Re: [Leica] Mis-information and innuendo

[Alan Ball <AlanBall@csi.com>]

Eric Welch wrote:
> 
> That is a total distortion of my post. It was not violent at all. I was
> simply saying I didn't like people calling other people stupid. I can't
> image where you got violent out of that.

Eric,

Either someone else is posting under your name or my mailer is seriously
bugged or I am not capable of understanding the following paragraph
(signed Eric Welch):

QUOTE: 
> Jim,
> I agree with you. I think we come here, in part to get away from the
> dialogue out there that Leica owners are a bunch of snobs, and fools who
> don't know how to use their cameras. Let's knock that crap off. If you want
> to slam Leica, go preach to the choir on the other lists and
> rec.photo.nobody.gives.a.crap.what.you.think.about.leica
> Okay?
UNQUOTE

This came as a support to Jim's following statement:
QUOTE:
> >Unfortunately, posts like this really get under my skin. Each and every
> >statement was made without any knowledge or thought about truth and
> >reality. Error, misconceptions, innuendo, and downright misleading data.
UNQUOTE

This latter statement came at the end of a post qualifying  statements
by an Alan (not me) on what type of camera should be given to a kid as
"stupid", amongst other charitable names, and after a very explicit
change in subject line. Alan's original post was not, to my
understanding, agressive at all, there was no "slam" against the holy
name of Leica.

Please forgive me if I misunderstood all of this and if your intention
was purely friendly and non-agressive. 

And please do not misunderstand me: I have no wish to judge anyone, I am
simply asking that we all refrain from agressive postings. I am happy we
agree on this.

Alan.