Frangipanni... Flower of love or... Frangi-bloody-panni LOL

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Douglas

unread,
Feb 15, 2008, 8:25:00 PM2/15/08
to
Knowing how much this picture will annoy the three stooges... I'm
thrilled almost to the loss of bladder control at the prospect of
their reaction.

http://www.douglasjames.com.au/art-photos/love_of_frangipannis.htm

Yep... Another "frangi-bloody-panni"!

ROTFL.


Pete D

unread,
Feb 15, 2008, 10:44:26 PM2/15/08
to

"Douglas" <cryp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ac34c86a-0909-476c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

Actually I would expect that no one will actually care but because you do
they will make all sorts of comments that you will take offence about just
because you have nothing better to do.


Atheist Chaplain

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 1:02:56 AM2/16/08
to
"Pete D" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:47b65c23$0$20237$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

Actually I like it, nice shot, I like the colour :-)
and it looks great on my new 22" wide screen monitor (Asus MW 221C, A
Valentines present from my Wife :-) )
I hope you sell a few of those Douggie :-)

--
God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?


Douglas

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 1:48:18 AM2/16/08
to
On Feb 16, 4:02 pm, "Atheist Chaplain" <ab...@cia.gov> wrote:
> "Pete D" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
>
> news:47b65c23$0$20237$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Douglas" <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote in message

> >news:ac34c86a-0909-476c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> >> Knowing how much this picture will annoy the three stooges... I'm
> >> thrilled almost to the loss of bladder control at the prospect of
> >> their reaction.
>
> >>http://www.douglasjames.com.au/art-photos/love_of_frangipannis.htm
>
> >> Yep... Another "frangi-bloody-panni"!
>
> >> ROTFL.
>
> > Actually I would expect that no one will actually care but because you do
> > they will make all sorts of comments that you will take offence about just
> > because you have nothing better to do.
>
> Actually I like it, nice shot, I like the colour :-)
> and it looks great on my new 22" wide screen monitor (Asus MW 221C, A
> Valentines present from my Wife :-) )
> I hope you sell a few of those Douggie :-)
>
> --
> God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

By God, your dad is gonna be pissed when he finds you've been using
the computer again.

Atheist Chaplain

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 2:07:41 AM2/16/08
to
"Douglas" <cryp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea2386a2-2e11-4c2a...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

no, you see, you make a photo related post, I respond in kind.
simple really :-)

Doug Jewell

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 3:59:36 AM2/16/08
to
Not bad - IMO though the dead leaf or whatever it is that
goes over the left flower lets it down. Get rid of that, and
it'd be a darn good shot.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 4:44:26 AM2/16/08
to

Therein lies the difference between you and me.

My photos have a story to tell. Those in tune with my awareness (both
of them it seems sometimes) could recite the story in the picture
without being prompted. Quintessentially summer on an Australian bush
beach.

I think natural features to remind us that life is a (re)cycle of
birth and death whilst showing the beauty of the in between time we
live in, is entirely appropriate to the story this picture tells.

My theory about pictures with stories to tell, creating motivation and
emotion in viewers is confirmed every time someone buys one of my
pictures.

If I were to alter my pictures every time someone passed a comment
like yours Doug, I'd have no original images. It reminds me of the guy
who carefully inspected all 40 of the canvas prints on exhibition at
the opening of my new gallery. His comment? Why couldn't you have done
it properly and put them under glass with nice picture frames? LOL.

How's the weather up your way?

Doug Jewell

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 5:15:21 AM2/16/08
to
Douglas wrote:
> On Feb 16, 6:59 pm, Doug Jewell <a...@and.maybe.ill.tell.you> wrote:
>> Douglas wrote:
>>> Knowing how much this picture will annoy the three stooges... I'm
>>> thrilled almost to the loss of bladder control at the prospect of
>>> their reaction.
>>> http://www.douglasjames.com.au/art-photos/love_of_frangipannis.htm
>>> Yep... Another "frangi-bloody-panni"!
>>> ROTFL.
>> Not bad - IMO though the dead leaf or whatever it is that
>> goes over the left flower lets it down. Get rid of that, and
>> it'd be a darn good shot.
>
> Therein lies the difference between you and me.
The missus saw it over my shoulder - she had the same comment.

