one more time - too many pics!!

[back alley]

cut & pasted from the 'for the newbies' thread.
this usually gets sent to the offending newcomers.

_____________________________

greetings and welcome to the rangefinder forum.

it truly is wonderful to see so many people joining our community.
we have a short but rich history where humour and respect for each other have been the keys to success.


i want to make a suggestion, when you are posting your photos to the gallery, please take the time to note what camera/lens/film combination you used to make that photo.
the membership had a long discussion awhile back and found that many of us look as forward to the info about the photo as we do the photos themselves.

and also, when posting please do not post a dozen or more pics at a time, it leaves us little opportunity to see all the new postings and to make comments on them.
some people and their pics gets pushed along and the pics are not viewed.

there are (so far) no hard rules about posting pics and your cooperation will ensure that none will be needed.

many thanks,
joe
your faithful moderator

[Roger Hicks]

It may be of moderatec interest what camera/lens/film/exposure someone used, but ask yourself this:

1 Am I using the same camera?
2 Am I using the same lens?
3 Am I using the same film?
4 Am I using the same meter?
5 Am I using the same film speed?
6 Am I using the same metering technique?
7 Am I shooting the same subject?
8 Is it under identical lighting?

If ANY ONE answer is different, consider the possibility that the information requested is substantially useless.

Cheers,

Roger

[breakaway]

no caps still?

[back alley]

It may be of moderatec interest what camera/lens/film/exposure someone used, but ask yourself this:

1 Am I using the same camera?
2 Am I using the same lens?
3 Am I using the same film?
4 Am I using the same meter?
5 Am I using the same film speed?
6 Am I using the same metering technique?
7 Am I shooting the same subject?
8 Is it under identical lighting?

If ANY ONE answer is different, consider the possibility that the information requested is substantially useless.

Cheers,

Roger


roger,
must you argue about everything? :)

some of us enjoy knowing some of the details, the more details the better.

and caps are bourgeois...;)

joe

[JoeFriday]

be that as it may, I like to know a little about the equipment used for any given shot

the lens, in particular, is good to know since I might be considering purchasing that same lens, and would like to see its perspective

film info is interesting in that it shows a sample of what the grain might be like, unless it has been processed in an unusual way

while it is potentially useless, it is also potentially very informative.. no one is reprimanded for his or her choice to share or withhold information here.. but the more we share, the more we can all learn

[kiev4a]

How about a message more to the point:

"Don't post so many damn photos at the same time!"

[MP Guy]

I may impose a 10 picture per day upload limit in the near future. RFF has a GIGANTIC collection of pictures :)

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Joe,

OF COURSE I have to argue about everything. It's what I get paid for... (not here, alas... but take a look at the back page of Amateur Photographer magazine in the UK)

Yes, the details are often interesting -- but are they actually worth anything? Many people conflate 'MP, 75/2 Summicron Aspheric, Kodak EBX' with 'has the faintest idea of what he is doing because he owns an expensive camera', whereas you and I know fuill well that 'Is bloody good and could produce stunning pics with anything' (I hasten to add that I wish to make no such claim) is a lot nearer the mark.

The attached pic tells the story. Of course, every one else on the forum has the option of shooting exactly the same subject (a 200+-year-old pewter charger) in in MY studio with MY lighting on 56x72mm Ilford film, using a Linhof.

Sorry, don't want to appear combative, but that's how it is.

Cheers,

Roger

[schaubild]

I won't bring the sentence about the quality vs. quantity issue and the art of self criticism again. The gallery has become almost useless to me, good shots are drowning under the masses of snapshots. I chose to look directly at the few galleries from photographers I know from here.

[GeneW]

It may be of moderatec interest what camera/lens/film/exposure someone used, but ask yourself this:

1 Am I using the same camera?
2 Am I using the same lens?
3 Am I using the same film?
4 Am I using the same meter?
5 Am I using the same film speed?
6 Am I using the same metering technique?
7 Am I shooting the same subject?
8 Is it under identical lighting?

If ANY ONE answer is different, consider the possibility that the information requested is substantially useless.

Cheers,

Roger
Roger, that's a silly statement. I don't read this info so I can duplicate someone else's photo -- I read for curiosity and the often-encountered moment of 'ah, I never thought of trying out that particular combination -- here's an example and I really like what I'm seeing -- I may give that film/lens combo a whirl one of these days.'

