Commenting On Unused Equipment
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Curiouser and Curiouser on 26 Oct 2009 20:26 I sometimes wonder why people feel the need to make authoritative comments on equipment they've never used, never touched, and never even considered as part of their camera gear. There have been outlandish claims being made. Mostly by dSLR proponents over what can and cannot be done with the myriad P&S cameras available for the last decade. Yet, when pressed for clarity, you find out they've never even been near the cameras they are commenting on so strongly, assuredly, and adamantly with their self-appointed authoritative and seemingly (to themselves) concrete stance. They will loudly and incessantly claim that some camera does not have a feature, when in fact a large range of cameras, sometimes all of those styles of cameras do indeed have that feature or capability. They would instantly know this if they would only go out and test it for themselves with real cameras. But no, to them they have imagined something about some equipment that they've never touched which is nothing but a total fabrication in their own minds. Believing their imaginations as if it is some kind of fact. Like any psychotic religious zealot would. What causes them to do this? I've never commented on nor given advice about anything in life other than that with which I have had first-hand knowledge and experience of my own in that field. If I haven't personally tested something for myself, then I am in no position to make comments about it. Even reading about something doesn't mean what I am reading is true representation of whatever might be in question. I MUST test things for myself before I feel I can comment on anything with any sense of authority whatsoever. I also never strongly rely on some "credible"(?) 3rd-party's review of photography equipment. I learned long ago after having purchased equipment that even those well-meaning reviewers failed to understand how to use a camera, a feature of that camera, or other equipment properly. Or their simplified testing methods to begin with had huge faults in them. (GIGO) Which I only discovered later when my findings didn't match their findings, and I started to wonder why. Their testing methods were to blame. So what causes this need for people to pretend to be authorities on things that they have no real knowledge about? Are they just psychotic trolls? And I'm not using the term "psychotic" pejoratively. I believe they really are psychotic if they can so adamantly believe what they say, when in fact, reality and genuine experience proves them out to be in complete error. If so, if that's all they are, psychotic trolls, they seem to be wall-to-wall in these newsgroups. Far more in abundance than those who have genuine experience and knowledge about the subjects at hand.
From: BobS on 26 Oct 2009 21:09 "Curiouser and Curiouser" <questioning(a)anyisp.net> wrote in message news:uedce5pudtfnk3m5ql001m1jh7n3uvikgk(a)4ax.com... > > I sometimes wonder why people feel the need to make authoritative > comments > on equipment they've never used, never touched, and never even > considered > as part of their camera gear. snip of a good post..... Answer.... Ego, need to participate and maybe even a few really do have hands-on experience (in their minds....;-). Now I'll go put on my flame-proof britches. Bob S.
From: Mike Russell on 26 Oct 2009 22:01 On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:26:05 -0500, Curiouser and Curiouser wrote: > So what causes this need for people to pretend to be authorities on things > that they have no real knowledge about? I think it's part of a category of behavior that predates the human race. Among social animals, status within the group has an important survival value. Humans are not exempt from this, and in many ways may be more prone to it. > Are they just psychotic trolls? And I'm not using the term "psychotic" > pejoratively. Basically yes, though I think neurotic is a more appropriate term than psychotic. > I believe they really are psychotic if they can so adamantly > believe what they say, when in fact, reality and genuine experience proves > them out to be in complete error. This seems like completely normal behavior to me, and not in the least psychotic. > If so, if that's all they are, psychotic > trolls, they seem to be wall-to-wall in these newsgroups. Far more in > abundance than those who have genuine experience and knowledge about the > subjects at hand. You are correct about this, and it does seem to have reached a pitch at the moment. This has always been the Achilles heel of Usenet, and is one of the main reasons that the vast majority of discussion has moved to the web boards. Let it slide off your back, is my advice. I believe it is possible to reason with trolls. It is a mistake to cross them directly. It is possible to appeal to their sense of themselves. -- Mike Russell - http://www.curvemeister.com
From: tony cooper on 26 Oct 2009 22:03 On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:26:05 -0500, Curiouser and Curiouser <questioning(a)anyisp.net> wrote: > >I sometimes wonder why people feel the need to make authoritative comments >on equipment they've never used, never touched, and never even considered >as part of their camera gear. I'd reply, but first I'd have to care. I don't. Not about dslr vs p&s, not about Canon vs Nikon, not about film vs digital, and not about Sigma vs whatever. I have a camera that I like. I have had days where I've spent hours taking photographs, come home with 400 or so images, and not kept one of them. I've never felt it was the camera's fault. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Frank ess on 26 Oct 2009 22:07
BobS wrote: > "Curiouser and Curiouser" <questioning(a)anyisp.net> wrote in message > news:uedce5pudtfnk3m5ql001m1jh7n3uvikgk(a)4ax.com... >> >> I sometimes wonder why people feel the need to make authoritative >> comments >> on equipment they've never used, never touched, and never even >> considered >> as part of their camera gear. > > snip of a good post..... > > Answer.... > > Ego, need to participate and maybe even a few really do have > hands-on experience (in their minds....;-). > > Now I'll go put on my flame-proof britches. > > > Bob S. Here I go. There is a normal drive to be seen, heard, recognized. "At any cost, by any means", is common in infants and pre-school children. Most grow out of it. For those who don't, where better to be seen, heard, recognized - without meaningful cost - than Usenet Groups? It's just a variation on the "troll" theme, maybe a little less dishonest. In some cultures it is discourteous to leave a question without an answer. Ask for directions in a rural area, in some parts of some countries or states, you will get a detailed answer that may or may not get you to your desired destination. "Can't send this poor guy on his way without directions, can we?" Better any directions than none. Seen, heard, and awaiting recognition, I remain your obedient servant, -- Frank ess |