you very much Alan Ball, for the analysis of Eric's and my posts. It
is enlightening to see that someone is at least reading all of the posts.
I'm afraid I don't have time. My answer to the other Alan's post was indeed
sincere. It was total mis-information and innuendo. Not a rational thought
in the entire post. It was not a matter of disagreeing, it was simply total
mis-information. And I, for one, will not simply sit and let that kind of
trash go un-contested. You can think what you want. There is no
"good-ol-boys" club. Eric and I have clashed a few times. In the end, it's
really all friendly. It's one persons opinion against anothers. If someone
voices an opinion, and you think it is totally wrong, are you just going to
let it slide by? I think not as you obviously answered Eric's and my posts.

Keep up the good work,

Jim


At 07:10 AM 7/22/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Eric (and Jim),
>
>There it goes again: as soon as someone does not post accordingly to the 
>"LUG Old Boy Club" rules, he/she gets slammed real hard.
>
>One Alan (not me) posted a note arguing it would be irresponsible to give a 
>Leica to a kid, for various reasons, some of which I agree with, others I 
>do not agree with.
>
>Then Jim comes in real irritated, arguing quite convincingly against some 
>of Alan's statements, but adding such non-constructive qualifiers as 
>'stupid' here and there. Then he ends with the paragraph hereunder, which 
>is not related at all to the subject the first poster discussed.
>
>Now you come in Eric, with something that has even less to do and that 
>sounds even more agressive.
>
>...