When I see no info posted, I get a feeling of incompleteness, as if the photographer didn't know/remember/care.

Gene

[back alley]

roger,
i have not been able to locate that mag here in edmonton.

while i understand your comments and somewhat agree - i agree more with gene.

most here are curious about the details and hope to learn from, deduce from, and gain some form of inspiration from.

you of all people here, with such a burning desire to educate us in all things, surprise me, that you would hold this info back from us. ;)

joe

[peter_n]

{snip} When I see no info posted, I get a feeling of incompleteness, as if the photographer didn't know/remember/care.

GeneAgree with your sentiment, Gene.

Brett - well said earlier in the thread! :) I too am particularly interested in lens information.

Jorge - I don't think that 10 is enough of a limit. 5 is more like it.

[jan normandale]

I'm probably an offender. I get a lot of shots save up and then take about 6/7 rolls of film into the processing shop and put onto CD's. Then when I get them back I have to admit that the details get a little vague. Some are shot on AE others are fully manual. I have five 120 / med format cameras and a slew of 35 mm cameras. Some are Olympus (XA, XA2, RC, etc) Some are Yashica (GSN, Lynx 14, Electro etc) MF Ikonta ( 531, 532) Voigtlander (Perkeo, Perkeo II)

I don't remember what is going on when I'm shooting. I just shoot. Did I use AE on the Mamiya? Did I use AE on the Oly? Did I use manual on the Yashica?

Last week I loaded 11 shots. Fair comment regarding several views. Some people view my shots as snapshots and not photographs so they don't bother to look at them because they have a favoured short list, others want the uploads to be fewer so they can review them more carefully.

I guess I could upload a few at a time, if I had the luxury of being retired or not having other issues to deal with daily. I put 'em all up when they come in because I don't know when I'll get time again.

So thats my situation. Now I'm going to go and take pictures/snapshots/photographs. With a rangefinder. Not a view finder, not a digital camera, not a point and shoot.

It's a great day and I'm going to go get some of it. Have a good one RFF'ers

Jan

[Roger Hicks]

Fair do's, Gene, it wasn't meant to be a put-down. But seriously, ask yourself: what does the camera/lens/film information REALLY do except fire a desire to buy more kit/change film? Surely better to ask yourself, "If I like this picture, how could I duplicate it (or better still improve on it) with the kit I actually own?"

And to be honest, I often don't know/remember/care what I used for a particular pic: I go onn probability (over half the 1000+ pics I shoot every year are an MP and a 35mm lens). The pic is the thing. I take it with what's available. If I'm near home, that's an unbelievable amount of kit. Away from home, it's what I have with me.

Cheers,

Roger

[back alley]

i'm afraid i am also leaning in the direction of imposing a limit.

i don't know about servers and file sizes but the posting of snapshots, using the gallery to host a family style photo album and by many who don't contribute to the forums, is starting to/continuing to annoy and aggravate quite a few here.

joe

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Joe,

Do I detect I tiny bit of irony here:

you of all people here, with such a burning desire to educate us in all things, surprise me, that you would hold this info back from us.

Point taken -- after all, benighted colonials need all the help they can get, meme les canadiens -- but seriously, sn't there MORE education in realizing what information is vakuable and what isn't?

Incidentally I have just discovered that the Acadiens (Cajuns, pour ceux canadiens qui ne parlent pas francais) came disproportionsately from hereabouts in the northern Aquitaine.

Amities,

Roger

[dkapp]

OF COURSE I have to argue about everything. It's what I get paid for... (not here, alas... but take a look at the back page of Amateur Photographer magazine in the UK)

I don't get that magazine here. If I did, your attitude in this forum would prevent me from buying it. I've been reading this forum for a few months now, and I'm not impressed.



Sorry, don't want to appear combative, but that's how it is.

I think you do.

[peter_n]

Roger Joe is a Yank... :)

Thanks for listening Jorge!! :D

[Roger Hicks]

Well, dkapp, whose problem is this? Yours, or mine?

Cheers,

Roger

[doubs43]

Just my 2 cents worth but I like knowing what lens/film combination took a particular picture.

I tend to like pastel colors and if a film has knock-yer-eye-out brilliant colors, highly saturated and contrasty, I don't want to use that film. Knowing what was used by others helps me avoid film I won't like. The same rationale goes for B&W film; i.e., does a particular lens/film/developer give a pleasing result or is it too grainy, flat etc.?

