In message <1g_Ij.28624$r76.18298@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, jim
<jim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
>
>"Chris H" <chris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:Y33wrMB6K18HFAn$@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In message <lIHIj.11872$Q52.9062@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, jim
>> <jim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
>>>
>>>I must disagree somewhat. I have not been vague at all.
>>
>> You were somewhat.
>
>HOW?
It has been explained to you by several people now accept that and move
on or you will piss off everyone and get no help at all.
DONT BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS
>>> I have plainly
>>>stated that need images of people helpeing people, people helping
animals
>>>or
>>>just people caught doing a good deed. I'd like the photos to not be
>>>staged.
>>>
>>>The project doesn't require anything more than that.
>>
>> Yes it does. You came across as wanting free photos for something you
are
>> publi****ng (implied, by omission, for money).
>
>Please point out the word "free" in the original post. I was open to
>anything, hence no restrictions as to licensing were even mentioned in
the
>OP.
As I and everyone else has said it was implied by omission.
>>You purely stated what YOU wanted.
>
>Of course I did! What should I have done....assummed I knew what you (or
>"they") wanted and posted that? How the hell do I know what you want?
And,
>since the gist of the post *was* to locate what *I* wanted, I felt it
>entirely appropriate to dwell on that subject matter.
>
>Odd as it may be, I prefer to address the topic at hand in the posts that
I
>write.
I give up! You cant give people helpful advice without them having a
go back.
Jim you are going the right way to get no help from anyone and being
kill filed.
CALM DOWN and read the advice you have been given.
>> You did not explain the project and say you were prepared to
collaborate
>> with a photographer or pay for photos. So the whole thing started of
with
>> every one at cross purposes.
>
>That's because people read what they wanted to read and not what I typed.
Of course. However you were not clear in what you wanted or why so
people filled in the blanks for themselves.
>Here's where I screwed up.....I *assumed*
Yes... In a place where the gaps you left people assumes something
different.
> that asking for help would elicit
>a logical response indicating where the needed photos would be found. I
>further *assumed* that the poster of said information would have, or
point
>to, the requirements for the use of said photos.
>I guess I assumed common, basic logic. For that I solemnly apologize.
Absolutely not. You assumed using YOUR logic in a place where a
different logic prevails.
You did not ask using the logic, assumptions and manners of THIS NG.
When people have helpfully pointed this out to you to be helpful you
have bitten the hand that is trying to help you.
Yes, you should apologise. And sincerely.
>> A book of poetry and pictures is 50/50 poetry and picture. How would
you
>> feel is some one said "I need some {industrial] poems to put in a book
of
>> [industrial] pictures I am publi****ng.
>
>If I had knowledge of where to find the needed items, I would simply post
a
>link - not go all schizoid assuming things not said and starting a
useless
>flame war over a simple (but not simple enough for the posters here)
request
>for images of people helping people.
Well you have stated a flame war yourself. Some people responded
abruptly but those of us who have tried to help have also been bitten.
You need to apologise to all who have been trying to help. (And next
time post under a different name)
>>>Instead of offering information if one has it, I have been subjected to
>>>accusations of wanting others to do my work, wanting free photos, etc.
-
>>>NONE of which I ever said in my original post.
>>
>> It was implied by what you left out as much as what you said. Where
there
>> was information missing people assumed.
>
>I also did not state other irrelevant things -
It was not irrelevant things.
>If they are going to assume things not in evidence, why stop at imagining
>"free" was implied? Why not go ahead and imagine that I "implied via
>ommission" that am using the proceeds to try and free convicted child
>molesters and sup****t the Knights of the Klu Klux Klan and that I have a
>secret death ray that I am using the proceeds to build and take over the
>world?
>
>When you (they) start arguing against arguments not presented, I guess
that
>really opens a whole can of worms for the voices in their heads to play
>with, doesn't it?
What UTTER CRAP. You should learnt eh rules of polite conversation for
this NG before you jump in and start a flame war with your attitude.
It is you who looses in the end.
>> Don't go into publi****ng (I can say that as some one who is published
for
>> both photos and the written word) You will need a MUCH thicker skin
than
>> you appear to have.
>
>My skin is plenty thick enough. What's lacking is my toplerance for
>stupidy.
Plonk!
You loose
You came here for help, pissed everyone off, some explained the correct
protocol for asking for what you wanted and you flamed them. Now that is
arrogance and stupidity.
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ chris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
|
