Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/08

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Should the nameless stay nameless
From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:33:14 -0500

Well, most of us use our real names. A few, like Arthur W. Gottschalk don't.

By the way, Arthur W. Gottschalk, you referred at one point to having a
'show' at a gallery in SoHo - Would that gallery be the "cooperative" of at
least 100 members, which lets any four members who want to hang their work?
Just wondering, as we haven't ever seen your work posted on the LUG?

B. D.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of John
Collier
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 10:24 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: [Leica] Should the nameless stay nameless


It was bad enough going through the desert on a horse with no name. I am not
going to have conversations with someone called Photo Phreak!

Seriously though, we all use our real names here and I appreciate it. We are
not fourteen year olds taking a break from cruising porn sites. It is not
all about cameras; people, personalities and names are important.

John Collier

> From: SthRosner@aol.com
>
> please let the phreakperson be. I've had an off-list communication with
> her/him and there is very sound reason for the lack of ID. Honest.
>

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html