Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/03/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --part0_921956824_boundary Content-ID: <0_921956824@inet_out.mail.aol.com.1> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Forwarded from Roy Moss - --part0_921956824_boundary Content-ID: <0_921956824@inet_out.mail.charleston.quik.com.2> Content-type: message/rfc822 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline Return-Path: <leicaroy@charleston.quik.com> Received: from rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (rly-zd02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.226]) by air-zd02.mail.aol.com (v58.13) with SMTP; Sat, 20 Mar 1999 13:55:52 -0500 Received: from q3.quik.com (q3.quik.com [209.213.140.5]) by rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0) with ESMTP id NAA27349 for <JZa1058168@aol.com>; Sat, 20 Mar 1999 13:55:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from leicaroy (ip173.charleston.quik.com [209.213.146.173]) by q3.quik.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA14900 for <JZa1058168@aol.com>; Sat, 20 Mar 1999 10:55:32 -0800 From: "Roy Moss" <leicaroy@charleston.quik.com> To: "Joe Zarick" <JZa1058168@aol.com> Subject: Posting on LUG Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 13:57:35 -0500 Message-ID: <01be7303$84395ac0$ad92d5d1@leicaroy> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Joe and ML, Thanks for your mail and your support. Joe, in light of Marc's last postin= g on the LUG would you mind posting the following quote from me to set the record straight. "I have been provided a copy of Marc Small's posting on the subject of my views on accuracy as the editor of VIEWFINDER. I would like to set the record straight on this matter in the hopes that this entire unpleasant matter may be laid to rest as it is bringing much discredit, in my opinion= , to we of the Leica community. In the first place, Mr. Small has not communicated with me "extensively" a= s he alleged in a previous posting. We had some differences of opinion back = in 1995 and some heated words were exchanged. I have not heard from him since= . In those discussions, he attacked my lack of accuracy in an article that appeared in VIEWFINDER and chastised me for allowing inaccuracies to exist= . I explained that as editor, I felt the authors ought to have the benefit o= f having their material published as submitted EXCEPT when apparent inaccuracies were present. Marc had objected to an author's use of certain Zeiss equipment that he (Marc) found implausible and believed I should hav= e changed it. I HAVE NEVER AND WILL NEVER knowingly allow inaccurate materi= al to be published in VIEWFINDER. In the past, I have rejected several submissions that contained inaccurate or incomplete information. I respect the research and effort that goes into every VIEWFINDER submissi= on and believe I am correct in allowing our writers to express themselves openly without the degrading analysis of a "referee" Board passing judgement on and possibly rejecting their work bas= ed on some nitpick disguised as a lack of accuracy. I cannot afford the time for such reviews and after all, VIEWFINDER is a member oriented journal no= t a technical publication. Roger Beamon's earlier posting on the difference between journals like VIEWFINDER and technical publications was on the money. And, his comment that one person"s "error" can be another person's fact is certainly true. I enjoy reading the experiences of fellow Leicaphiles and the feedback I get from LHSA members is that they like the= ir journal...so much so that many submit unsolicited articles because they wa= nt to be part of it. I strongly believe there is room for honest open disagreement and counterpoints in VIEWFINDER and those who want to express their divergent views may do so in a Letter to the Editor or to the author personally. Thi= s technique works for most major publications in the U.S. and I think is appropriate for VIEWFINDER. I want to emphasize my requirement for reasone= d, well articulated counterpoints since I will automatically reject those tha= t are bombastic, intolerant or arrogant. There is no place in the Leica community for this type of dialogue. Finally, I did not create the VIEWFINDER Contributing Editors as Marc asserts in his posting. They have been a very valuable VIEWFINDER fixture for a long time. Marc's comments that I no longer use them is incorrect since in the VIEWFINDER issue under discussion (32/1) you will find me citing information provided by Jim Lager and in other issues from Randol Hooper, two recognized authorities on Leica collectibles. I will continue = to use these five Contributing Editors as their expertise substantially enhances the value o= f the LHSA journal. I strongly urge LUGGERS to read VIEWFINDER for themselves and make your ow= n judgments regarding its quality and accuracy. And please remember, this is supposed to be a FUN hobby which we enjoy. Let's lighten up and go make so= me Leica photographs. Thank you for this opportunity to respond. Roy Moss" - --part0_921956824_boundary--