photography documentaries
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: John McWilliams on 19 Jun 2010 20:50 sobriquet wrote: > Fine, so if you just have the decency to respect the terms and > conditions of my usenet postings, we can all just get along fine here > in rec.photo.digital. "We"?? Hah, and hah again. It's just you and a sock or two. No one gets along with you, at least no one in this NG. -- lsmft
From: Will T on 19 Jun 2010 20:58 On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:48:36 -0400, krishnananda <krishna(a)divine-life.in.invalid> wrote: > >You have obviously never read the fine print at the UN's Universal >Declaration of Human Rights web site. Since when has the UN ever voiced the opinions of the worlds' populations? Did you recently receive a ballot in the mail asking for your opinion on one of their "laws"? If not, they don't represent you, nor anyone else who hasn't likewise received such a ballot. They're a sham organization, invented and perpetuated to appease idiots like you.
From: Intentionally Left Blank on 19 Jun 2010 21:18 "sobriquet" <dohduhdah(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:e9f688e5-7a3e-407d-b81d-176a22863c5d(a)j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > ***************************************************************************** > By reading and/or replying to this usenet posting, you acknowledge > that you have read, understood and accepted the terms and conditions > found at: > > http://www.ibbu.nl/~nsprakel/eula.txt > > ****************************************************************************** > > Fine, so if you just have the decency to respect the terms and > conditions of my usenet postings, we can all just get along fine here > in rec.photo.digital. > > If you disagree with my point of view on spurious intellectual > property claims and the freedom to share information as specified in > the universal declaration of human rights, you should simply ignore my > postings and that way we can both enjoy human rights like freedom of > expression and the freedom to share information without infringing or > encroaching on each others rights. How about creating your own forum, then you can declare yourself as moderator. In such your forum, your rules. Otherwise the Charter of rec.photo.digital applies. Your post and this thread is off-charter, and off-topic. 1. CHARTER OF REC.PHOTO.DIGITAL "This group is for the discussion of all aspects of digital photography, including digital cameras, scanners, image manipulation software, printers, and CD-ROM technology. All postings made to this group should conform to existing Usenet guidelines (see news.announce.newusers for guideline documents). This group explicitly prohibits the posting of commercial advertisments or other promotional material, whether or not it is an any way related to photography. Binary postings (i.e. non text postings) are prohibited." About this group: The rec.photo.digital Usenet newsgroup offers a forum in which to discuss past, current and future digital imaging solutions, devices and software. Feel free to ask for help or advice on how best to perform imaging tasks using cameras and other related hardware such as card readers, power sources, CD burners, etc. This group does NOT permit commercial posts. Do not sell your hardware, your business or your site on this group. 2. GENERAL COURTESY AND NEWSGROUP SPECIFIC CONVENTIONS Please use standard Usenet netiquette when posting on r.p.d. Treat other posters with courtesy and follow standard conventions when replying to posts. Please trim the posts you reply to, retaining only the significant portions in your follow up. Preserve attributions (the bits that specify who wrote what in each post) and limit your signature to 4 lines or less. To ensure readability, do not use HTML in your posts and keep your line lengths to the Usenet standard of 80 characters. You can read more about netiquette at many sites, such as http://www.pbs.org/uti/guide/netiquette.html
From: sobriquet on 19 Jun 2010 21:26 ***************************************************************************** By reading and/or replying to this usenet posting, you acknowledge that you have read, understood and accepted the terms and conditions found at: http://www.ibbu.nl/~nsprakel/eula.txt ****************************************************************************** On 20 jun, 03:18, "Intentionally Left Blank" <anonym...(a)not-for- mail.invalid> wrote: > "sobriquet" <dohduh...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:e9f688e5-7a3e-407d-b81d-176a22863c5d(a)j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > > > > > ***************************************************************************** > > By reading and/or replying to this usenet posting, you acknowledge > > that you have read, understood and accepted the terms and conditions > > found at: > > >http://www.ibbu.nl/~nsprakel/eula.txt > > > ****************************************************************************** > > > Fine, so if you just have the decency to respect the terms and > > conditions of my usenet postings, we can all just get along fine here > > in rec.photo.digital. > > > If you disagree with my point of view on spurious intellectual > > property claims and the freedom to share information as