>
> My photos have a story to tell. Those in tune with my awareness (both
> of them it seems sometimes) could recite the story in the picture
> without being prompted. Quintessentially summer on an Australian bush
> beach.
Frangipani amongst grass is an Australian bush beach scene?
The missus actually said it looks fake cos frangipani's
don't grow like that. As for me - I wouldn't know - it
looked like a nice photo, but that dead leaf just jumped out
at me and drew my eye.

>
> I think natural features to remind us that life is a (re)cycle of
> birth and death whilst showing the beauty of the in between time we
> live in, is entirely appropriate to the story this picture tells.
>
> My theory about pictures with stories to tell, creating motivation and
> emotion in viewers is confirmed every time someone buys one of my
> pictures.
>
> If I were to alter my pictures every time someone passed a comment
> like yours Doug, I'd have no original images. It reminds me of the guy
> who carefully inspected all 40 of the canvas prints on exhibition at
> the opening of my new gallery. His comment? Why couldn't you have done
> it properly and put them under glass with nice picture frames? LOL.
>
> How's the weather up your way?
Bloody dry. We see on the news every night that there are
floods all around us, but we're missing out every time.
While the rest of QLD drowns, we've had enough to add about
1% to our dams. We're looking at running out by the end of
the year if we don't get something decent.

corks

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 6:18:25 AM2/16/08
to

"Douglas" <cryp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ac34c86a-0909-476c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>hahahaha

few years ago, i got in trouble for this one

http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_thread/thread/af08790a2b54bdf7/0f3bc558a95f8e15?hl=en&q=not+another+f**king+rose&lnk=ol&


N

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 7:44:35 AM2/16/08
to
"Douglas" <cryp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ac34c86a-0909-476c...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

I prefer photos of flowers and leaves to have those flowers and leaves from
the same plant species.

Harold Hughes - Higglytown Hero

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 7:51:24 AM2/16/08
to

makes me think 'Daniel Rocha has discovered colour'

Atheist Chaplain

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 8:02:04 AM2/16/08
to
"Harold Hughes - Higglytown Hero" <...@---.com> wrote in message
news:g%Atj.15660$421....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

actually Daniel Rocha did some really nice colour shots before he
disappeared :-)

Harold Hughes - Higglytown Hero

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 8:09:04 AM2/16/08
to
Atheist Chaplain wrote:
> "Harold Hughes - Higglytown Hero" <...@---.com> wrote in message
> news:g%Atj.15660$421....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> Douglas wrote:
>>> Knowing how much this picture will annoy the three stooges... I'm
>>> thrilled almost to the loss of bladder control at the prospect of
>>> their reaction.
>>>
>>> http://www.douglasjames.com.au/art-photos/love_of_frangipannis.htm
>>>
>>> Yep... Another "frangi-bloody-panni"!
>>>
>>> ROTFL.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> makes me think 'Daniel Rocha has discovered colour'
>
> actually Daniel Rocha did some really nice colour shots before he
> disappeared :-)
>

And Daniel Rocha only used the one name

I stand corrected

Message has been deleted

Harry Lockwood

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 11:09:31 AM2/16/08
to
In article
<d07038cd-bfe5-475b...@o77g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Helen <helensi...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Feb 16, 8:02 am, "Atheist Chaplain" <ab...@cia.gov> wrote:
> > "Harold Hughes - Higglytown Hero" <....@---.com> wrote in
> > messagenews:g%Atj.15660$421....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...


> >
> > > Douglas wrote:
> > >> Knowing how much this picture will annoy the three stooges... I'm
> > >> thrilled almost to the loss of bladder control at the prospect of
> > >> their reaction.
> >
> > >>http://www.douglasjames.com.au/art-photos/love_of_frangipannis.htm
> >
> > >> Yep... Another "frangi-bloody-panni"!
> >
> > >> ROTFL.
> >
> > > makes me think 'Daniel Rocha has discovered colour'
> >
> > actually Daniel Rocha did some really nice colour shots before he
> > disappeared :-)
> >
> > --
> > God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?
>
>

> I remember some really nice color floral shots he did. Especially a
> rose that I particularily liked.
>
> Daniel's series of shots of people demonstrating against the war in
> Iraq has "a story to tell".
>
> http://www.monochromatique.com/nonguerre2/
> Helen

The power of monochromatique.