A great deal of emphasis has been placed on "bokeh" in recent years. It's helpful knowing which lens was used when the bokeh is appealing to me and which lens renders horrible out of focus images.

Other than that, I suppose such information is pretty meaningless.

Walker

[dkapp]

Well, dkapp, whose problem is this? Yours, or mine?

Cheers,

Roger
From where I sit, it sounds like yours. I don't rely on people wanting to hear what I have to say to pay my rent...you do.

Dave

[JoeFriday]

Point taken -- after all, benighted colonials need all the help they can get, meme les canadiens -- but seriously, sn't there MORE education in realizing what information is vakuable and what isn't?
it's a good thing we have you to make that distinction for us, Roger

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Dave,

Yes, and I'm not worried. Nor do I pay rent.

Joe: To quote Flanders and Swann (Swan?) from memory, from 'The English Are Best'

"It's not that they're wicked or naturally bad/It's knowing they're FOREIGN that makes them so mad"

Manolo: ****stirring? Moi?

Walker: your point about film is entirely fair, but what's it worth after Photoshop and the web and God-awful monitors?

Cheers,

Roger

[Nick R.]

This thread is a waste of time. I go to the gallery to see photos from the people with whom I converse on the forum, not three pages of snapshots from some guy named "alt" that I never heard of. Until there's a limit on gallery postings, why bother.

[Fedzilla_Bob]

Camera, lens and film. F stop if you can remember or noted it. The last can be tough when you are hurried to catch a shot. The first three aren't really all that hard to keep track of.

It helps me understand what tools produce what results. Yes, the individual's eyes, mind and the moment matter most. But, the tools do count.

Besides how else are we gomig to keep G.A.S. alive.

I won't even bother to mention the need for self limitation when it comes to posting images. Oh... wait... I just mentioned it. ;)

[Little Prince]

A disappointing thread to read. I wish people could remain objective.

[julianphotoart]

1. Amateur Photographer is available in the U.S. and Canada, at least by subscription. It's weekly, it's got regular contributions by Ivor Matanle, it's got Roger Hicks' weekly diatribe (which I read religiously), and of the general interest photo magazines it's about the least taken in by digitalmania (i.e., it's actually got more than a token number of film-based topics and its editor isn't a stooge for the digital industry). The web-site is amateurphotographer.com and I think the e-mail address for subscriptions is ipcsubs@qss-uk.com.
2. We've gotten off-topic. I disagree with Roger on this one but I understand his point entirely. If one reads his columns his mind-set grows on one. My main reason for wanting to know details is that I like seeing all the nice old cameras at work (especially Argus).
3. I'm guilty of too many uploads at once. I will limit to 3 from now on.
4. I agree that the gallery is being drowned by snapshots. I hope that mine are not perceived as snapshots but who knows; let me know.

Julian

[Roger Hicks]

Sorry, Bob, it IS hard to keep track of what camera and lens you used 5, 10, 15, 20 years ago -- and WHO CARES? I can go on probability -- which Leica, the focal length from the apparent perspective -- but I can't guarantee it. Had they discontinued Fuji RF/RFP at that tiime? Was I using Kodachrome faute de mieux? Does it matter?

Shoot what you can, now, with the kit you have. Everything else is worthless. Do you care what kit I used? No. Do I care what kit you used? No. So YOU care what kit you used?

Cheers,

Roger

[Fedzilla_Bob]

Whatever. It matters to me.

I have said enough.

[Fedzilla_Bob]

One more thing. (my wives, current and past, tell me that I love to have last words)

I know what camera, lens and f stop I shot 20 years ago. It's written on the transparency mounts.

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Anand,

What's objective, on a matter of opinion?

Dear Julian,

I'm delighted you disagree. You have thought about it. Great. The same goes for Bob. But at least we're THINKING and arguing instead of saying "It's always been done this way therefore it should always be done this way. "

This is not meant to sound patronizing. Your opinions are worth at least as much as mine. But without debate, how do we know anyone's opinion? And how do we form our own opinions?