specified in > > the universal declaration of human rights, you should simply ignore my > > postings and that way we can both enjoy human rights like freedom of > > expression and the freedom to share information without infringing or > > encroaching on each others rights. > > How about creating your own forum, then you can declare yourself as > moderator. In such your forum, your rules. Otherwise the Charter of > rec.photo.digital applies. Your post and this thread is off-charter, and > off-topic. > > 1. CHARTER OF REC.PHOTO.DIGITAL > > "This group is for the discussion of all aspects of digital photography, > including digital cameras, scanners, image manipulation software, > printers, and CD-ROM technology. All postings made to this group should > conform to existing Usenet guidelines (see news.announce.newusers for > guideline documents). This group explicitly prohibits the posting of > commercial advertisments or other promotional material, whether or not > it is an any way related to photography. Binary postings (i.e. non text > postings) are prohibited." > > About this group: > > The rec.photo.digital Usenet newsgroup offers a forum in which to > discuss past, current and future digital imaging solutions, devices > and software. Feel free to ask for help or advice on how best to > perform imaging tasks using cameras and other related hardware such > as card readers, power sources, CD burners, etc. This group does > NOT permit commercial posts. Do not sell your hardware, your business > or your site on this group. > > 2. GENERAL COURTESY AND NEWSGROUP SPECIFIC CONVENTIONS > > Please use standard Usenet netiquette when posting on r.p.d. Treat > other posters with courtesy and follow standard conventions when > replying to posts. Please trim the posts you reply to, retaining > only the significant portions in your follow up. Preserve attributions > (the bits that specify who wrote what in each post) and limit your > signature to 4 lines or less. To ensure readability, do not use > HTML in your posts and keep your line lengths to the Usenet standard > of 80 characters. You can read more about netiquette at many sites, > such ashttp://www.pbs.org/uti/guide/netiquette.html My postings on rec.photo.digital are in agreement with these guidelines. My original posting is not intended to sell anything and it's clearly related to digital photography, as I'm pointing out some interesting photography documentaries that are available on the internet for people with an interest in digital photography. Nobody is forced to read my postings and if people are not interested in them, they can simply ignore my postings. If they do read and/or reply to my postings, they thereby acknowledge that they agree to the terms and conditions of my postings.
From: George Kerby on 19 Jun 2010 21:37
On 6/19/10 6:56 PM, in article 2010061916560844303-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: > On 2010-06-19 16:26:52 -0700, George Kerby <ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com> said: > >> >> >> >> On 6/19/10 11:53 AM, in article >> 2010061909533922503-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck" >> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >> >>> On 2010-06-19 09:46:24 -0700, George Kerby <ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com> said: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6/19/10 10:28 AM, in article >>>> 2010061908283084492-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck" >>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2010-06-19 03:41:54 -0700, sobriquet <dohduhdah(a)yahoo.com> said: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ************************************************************************* >>>>>> ** >>>>>> ** >>>>>> By reading and/or replying to this usenet posting, you acknowledge >>>>>> that you have read, understood and accepted the terms and conditions >>>>>> found at: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.ibbu.nl/~nsprakel/eula.txt >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> *************************************************************************** >>>> ** >>>>>> >>>> * >>>>> >>>>> Nick Sprakel remains a cyber-thief, no matter how much he protests. >>>>> ...and he cannot find his way out of that basement. >>>>> >>>>> < http://picasaweb.google.com/THCganja/Various#5244910721929976050 > >>>>> < http://picasaweb.google.com/dohduhdah/Experimenteel#5282010159386521810 >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> I await the nazi name calling so we can invoke Godwin. >>>> >>>> Gawdamit! Are those creatures still alive?!? >>>> >>>> Looks like rigor mortis had set in... >>> >>> He doesn't see much sunlight does he? >> >> Just occurred to me that it is one and the same. A Kafkian metamorphosis, of >> sorts. > > A modern Nederlander version of Gregor, now there is food for thought. > When unable to meet family responsibility within the stresses of a > working life, Gregor becomes a metaphor for an ugly family burden > hidden in his bedroom. > They are finally released with his death. > > ...yes I can see how the Metamorphasis analogy with Sobriquet/Nick is > > very workable. There is probably a family dynamic which keeps him in > that cave. Not to mention the "cockroach" theme factor that he continually throws about. |