HFL

--
Change hlockwood to hflockwood in email address

Helen

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 11:16:01 AM2/16/08
to
On Feb 16, 11:09 am, Harry Lockwood <hlockw...@verizon.net> wrote:
> In article
> <d07038cd-bfe5-475b-9744-21f3aec87...@o77g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,


I removed it because I wasn't sure if I would be allowed to post
someone elses website. I don't know the Terms of Service for
monochromatique.
Helen

Rob.

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 12:22:20 PM2/16/08
to

Well there you go two sets of rules.

mark.t...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 3:28:35 PM2/16/08
to

Yawn.

I see Douglas has time for this, but none to get back to the classic
'stepped out panorama' thread...

http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/a6d1c0259d43619f

A cynical person might note that he has returned just after that
thread dropped off GG's "Active Older Topics" list.. Just another
coincidence, I'm sure.

Douglas will *certainly* come back to that thread and prove us all
wrong - it's not like he has ever abandoned a topic when the going got
too tough.

I personally can't wait to apologise...

(O:

Annika1980

unread,
Feb 16, 2008, 3:46:56 PM2/16/08
to
On Feb 16, 4:44 am, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think natural features to remind us that life is a (re)cycle of
> birth and death whilst showing the beauty of the in between time we
> live in, is entirely appropriate to the story this picture tells.
>
> My theory about pictures with stories to tell, creating motivation and
> emotion in viewers is confirmed every time someone buys one of my
> pictures.
>
> If I were to alter my pictures every time someone passed a comment
> like yours Doug, I'd have no original images.

LOL!

These are the same two plastic flowers that you used on your Julian
Abbot site in this pic.
http://members.aol.com/annika1980/art-frangi.jpg

I guess senility has continued to set in because you even later
admitted that these flowers were fake.

Nice try, though.

Annika1980

unread,
Feb 17, 2008, 10:46:17 AM2/17/08
to
On Feb 16, 3:46 pm, Annika1980 <annika1...@aol.com> wrote:
> These are the same two plastic flowers that you used on your Julian
> Abbot site in this pic.http://members.aol.com/annika1980/art-frangi.jpg

========================

Ah, I love the sound of crickets.

Message has been deleted

Douglas

unread,
Feb 17, 2008, 3:53:41 PM2/17/08
to
On Feb 17, 6:46 am, Annika1980 <annika1...@aol.com> wrote:

>
> These are the same two plastic flowers that you used on your Julian

> Abbot site in this pic.http://members.aol.com/annika1980/art-frangi.jpg


>
> I guess senility has continued to set in because you even later
> admitted that these flowers were fake.
>
> Nice try, though.

So which one are you today? Larry or Mo?

Douglas

unread,
Feb 17, 2008, 3:55:40 PM2/17/08
to
On Feb 17, 6:28 am, mark.thoma...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 16, 11:25 am, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Knowing how much this picture will annoy the three stooges... I'm
> > thrilled almost to the loss of bladder control at the prospect of
> > their reaction.
>
> >http://www.douglasjames.com.au/art-photos/love_of_frangipannis.htm
>
> > Yep... Another "frangi-bloody-panni"!
>
> > ROTFL.
>
> Yawn.
>
> I see Douglas has time for this, but none to get back to the classic
> 'stepped out panorama' thread...
>
> http://groups.google.com.au/group/aus.photo/browse_frm/thread/a6d1c02...

>
> A cynical person might note that he has returned just after that
> thread dropped off GG's "Active Older Topics" list.. Just another
> coincidence, I'm sure.
>
> Douglas will *certainly* come back to that thread and prove us all
> wrong - it's not like he has ever abandoned a topic when the going got
> too tough.
>
> I personally can't wait to apologise...
>
> (O:

You've waited 3 years now... What's the rush?

Annika1980

unread,
Feb 17, 2008, 7:59:14 PM2/17/08
to
On Feb 17, 3:53 pm, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > These are the same two plastic flowers that you used on your Julian
> > Abbot site in this pic.http://members.aol.com/annika1980/art-frangi.jpg
>
> > I guess senility has continued to set in because you even later
> > admitted that these flowers were fake.
>
> > Nice try, though.
>
> So which one are you today? Larry or Mo?

I'm the one that once again busts your ass on yet another lie and
leaves you once again quivering in a puddle of your own drool.
"Certainly!"