Cheers,

Roger

[back alley]

i don't think we're talking about photo lessons or what 'secret' will i learn from all this tech info?, for me, IF YOU ARE SO INCLINED, put down some details from that recent shoot, IF YOU NOTE THESE THINGS in the first place.

i'm like roger (heavens) in that i don't pay particular attention to exposure details except for the moment i'm shooting.
it's usually easier for me to remember what gear i used as i normally go out with one camera and one lens and most of the time it's a p+35. the type of film is on the neg.

now, everyone, take a big fu**ing breath and share the love:)

joe

[back alley]

'But without debate, how do we know anyone's opinion? And how do we form our own opinions? '

just ask me, i'll tell you my opinion.
i just find the confrontational approach too tiring and i can learn without the pain.

joe

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Joe,

Sorry, I don't mean to be confrontational. But (a) it's my nature and (b) I have a law degree. Your view is 100% wise -- but then, I would say that, wouldn't I?

Cheers,

Roger

[Fedzilla_Bob]

A rousing chorus of "Koom By Yah" maybe?

No worries. Just sharing thoughts.

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Bob,

Hey, Lordie...

Cheers,

R

[ddunn]

It's interesting that none of the pictures in the Lee Friedlander retrospective at the Museum of Modern Art was captioned with the "camera, lens, shutter speed, aperture, film" information. It was fairly apparent when he made the change from Leica to Rollei Ultrawide, but that bit of knowledge wasn't critical to enjoying the pictures.

Magazines have printed that information for years and years, as if it was critical to understanding and enjoying the photo, and we've been conditioned into believing this. But if you actually LOOK at the photo, 9 times out of 10 you can figure out the lens focal length and aperture used (and shutter speed if it wasn't instantaneous). Even if you can't, it doesn't change your understanding and enjoyment of the photo. After all, if this information really was that important, museums and galleries would demand it and display it for each of the photos in their collections.

However, I will say that this information is of interest when looking at old magazines. It is intriguing to see what some of the old timers could do when f 3.5 and Weston 25 were "fast."

[Roger Hicks]

Dear ddun,

YES!

If you can't figure it out, it probably won't matter anyway.

If you can figure it out, it doesn't matter.

And figuring it out on the web is (a) next to impossible and therefore (b) worthless anyway.

Cheers,

Roger

[doubs43]

i don't think we're talking about photo lessons or what 'secret' will i learn from all this tech info? joe

Joe, you've reminded me of a story that my father told me years ago.

Our small-town Methodist Church once had a Minister who became interested in photography. He rushed out and bought a camera, lenses, enlarger and all the necessary items required to develope film and print enlargements. When he couldn't produce a decent print, he asked my father for help.

My father joined the Minister in his darkroom and asked him to make a test strip of his negative. The Minister immediately threw a full sheet of 8x10 paper under the enlarger! My father stopped him and asked why he was using a full sheet. Why, that's how he made his test strips! My father then explained how to cut the sheet into strips and place them under the important parts of the enlargement. Then he demonstrated how to make a decent print from the results of the test strip(s).

It was then that the Minister shocked my father by asking for his "secret" to making good prints. Pop explained that there was no "secret" and that it was simply a matter of practice and learning. The Minister actually became angry and insisted that Pop was withholding his "secret" from him. As far as I know, the Minister was never satisfied that Pop wasn't keeping something from him. I don't know if he ever found out what the "secret" was as I believe he quickly tired of photography.

Walker

[FrankS]

I'm not sure exactly why, but I do like reading the technical details of a photograph while I am enjoying the asthetic axpects of a photograph. The extra context somehow "completes the picture" for me. Must be the gearhead part of me. I'm certainly not going to use the info to try to replicate the image with the same camera/lens/exposure/developer etc. I just like knowing the details.

[back alley]

ok, maybe you two haven't noticed...this is not an art museum, it's a internet forum for guys like me who want TO SHARE info and learn and keep the creative juices flowing.

to hang out with artists and geeks and even the ODD mag writer, to enjoy my hobby, my art whatever.

i'm also a poet, used to attend a writer's group and no we did not talk about what pen or pencil we used or what kind of computer or printer...but we DID SHARE for the purpose of moving ahead.
no blood was spilt, either :)

joe

[Roger Hicks]

Nice story, Walker.

Frank: WHY? Are you sure it isn't just habituation?

