-
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alex to Bolex Bob:
I note a slight twinge of sarcasm in your post. No apology necessary
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Alex, here is the thing that you simply do not get:
No one on this board is indebted to you, has to justify themselves to you or has to apologize for defending themselves against one of your tirades that inevitably results when someone disagrees with you and you get your feelings hurt. I find it odd that you are the ONLY one on this board that seems to have this problem with other posters yet, in your mind, it's 'everyone else' out to get you; it couldn't POSSIBLY be you.
Even when it was obvious that you offended a large group of people with your unfortunate attempt at "humor", you didn't have the courtesy to apologize. In fact, I have never seen you apologize for any comment you have ever made on this board, no matter how insensitive or inaccurate. It is that kind of obvious arrogance that results in people not giving you any slack what so ever, even when you try to joke. You come across as conceited, mean and pompous. And we are somehow supposed to RELATE to you on a "human" level? We are supposed to take your advice on how to make this world a 'better place' when you can't go for more than a day or so without stirring up trouble? Even if you don't MEAN to, you can not be so blind as to not see it happening. Or do you REALLY think that it is everyone else but you?
Come on, man. How long are you going to keep this up line of logic? No one is out to "get you". But you have to take responsibility for the things you write. If you're going to ream people for their "lack of allegiance" to super 8, like you did me and others, then you have GOT to figure that someone is going to (sooner or later) hold YOUR feet to the fire for your accomplishments in the medium you so overzealously defend.
It would appear that you are the only one that feels unsettled by what Chas wrote, which I still feel is funny and pretty accurate. You DO spend a huge amount of time posting here and on your own forum. You DON'T appear to shoot any film, particularly super 8 and you seem to work exclusively in the medium of video which you claim is the big threat to super 8. Is it really so illogical or unfair for anyone, not just Chas, to poke a little fun at you for your seemingly bi-polar position?
The way I see it, you can make as many friends here as you want. Or you can ignore the impact of your claims and what you write and make enemies. To me, this is a no-brainer. I certainly didn't come LOOKING for trouble when I first posted on this forum and I never have trouble on any other forums. Are you really so blind to your contribution in all this?
You know, a simple apology from you and some acknowledgement that you are wrong as often as anyone would go a long way in my book in making you more "human" and someone that I could relate to as opposed to this image of you pecking away at your computer, hours on end, trying to "one up" all your enemies that, frankly, don't even KNOW they're your enemies!
No one is out to get you. But people aren't going to ignore the things you write now or the accusations you've made in the past. You want to keep relacing them gloves or take them off? It would be much easier to post if you took them off, I think.
Think about it, Alex. None of us has time for this nonsense. Let's make movies and get on with it, and that includes YOU.
Sincerely,
Roger Evans
-
O.K. I'll throw my 2 cents in here.
Alex, I wouldn't have a problem with you at all if:
1. You would just occasionally admit that something you say MIGHT be SLIGHTLY off the mark, instead of going into a tirade that we're out to get you, just because someone simply disagrees with you every once in a while.
I've had huge disagreements with other people, including Roger Evans (remember the digital projection debates?) but we never stopped being gentlemen about it. In fact, I enjoy a good intellectual debate once in a while, but the crybaby stuff is another story! Are you an only child? Seems like it!
2. You wouldn't drag what would be otherwise a purely technical discussion into personal insults or whatever.
3. You would have the guts to apologize when you do offend someone, like the now infamous incident where I posted your quote, and all you could do is defend yourself for having deleted it after I saw it!
I, for one, will not post any slams on you, if you will from this point forward stop all this crap!
Forgive and forget, if you are willing to be a gentleman and keep the discussions civil, and not take it so personal when someone disagrees with you.
Matt Pacini
------------------
-
Roger, apparently you are still angry about events from two months ago?
Frankly, this new topic post you created is more flaming and more mud slinging directed at me.
I always try to talk about a topic or a concept as it relates to Super-8. In many instances, I believe you have taken these type of posts personally, especially when they are in response to one of your posts.
Just because we slung dozens of posts back and forth on one topic post two months ago doesn't mean I hate or disrespect you.
Those kind of thoughts have never even entered my mind.
The quote you use in your post confuses me. Bolex Bob either twisted my words on purpose or accidentally...or misunderstood them.
Bolex Bob's apology post seemed to have a mild sarcastic tone to it. I don't even understand why you refer to his quote at all. I certainly don't think either Bob or myself needed to apologize over either's posts to each other.