Steve Brooks

unread,
Feb 17, 2008, 8:14:26 PM2/17/08
to

I'm still waiting for the name of the owner of Godaddy so I can contact
him to ask if he rang Dog at 3am.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 18, 2008, 10:35:25 PM2/18/08
to

You're not doing it right fool. You're supposed to be hanging by your
thumbs while you wait.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 19, 2008, 3:48:57 AM2/19/08
to

You don't drink so you must be on dope. Send us a pic of your nose.
Methinks you've been sniffing asses of some white stuff. Quivering? oh
yeah... That's me.

Annika1980

unread,
Feb 19, 2008, 9:26:58 AM2/19/08
to
On Feb 18, 10:35 pm, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You're not doing it right fool. You're supposed to be hanging by your
> thumbs while you wait.

Hey Douggie, tell us more about Frangipanni .... Flower of Plastic.

Hanz

unread,
Feb 20, 2008, 9:40:01 AM2/20/08
to
Douglas wrote:
> Knowing how much this picture will annoy the three stooges... I'm
> thrilled almost to the loss of bladder control at the prospect of
> their reaction.
>
> http://www.douglasjames.com.au/art-photos/love_of_frangipannis.htm
>
> Yep... Another "frangi-bloody-panni"!
Not too familiar with the vendetta playing out above, I do like the
picture.. Still, I wouldn't want it on the wall of my office, natural
timber and all: too kitschy, despite the dead leaf, too smooth. Perhaps
without the flowers and the sea??
-- Hans

Douglas

unread,
Feb 20, 2008, 6:24:51 PM2/20/08
to

Absolutely Hans. Several of my grass and sand prints are very popular.
Thank for your input

Troy Piggins

unread,
Feb 20, 2008, 7:09:18 PM2/20/08
to
* Hanz is quoted & my replies are inline below :

Hans,

Here is some similar shots without the flowers:

http://www.seanscottphotography.com.au/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=779
http://www.seanscottphotography.com.au/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=752

And this one looks an awful lot like Doug's:

http://www.seanscottphotography.com.au/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=622

So much for originality. Of course, if you ask Doug he will say
that his photo was first.

--
Troy Piggins

Steve Brooks

unread,
Feb 20, 2008, 7:21:24 PM2/20/08
to

That last one is nice, a lot better than Dogs

Several years ago I was holidaying in Mooloolaba and there was an artist
there who had sand for the floor of his shop.

Anyone know who this photographer is?

Rob.

unread,
Feb 20, 2008, 8:26:21 PM2/20/08
to

I still can't imagine Frangipani's growing on the beach. At least there
not plastic.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 5:19:18 AM2/21/08
to
On Feb 21, 10:09 am, Troy Piggins <usenet-0...@piggo.com> wrote:
> * Hanz is quoted & my replies are inline below :
>
> > Douglas wrote:
> >> Knowing how much this picture will annoy the three stooges... I'm
> >> thrilled almost to the loss of bladder control at the prospect of
> >> their reaction.
>
> >>http://www.douglasjames.com.au/art-photos/love_of_frangipannis.htm
>
> >> Yep... Another "frangi-bloody-panni"!
>
> > Not too familiar with the vendetta playing out above, I do like the
> > picture.. Still, I wouldn't want it on the wall of my office, natural
> > timber and all: too kitschy, despite the dead leaf, too smooth. Perhaps
> > without the flowers and the sea??
> > -- Hans
>
> Hans,
>
> Here is some similar shots without the flowers:
>
> http://www.seanscottphotography.com.au/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=779http://www.seanscottphotography.com.au/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=752

>
> And this one looks an awful lot like Doug's:
>
> http://www.seanscottphotography.com.au/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=622
>
> So much for originality. Of course, if you ask Doug he will say
> that his photo was first.
>
> --
> Troy Piggins

I never said anything of the kind.
Frangipannis, sand, sea and grass photos are perennial sellers at
dozens of private galleries all over Queensland. I own a gallery and
feed several others so it's relatively logical I would have popular
photos on sale... Or does that not computer for a mathematician?

I'll give you a tip.
If you think you have ever had an original idea for a photo... You are
wrong. There is nothing that you can photograph that someone else
hasn't photographed before, no pose, no subject and no object. Your
macro photos might seem to you to be unique... They're not and if you
ever reached a point where you took that one in a million shot that
had value, 500 wannabe photographers would shoot identical shots the
next day and drag the value down to gutter they dwell in.

