Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/02/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] QUESTIONS FOR ERWIN PUTS IN RESPONSE TO HIS POST
From: Bill Satterfield <cwsat@istate.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 09:09:58 -0600
References: <MBBBJHIBKCKEAEOKKBPOEEIKCKAA.bdcolen@earthlink.net>

B. D. Colen wrote:

>Since you have chosen to responded directly Erwin - and I quite sincerely
>apologize for misspelling your name - I have trouble with my own - let me
>take this opportunity to pose a set of direct questions, which you can
>obviously tell me I have no right to ask
>
>Have you ever received any bodies or lenses from Leica that you have not
>been required to return after a normal period for testing?
>
>Have any of your trips to Leica facilities, or your stays in the areas of
>those facilities, been paid for by Leica?
>
>Has Leica ever financed any of your testing, or provided you with any
>equipment with which to do that testing?
>
>Have you ever submitted any of your test results to Leica for review prior
>to posting them public ally?
>
>Have you ever received any payments, gifts, equipment, of any kind, which I
>haven't specifically asked about?
>
>If the answer to all my question is an unqualified no, then I, for one, will
>take you at your word, 'eat crow, and offer sincere apologies for the
>statements I've made questioning your independence as a tester of Leica
>equipment.
>
>B. D. Colen
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Erwin Puts
>Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 4:37 PM
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: [Leica] M7 review and comments by D.B
>
>
>Some friends sent me a copy of an email to the LUG, written by Dr. Blacktape
>that starts with this question.
>
>DR. BLACKTAPE WOULD LIKE TO RAISE AN EXTREMELY SERIOUS
>QUESTION REGARDING ERWIN PUTTS' "REVIEW OF THE NEW M7...
>
>B.D., the name is Puts, Erwin Puts and I have no licence to kill, nor would
>I want one.
>May I welcome you to that small band of individuals, who have over the years
>questioned my credibility and independence . Every year or so, quite
>predictably, the same ritual is restaged. While the demagogic question is
>that I can not be independent and truly objective, as defined by any neutral
>observer,(and I do presume that you would like to qualify for that post?), I
>wonder what facts you have to support your answer that my prose is on the
>same level if not identical to press releases and ' endorsements
>from photographers to whom it [Leica?] gives free cameras'.
>You are not expected to believe anything I write. It may have escaped you,
>but we live in that priviledged area of the globe where free speech, free
>thinking and free exchange offacts and opinions are allowed. At least I do
>not expect this from you. If you feel (I do presume that the 'we' in your
>question is just academic?) compelled to have to believe anything you do not
>want, I would like to ask you, when and where did I ever force you to accept
>my findings or opinions. If the 'we' refers to your audience, I wonder why
>you want to question their ability to think and judge for themselves.
>Is it not ironic, B.D., that you want to think for others?
>
>The 'facts' you present to judge my prose as irrelevant are a remarkable act
>of spin doctoring.
>
>"Erwin Putts gets an M7 ONE YEAR ahead of release"
>Where did you read that in my report. I noted that I tested a Leica M7 that
>had been in use for over a year and I said that I have been able to use an
>m7 prototype  during some time. It is some leap of imagination to merge both
>facts into the statement quoted above. It might be tempting to conclude
>this, but would that neutral and unbiased observer not be careful enough to
>inquire by the person who wrote the article if this conjecture is true. In
>fact it is not. You just want to believe this,as it seems to suit your
>purpose.
>Then you make another remarkable observation. I get an M7 "- when Leica is
>denying that there will ever BE an M7". I fail to see the relevance of the
>juxtaposition of these remarks.
>
>Then this really perceptive remark, that exposes my links to Leica.
>"He gets extensive tours of the factory prior to release, so that he can
>describe in worshipful prose the ancient sewing machines, manned by the
>skilled Portuguese seamstress sewing the shutter curtain".
>I wrote: "I happened to be in the Portugal factory when the first new  M7šs
>started to be manufactured.".
>Did I say 'extensive tours (more than one!)'?
>As far as I know many Luggers have visited the Portugal factory and reported
>on their observations. Many journalists get factory tours in Solms and
>Portugal. So the very fact of visiting the factory is, according to your
>rules of neutral observancy,  credible  evidence of becoming an extension of
>the PR-department. You have indeed exposed in stark detail  the subtle
>persuasions of the modern marketing conspiracy?
>Again, would a careful observer who wants to be "independent and truly
>objective", not want to verify his conjectures? Check and double check is a
>scientific and journalistic rule. But not for you, it seems.
>When I do observe a detail, that  visitors before me did not spot or did not
>deem important enough to report upon: that ancient sewing machine and the
>skilled and beautiful young worker (maybe I saw her first and then the
>machine?), does that make my report a Leica advertisement? You seem to imply
>this as this seamstress is your strongest case, it seems.
>Again I fail to see why my genuine admiration for somebody's skills makes me
>a suspect and un untrustworthy person. But then you claim to be a neutral
>observer, so please enlighten me why admiration for skills is suspect in
>your value scheme.
>You seem to imply that independent thinking is impossible after having used
>a product in advance of the release date, after visiting a factory and
>observing a seamstress working on shutter curtains.
>I am deeply impressed by this remarkable imtellectual edifice you have
>erected! And by your followers who have jumped on this bandwaggon.
>
>Erwin
>Erwin
>
>
>
>Are we really expected to continue to believe that Erwin and his reports are
>what any neutral observer would call "independent" of Leica and truly
>objective?  We would suggest that we should judge his reports just as we
>judge Leica's advertising materials, press releases, and the.
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
>



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> ([Leica] QUESTIONS FOR ERWIN PUTS IN RESPONSE TO HIS POST)