Virtually every line in your post is full of the kind of crap I have never swung your way.
------------------
Alex
-
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Matt Pacini:
O.K. I'll throw my 2 cents in here.
Alex, I wouldn't have a problem with you at all if:
1. You would just occasionally admit that something you say MIGHT be SLIGHTLY off the mark, instead of going into a tirade that we're out to get you, just because someone simply disagrees with you every once in a while.
I've had huge disagreements with other people, including Roger Evans (remember the digital projection debates?) but we never stopped being gentlemen about it. In fact, I enjoy a good intellectual debate once in a while, but the crybaby stuff is another story! Are you an only child? Seems like it!
2. You wouldn't drag what would be otherwise a purely technical discussion into personal insults or whatever.
3. You would have the guts to apologize when you do offend someone, like the now infamous incident where I posted your quote, and all you could do is defend yourself for having deleted it after I saw it!
I, for one, will not post any slams on you, if you will from this point forward stop all this crap!
Forgive and forget, if you are willing to be a gentleman and keep the discussions civil, and not take it so personal when someone disagrees with you.
Matt Pacini
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Matt, you have a lot of nerve even bringing up the "deletion" incident again. Especially after accusing me of harrassing you.
Now you bring it up again!
Continue to defend Chas's comments toward me, continue to offend me.
------------------
Alex
-
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alex:
Roger, apparently you are still angry about events from two months ago?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, I haven't forgotten them, if that's what you mean. People that post lies about me generally find a unique place in my memory. I'm funny that way, I guess. Would you care to apologize?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alex:
Frankly, this new topic post you created is more flaming and more mud slinging directed at me.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are one paranoid dude, dude. This new topic was a genuine attempt to try to reach out and come to terms. If you can't face your own shortcomings due to your ego, then you have a very, very serious problem.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alex:
Just because we slung dozens of posts back and forth on one topic post two months ago doesn't mean I hate or disrespect you.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ooooo. I'm getting the warm fuzzies all over. If your treatment of me doesn't mean that you hate or disrespect me, then I'd hate to see how you treat your friends.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alex:
I certainly don't think either Bob or myself needed to apologize over either's posts to each other.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
More to the point, you don't feel it necessary to EVER apologize, do you Alex?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alex:
Virtually every line in your post is full of the kind of crap I have never swung your way.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, you have your own unique brand of crap. It's called "Alex-Speak", of which we have just seen a whole heap.
Sorry I even tried, Alex. I guess I should have known better.
Roger
-
Yeah, I can't make it to meeting, either. And I know how important it is, too. But, unfortunately, if falls on the night I sort my socks, so I guess Matt will just have to carry on without us other shitheads.
"The Three Shitheads". There's a movie there, somewhere. http://www.hostboard.com/ubb/wink.gif
Roger
-
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Alex:
[B] Matt, you have a lot of nerve even bringing up the "deletion" incident again. Especially after accusing me of harrassing you."
Alex, you're the one who beat that subject to death.
Go back adn count posts on that subject, and you'll find you have the high count, not to mention, you're always the first to bring it up, then I defend myself.
This is the only post that is an exeption.
You're a lost cause dude, you really MUST be an only child.
You obviously have no desire to bury the hatchet.
I for one would much rather have constructive conversations on this forum.
I had no idea why Mike Brantley would tolerate your belligerent behavior, then I noticed all the ads running on this board.
Our arguing is probably enabling him to sell even more advertising, due to the high hit count.
I can't think of any other reason, because you're obviously pissing lots of people off, and intimidating others not to even dare post on this board...
I wish Brantely could see that in the long run, this is going to hinder, not help the hit count.
Matt Pacini
------------------
-
Guys, I'm at my wit's end over the continued problems on this board. It's spoiling things for a lot of people -- many more, in fact, than are the typical core of active posters.
One person obviously is a catalyst for trouble, whether by his own design or his own inability to see he is the epicenter for trouble. However, others fuel the flames by their responses to him. They empower him.
Given that this has been ongoing for months, I am considering the most drastic of actions. Read into that statement the most ominous steps you can imagine, and you will be close to understanding how serious I am. This has all become too much of a chore for me, and I don't have time for it.