Go find some originality yourself. Good luck keeping it to yourself
too.

The idiots in these groups criticize me for producing "fake" (to use
Annika1980's words) photos by adding and altering in Photoshop. Your
mate Mark (the real fake) seemed to think by folding a rather bland
beach picture out and making a feature of part of it, that was
"cheating". I'll happily be called a cheat with record breaking
sellers like that keeping me in fine style.

One of my bridal portraits ("bridezilla", the jackass called it), was
made the way it was because that's my style. To be different than all
you wannabes. The Tennessee jackass and a few of the Aussie wannabes
who worship him reckon that's a good laugh. Keep thinking like that
and you just become one of the mob bleating at me whenever you don't
get your ego massaged for posting some everyday happy snap you took at
lunch time.

And here you come up with the "so much for originality" shit. Get a
life mate. Nothing you've produced so far shows any originality. All
you've demonstrated in the short time you've been here is a copy cat
mentality of sameness. Looks like you've found you niche, Troy. Enjoy
it.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 5:37:44 AM2/21/08
to

Frangipanni trees grow on the edge of the beach at several Gold Coast
locations. Those people rich enough to have beach front property,
planted them many years ago. I've seen them beach side at Bundaburg
too. The Singapore variety is supposed to be salt resistant. I
wouldn't know myself I just photograph them.

Some dude on the Gold Coast arranges shells, frangipannis, leaves and
flowers on the beach and takes photos he sell glued on post cards for
$3.60 each. That's like my calendars mate... It's what we do for a
quid. You lot can rattle your chompers all you like, I've never been
hungry, never had nowhere to sleep and always found enough for myself
and family. Now I've got enough to live comfortable in retirement... I
got it taking the sort of photographs you all love to criticize.

All 2000 of my calendars were sold out in December but you can still
see Steve Parrish's stuff cramming the shelves of Post Offices around
Australia... Unsold, waiting for the muncher. A total wast of valuable
resources. Is this what we're chopping down the rain forests for? To
recycle unsold calendars printed in Asia? I guess that's what having a
5 year contract to supply this shit to Aus Post will get you. SFA but
everyone knows his name!

While you have been bleating out your criticism, I sold 2 of those
frangipanni prints today. Either there's a lot of people who like my
photos or you lot get it wrong most of the time. I'll go with the
latter.

Jeff R.

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 6:07:32 AM2/21/08
to

"Douglas" <cryp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:10862767-61d9-44e4...@o10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

<snip>


>
> All 2000 of my calendars were sold out in December but you can still
> see Steve Parrish's stuff cramming the shelves of Post Offices around
> Australia... Unsold, waiting for the muncher. A total wast of valuable
> resources. Is this what we're chopping down the rain forests for? To
> recycle unsold calendars printed in Asia? I guess that's what having a
> 5 year contract to supply this shit to Aus Post will get you. SFA but
> everyone knows his name!

That's a low blow, Doug, and a rather sad one, too.
All 2000 of your calendars sold out, huh? What sort of print run do you
imagine Parish would produce annually? What difference do you think 2000
would make to his print run?

If your photos are so much better than his, then how did he manage to get
that 5 year contract you mentioned? (and you didn't, that is)

If his work is so poor, why is it carried by so many well-known bookshop
franchises? Dymocks, A&R, Collins and others. In Australia and overseas.

If he was no good, no-one would know him name, 5-year contracts
notwithstanding.

Where can I buy your work off-the-shelf, Doug? I admit I haven't been
looking, but I don't recall ever seeing one of your calendars/ artprints/
whatever in any of the many bookshops I've browsed through.

I can understand your jealousy of Parish, Doug, but you belittle yourself
even further when you express it in public in such immoderate terms.
Obviously he is an adequate (!) photographer and a brilliant
marketer/businessman. Why the need to disparage him?

> While you have been bleating out your criticism, I sold 2 of those
> frangipanni prints today. Either there's a lot of people who like my
> photos or you lot get it wrong most of the time. I'll go with the
> latter.

Wow.
Two prints.
Congratulations. That must be really something.

Keep it up, Doug.