There's also the point that people lie, sometimes through forgetfulness (raises hand) and sometimes out of dishonesty: I knew one photographer, the author of a few books (not me -- I'm the author of LOTS of books) who attributed all his good shots to the company that gave him free cameras, and all the ordinsary ones to the cameras he had to buy for himself.

Cheers,

Roger

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Joe,

I regard myself as a better writer than photographer (chorus of 'Hear! Hear!' and 'He can't write either') and I have to echo your point about writers' groups. But then again you don't get sharper typewriters or word processing programs.

Incidentally was there any hidden agenda in the capitalization of 'odd'?

Cheers,

Roger (still using Wordstar)

[Fedzilla_Bob]

In the interest of "sharing the love..." here is why it matters to me-

I am an amateur photographer. I leave the professional shooting to my brother who has lived and breathed it for over 3 decades. I am a professional graphic designer. My head is filled with understanding of typography, color, form and composition as it applies to book and Web design. My head is also filled with info about human factors and how it matters in design. Functionality is key in conveying information. I apply my knowledge intuitively as a result of almost 30 years of experience.

I don't have the experience of working with my cameras hours on end, day in and day out. I believe it would take that amount of involvement in photography to apply the knowledge with the same level of intuition I use in my professional life.

So, the added information reminds me of how to apply the tools. Seeing information about lenses, film and aperture informs me of how an effect is acheived.

No, I won't necessarily be able to duplicate results. But, I can assimilate what I learn from it and apply it to my own photos. Maybe this is a result of being a designer and not an artist.

For me, some level of process must be practiced in order to get to the next level where I can perform intuitively. I see that information as a matter of building knowledge. Which, hopefully, will lead to experience.

[back alley]

Incidentally was there any hidden agenda in the capitalization of 'odd'?

nothing hidden at all.
i think you see the way the people on this forum work very differently than i do and therefore i find that odd.
i find you odd, in that, after repeated attempts to downplay your confrontational manner, you persist in confronting others and pushing your 'agenda of learning' on this small group of people.
frankly, i am tiring of it.

you may be interested in knowing of the complaints i get about you from forum members, of the people who leave this forum because they choose that over the unbearable unrelenting attitute of self rightiousness and condecending manner in which you address people here.

is this the kind of truth you are after roger?
does this satisfy your need for impact on others?

any more opinions from me that you would like to hear?

joe

[JoeFriday]

is it just me, or is it a bit egotistical for someone to be concerned that others are going to take another RFFer's photo and try to replicate it?

[Roger Hicks]

OK, Joe. I guess it's time to leave. Sorry I upset you (and others).

I'm not entirely sure I understand what you're saying, but equally, you (and others) don't seem too clear on what I am saying. I thought we were all here to learn, not merely to confirm our prejudices.

Perhaps I'll see some of you on www.rogerandfrances.com. Hope so. If not, vaya con dio.

Cheers,

Roger

[back alley]

are you not capable of change, of learning something new and trying it out?

i could ban you roger but that is not my style.

i'm not asking you or anyone else to leave but i will ask for some sincere respect for the people here.

you don't seem to want to understand that most people here are trying to have some fun, to learn, make some cyber friends and sometimes, to create something unique and beautiful...all while enjoying the forum experience.

you are welocme here, maybe just relax some...

joe

[jan normandale]

Hey , I'm back. Just checked in before going out. I can smell a good thread a mile away.

Wow! Who'd a thought. Roger versus the world and he likes it. I'd probably hang out with Roger for the heck of it. I imagine he's a gusto sorta guy. Still it must be a slow day Roger. You've single handedly put out more 'ink' for one guy on a thread and 'bareknuckled' it out too.

So how about a solution here. Roger.. don't bother putting info on your pix. If some want to put info on pix do it. If some can't remember don't make it up! I didn't do a random check of the supporters of tech info but maybe we should look to see who says they are compliant and who isn't.

I'm sorta like Roger tho I'm a Canadian version. Sometimes the tech stuff gets in the way or is not 'journalized'. I'd like to see a Winogrand or Cartier-Bresson stop in the street and note down f stop, speed, and lens each time he changed any of those three. For those who noted that they can remember details of a shot 20 years ago. It's not fair, you have a memory issue. I won't hold it against you.

Joe you've got a point this is a wonderful site for people to learn tech stuff. So I promise to try and note specifics whenever I can. This will help the newbies and curious.