I will spend the next few days investigating ways to reestablish this forum on my own server space, with software that will allow me full control over who gets in and who will be turned away. Using Hostboard, my abilities in that regard are limited. The biggest negative to such a move is that the vast archive of messages posted here likely would be lost. I know of no way to move this data from Hostboard to my own server.
However, there may be a way of getting the stuff moved. I just don't know. I don't really know that much about such things, I must admit. But I will look into it, and I invite anyone with the knowhow to correspond with me through private e-mail. Please come forward quickly. If I can save this data, I want to do it.
At any rate, I suggest you bookmark my main Super 8 site and not just this Hostboard forum. I don't want the folks who are interested in serious, meaningful discourse about Super 8 filmmaking to lose track of us.
I'm serious as a heart attack, and I will post this note also to a new thread as I close this one.
------------------
--Mike Brantley
-
Roger, I don't see how you can't see how awful your original Peace Accord Post really is.
If your original post was a peace accord, I'd hate to see your war accord.
Our original flame-out caught me every bit by surprise as it did you. (I had never been involved in any thing like that before)
You keep saying I told all these lies about you when all I did was debate you on the wisdom of stating 16mm can be used pretty much whenever you want to shoot Super-8, especially if you have $3,000 to shoot a commercial.
I pointed out you could shoot it in either 35mm, 16mm, Super-8mm.
Everytime I tried to do an overview of the topic, you would accuse me of changing the topic. To this day, you constantly accuse me of changing topics simply because I try and explain the situation using analogies.
Here is an excerpt of one quote by me and then a series of quotes by Roger made during the debate we had a few months ago.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alex:
By the way, I agree entirely with Neil, this forum should NEVER be about 16mm versus Super-8....compare and contrast, fine, but when your conclusion is 16mm can be used whenever you want to use 8mm.....that is not a truth to the people who frequent this forum.
It can however, be a truth for Roger. That is the paradigm.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are quotes from Roger....
"There isn't anything to "master" about the Scoopic. In fact, it's built just like a Super 8 camera, complete with beam splitter viewing and a 2.5 minute run. It's just as light, just as versatile, just as easy to use. The only difference is that it will give a better image and his budget is high enough that film costs and processing are more than offset by a smaller crew for indoor shots, since 16mm can handle lower lighting problems easier than Super 8."
"ASSUMING that such an experienced person agrees to such a project and the minimal pay it would generate, don't you think he would prefer to shoot 16mm on just about ANYTHING rather than shoot Super 8, especially if it's his ass on the line to provide a "top professional look"? Especially if he knows the budget will support 16mm?"
"Story and content matters. In fact, it matters so much that it deserves to be matched to the best format the budget can muster and not the other way around."
"Okay, I'll play Kreskin, too: If the original poster would be content to hire someone with a Canon 1014, he would be just as content to hire someone with a Canon Scoopic, especially since he wanted 16mm to begin with and both are "amateur" equipment."
"Why not choose the specific piece of amateur equipment that will give him what he needs. More to the point, considering how cheap Scoopics are and how easy they are to use, why hire anyone at all? Just by a Scoopic and shoot it like one would Super 8!"
"My act of pointing out that he could use amateur 16mm equipment to get better results for the same budget brought accusations that I was against Super 8 under any circumstance. More to the point, if he were still looking for a DP that was understanding enough to work in Super 8, he should have no problem finding one that would be flexible enough to shoot with a Canon Scoopic as well. After all, the original poster defines the job requirements, not the person who takes the job."
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried to remind Roger over and over that because this is primarily a Super-8 forum, making statements that assert that 16mm wins out over Super-8mm in any scenario where there is a $3,000 budget for commercials is not an absolute truth.
I further asserted that taking such a strict position on a Super-8 forum comes across as a form of spamming. It can be a truth for Roger, but it is certainly not a truth for all others.
That was my point. No personal attack at all.
But the longer we argued this specific point, the angrier Roger got that I was impugning his character.
Go figure, we're on a Super-8 board, and Roger gets angrier and angrier because I think it's wrong to make claims that 16mm can basically be used whenever Super-8 is to be used, especially if you have a $3,000.00 budget.
That is the root cause of all the anger being spewed my way by Chas, Matt, and Roger.
Hey, the gang is all here Chas, Matt, and Roger have already chimed in.
How paranoid of me to notice.
------------------
Alex
-
How convenient that you left out all the quotes where you lied about me, my character, and my product; but then Mike would need more bandwidth than this forum allows.
Mike is right, Alex. Drop it.
Roger