--
Jeff R.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 7:17:16 AM2/21/08
to
On Feb 21, 9:07 pm, "Jeff R." <contact...@this.ng> wrote:
> "Douglas" <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Yeah... 2000 calendars wouldn't put a dent in Steve's stock. They sure
as hell helped employ a few locals where he sold none when mine were
in the store.

Nothing to do with better or worse photos and I'm sure as hell not
jealous of him mate. I retired to part time work last year. My
daughter runs our business now. When I sell 2 prints of the one image
in the one day to 2 different people out of the one gallery, that is
quite significant considering how you and your cohorts attack me for
posting them.

If I recall it wasn't me who brought up Steve's name. It was some
cretin who tried to use it as a means to insult me. I've never
criticized Steve Parrish's work. I'm pissed off he beat me to the last
GWS Fuji Photo continental had a few years ago but he probably did me
a favour when I bought one in New York and saved a couple of grand.

Steve Parrish has a marketing machine of awesome capabilities. I make
my primary living from wedding photography. It's a highly personal
business. I originally made regional calendars as a community service
and a way to advertise my print centre. It has grown into more than
that now. If you look on the back of one it has an advertisement for
my wedding and portrait business. It is MY way of contributing to MY
community which also gets me wedding photography and portrait sittings
from the people who know me.

We also publish a couple of magazines. That doesn't make me jealous of
James Packer just because he owns more magazines than I have pages in
mine.

Jeff... I don't know where you got the idea I have any anger, jealousy
or whatever for other businesses. I do my thing and something it comes
in conflict with what someone else does. Big deal. I know there are
way better photographers out there than me. Big Deal. I also know
there are plenty of wannabes who try to imitate me and copy my popular
photos. Big Deal too. By the time they get to market, I'll have a
different one.

It might interest you to learn that Steve Parrish doesn't actually
sell his products up front and I do. He buys racks and stands which he
puts in the stores and fills with stock. He only gets paid when the
stock is replenished. I have a totally different business model to
him. Why would I be jealous of him? I probably make as much money as
he does, I just do it differently. And don't think for a single moment
he took all those photos. He just owns them.

You really ought to study a few business models and realize very few
people who have continuously been in business for as long as me (over
40 years), hold any jealousy towards other businesses that operate
ethically. I'll tell you too that I've never met anyone so vocally
outspoken as the idiots who frequent this group, who have ever been
successful in business.

Troy Piggins

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 7:35:45 AM2/21/08
to
* Douglas is quoted & my replies are inline below :

> On Feb 21, 10:09 am, Troy Piggins <usenet-0...@piggo.com> wrote:
> [---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 22 lines snipped |=---]

>>
>> And this one looks an awful lot like Doug's:
>>
>> http://www.seanscottphotography.com.au/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=622
>>
>> So much for originality. Of course, if you ask Doug he will say
>> that his photo was first.
>
> I never said anything of the kind.
> Frangipannis, sand, sea and grass photos are perennial sellers at
> dozens of private galleries all over Queensland. I own a gallery and
> feed several others so it's relatively logical I would have popular
> photos on sale... Or does that not computer for a mathematician?
>
> I'll give you a tip.
> If you think you have ever had an original idea for a photo... You are
> wrong. There is nothing that you can photograph that someone else
> hasn't photographed before, no pose, no subject and no object. Your
> macro photos might seem to you to be unique... They're not and if you
> ever reached a point where you took that one in a million shot that
> had value, 500 wannabe photographers would shoot identical shots the
> next day and drag the value down to gutter they dwell in.
>
> Go find some originality yourself. Good luck keeping it to yourself
> too.
<snip />

Here's where you had a go at insect macros in case you have
forgotten what you typed:

<9ed8cf27-0fd4-48df...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
"...
Is there a hidden agenda here somewhere or have digital cameras
produced a whole new generation of happy snappers with an over
abundance of ego and an under supply of imagination?"

So you are allowed to criticise others for having no imagination,
yet when your lack of imagination is proven it's fine? You can't
even sit on the fence, you keep jumping from side to side.

I agree with you. I don't think I'll ever take a photo that
doesn't resemble something that some other photographer has
taken. I don't care. I would love to be able to mimic some of
the awesome photos I've seen. And I don't really care that your
shots have all been taken before either.

Just don't criticise me or anyone else for it. That's all I was
saying.

