Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/01

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: website comments
From: Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 23:18:45 -0800

I apologize to you if I took your overall tone the wrong way. I just
re-read your post, and unfortunately, to me, it still sounds the same. But
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I did look at your site and found
it very pleasing. I don't have the time right now for a photo critique, but
for the most part, they looked very nice.

Jim


At 10:31 PM 3/1/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Jim, it seems that you and a few others on this list imagine yourselves
>as being in an elite class of LUGgers, looking down on the rest of us 
>poor slobs and amateurs.
>
>If you take the time to reread my original email, you'll understand that
>the reason for my tone is the nasty email I received from one of the
>high and mighty of the LUG.  I was only making comments, and not
>attempting to ruffle feathers....my questions were honest.  After I wrote 
>the first email I realized that it was the weekend and that may account for
>the lack of response.  But why am I justifying myself to you anyways?
>
>I apologize for offending the gods.
>
>Francesco
>
>
>At 06:38 PM 3/1/99 , you wrote:
>>Well Francesco, all of the bitching and moaning in the world will not MAKE
>>people go to your web site. Accusing people of playing favorites, snubbing
>>other cameras, and the general overall tone of your post, basically pisses
>>people off.
>>
>>People will look at things they want to look at, and not look at things
>>they don't want to look at. And even if someone looks at a site, is there a
>>requirement that they somehow, put into words, an evaluation? No.
>>
>>Basically, after reading your post, I lost all interest in looking at your
>>girlfriends site.
>>
>>But let me re-write your post for you...
>>
>>"Hey LUGgers, we've only received three comments about our new web site so
>>far. We could really use some genuine comments, positive or negative. We
>>know you are all busy out there, but if you have a chance, we would really
>>appreciate your help.
>>
>>Many thanks,
>>
>>Francesco"
>>
>>
>>...Jim
>>
>>
>>At 06:18 PM 3/1/99 -0800, you wrote:
>>>What kind of a snide remark is that?
>>>
>>>Francesco
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>At 04:05 PM 3/1/99 , Jim Brick wrote:
>>>>Francesco,
>>>>
>>>>After reading your post (below) I would recommend that you buy and read
the
>>>>following book: "How to Win Friends and Influence People", by Dale
>>>>Carnegie. $4 or $5 used. You can find it at   http://www.bookfinder.com/ .
>>>>
>>>>Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>At 03:17 PM 3/1/99 -0800, you wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>So far, we have only received 3 comment emails, and one email from
>>>>>a LUGger that said "maybe no one wants to look at her photos since she
>>>>>took them with an N brand camera."  I thought that email was ridiculous
>>>>>and childish.  I thought photos were to be reviewed and appreciated 
>>>>>regardless if they were shot with Leica or Nikon or a point and shoot!
>>>>>Is this the general feeling on the LUG......that ONLY Leica website
photos
>>>>>should be commented on?  If anyone else posts a URL for review, there
>>>>>are literally 20-30 comments, but we have gotten only 3 and one nasty
>email.
>>>>>Or is everyone just too busy this week?
>>>>>
>>>>>Francesco
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>  
>>>
>>  
>