As a final comment. I randomly selected 3 of the RFFers who want the 'info' and went to their galleries…….. I then went to the first gallery and first photo in that gallery. Guess what? No tech info on the shot. Before we start throwing stones lets be sure we aren't living in a 'glass forum'

Maybe a little live and let live would be good here. I have written to members regarding their shots. Those inclined responed. That may be one more solution and it isn't difficult.

Cheers, Jan

[back alley]

the tech info for most of the gallery was lost in the move.

joe

[back alley]

and this stopped being about tech info a while back.

joe

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Joe,

You could ban me, but that's not your style?

What is? And what would you ban me for? Disagreeing with you?

I'd say that sincere respect is what I'm offering: I'm taking other people's views seriously and responding seriously. I just don't agree with a lot of them.

Which is why, perhaps, it's better if I quit before I'm thrown off. If there is no room for dissent -- and I think I've usually been civil -- then there's no room for me on the forum either.

Cheers,

Roger

[back alley]

roger,

you're an adult who can decide these things on his own.

if you are capable only of dissenting so be it.

joe

[jan normandale]

Hi all ,if we really think about it, this is deteriorating. Lets stop for today .

Jan

[Fedzilla_Bob]

Thanks Joe for pointing out the data lost. I was going to bring that up.

It's easy to remember which camera and lens. Joe mentioned this earlier when he pointed out that he usually is using one camera and lens. I have only once gone out with two lenses and My Bessa R. A few of my other cameras are fixed lens. Makes that easy enough.

It is also not unheard of to use a microcassette recorder to capture notes. I have done this in the past as a learning tool. Dorky? Yes, but effective.

[Fedzilla_Bob]

"Mixing Blues" was shot with my Bessa R, Industar 61 l/d and Fuji NPS 160. Don't know the f. ;)

[JoeFriday]

Roger, I can take the sometimes combative attitude, the glib remarks, etc. Sometimes I even enjoy them. I'm a thick skinned kind of person who thinks people should speak their minds when appropriate. What really
p!$$e$ me off is how you all too often make the subject of many threads one thing: Roger Hicks
that's how I feel, as well.. in this one thread, which was originally a stern request to upload your photos in small groups, we've learned that Roger has a law degree and has written LOTS of books *golf clap*

unfortunately, this site is about photography.. and even more to the point, it's a place to discuss questions, thoughts and yes, feelings.. as Joe has already pointed out, it's not a museum or an art gallery.. it's also not a place where any one person's opinion is the deciding factor (at least, for as long as Jorge allows)

it's time for all of us to elevate ourselves above 'civil' and embrace 'polite' and 'respectful'.. you go first :D

[jan normandale]

"Mixing Blues" was shot with my Bessa R, Industar 61 l/d and Fuji NPS 160. Don't know the f. ;)

Hi Fedzilla Bob

yep, you were one but I wasn't going to say it, but you blew the cover. (joke!!)

Jan

my attempt to lighten this thread up

[Fedzilla_Bob]

Oh it only took a liitle work to figure it out. All of 30 seconds. No feelings hurt here.

A lot of my data was blown away with the move. Happened to most us.

I have been lazy about adding the data again. Partially guilty as charged. ;)

[FrankS]

About confrontational style: There was a fellow a while ago who advertized his new photographic discussion website. The last article of his that I read, and commented on here at RFF, was something to the effect that if an image did not work in colour, one could make it B+W and call it art. He decided that in order to capture readers he needed to be confrontational. I surmise that Roger Hick's magazine articles are similar.

I stated that what I enjoy the most about RFF was atmosphere of warmth, helpfulness, and respect. This confrontational style, especially when someone needs to argue his point to the bitter end, instead of realizing that there are other valid points of view and the socially polite course would be to agree to disagree, is the opposit of what I like the best about RFF.

If only Roger could adapt his discourse here to the prevailing custom of respect and politeness! It is similar to someone entering a church and talking too loudly.

I don't mind that Roger has his own views and that they are sometimes different from those of others, it is the manner in which he presents them that I find less than acceptable here at RFF. Perfectly fine for his articles, but the confrontational style goes against the culture here at RFF.

I wish Roger would stay, but chill out a bit.

(My tech data was also lost in the move.)

[MP Guy]

Enough said on this thread. Lets return to a civil forum and enjoy it for what it is. I am sure everyone has their bad days. I am just puting an end to this one here.