--
Troy Piggins

Message has been deleted

Douglas Macdonald

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 8:28:31 AM2/21/08
to

I mean Bundaburg Gold Coast not Bundaberg further up the coast which I
know is 13 kilometres from the coast (and nearest beach)


The Singapore variety is supposed to be salt resistant. I
> wouldn't know myself I just photograph them.
>
> Some dude on the Gold Coast arranges shells, frangipannis, leaves and
> flowers on the beach and takes photos he sell glued on post cards for
> $3.60 each. That's like my calendars mate... It's what we do for a
> quid. You lot can rattle your chompers all you like, I've never been
> hungry, never had nowhere to sleep and always found enough for myself
> and family. Now I've got enough to live comfortable in retirement... I
> got it taking the sort of photographs you all love to criticize.
>
> All 2000 of my calendars were sold out in December but you can still
> see Steve Parrish's stuff cramming the shelves of Post Offices around
> Australia... Unsold, waiting for the muncher. A total wast of valuable
> resources. Is this what we're chopping down the rain forests for? To
> recycle unsold calendars printed in Asia? I guess that's what having a
> 5 year contract to supply this shit to Aus Post will get you. SFA but
> everyone knows his name!
>
> While you have been bleating out your criticism, I sold 2 of those
> frangipanni prints today. Either there's a lot of people who like my
> photos or you lot get it wrong most of the time. I'll go with the

> latter.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Douglas Macdonald

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 8:30:51 AM2/21/08
to
> daughter (better known as Bridezilla) runs our business now.

Sorry did I say part time? Ooops does that go against me saying a
few days ago my wedding gigs have doubled in the last month?

I am such a looser.

Annika1980

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 9:50:20 AM2/21/08
to
On Feb 21, 5:19 am, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I own a gallery and
> feed several others so it's relatively logical I would have popular
> photos on sale

What is the location of your gallery?
Which other galleries do you "feed?"


> Go find some originality yourself. Good luck keeping it to yourself
> too.
>
> The idiots in these groups criticize me for producing "fake" (to use
> Annika1980's words) photos by adding and altering in Photoshop. Your
> mate Mark (the real fake) seemed to think by folding a rather bland
> beach picture out and making a feature of part of it, that was
> "cheating". I'll happily be called a cheat with record breaking
> sellers like that keeping me in fine style.

Just so I'm following correctly, if I do contrast enhancement to my
photos in Photoshop then that's bad ("plastic looking" as the other
idiot troll calls it), but if you use fake plastic flowers arranged on
a beach setting where they don't even grow then that's OK.

Yeah, that makes perfect sense, especially coming from the guy who
tries to sell large prints of sunsets where half of the pic is a
mirror image of the other half.

Remember this gem? I'm sure it was a huge seller.
http://members.aol.com/annika1980/faker1.jpg

Annika1980

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 9:56:17 AM2/21/08
to
On Feb 21, 7:17 am, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Jeff... I don't know where you got the idea I have any anger, jealousy
> or whatever for other businesses.

Yeah, I wonder why anyone would think that?

===========================


>
> It might interest you to learn that Steve Parrish doesn't actually
> sell his products up front and I do.

> Why would I be jealous of him?

>I probably make as much money as he does...

>Yeah... 2000 calendars wouldn't put a dent in Steve's stock.
>They sure as hell helped employ a few locals where he sold
> none when mine were in the store.

>Nothing to do with better or worse photos and I'm sure as hell
>not jealous of him mate.

> And don't think for a single moment he took all those photos. He just owns them.
>
==========================

No jealousy at all that I can see, mate.

Message has been deleted

Douglas

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 6:09:40 PM2/21/08
to

Absolutely... It's like all my other photos you stole and try to poke
me with. I don't have to try to sell them, people buy them.

AOL it seems is only accessible by AOL customers outside the USA.

The connection has timed out
The server at members.aol.com is taking too long to respond.

That must piss you right off, all those people missing out on the
slide show of the century. Go on, show us you have balls. Put 'em up
on pbase and let's have some fun. I'm sure by now you've had your last
warning from them.

I'll have a guess... It's one of the Nth Stradbroke Island collection
with my grand daughters holding it so buyers can gain a idea of it's
size. This is most likely from the eBay sale you tried to sabotage.
Guess what? Your pathetic attempt at cracking my eBay seller's account
so you could sabotage my sales didn't work. http://www.annika1980.com/cracking.htm
is the evidence of your dirty deed. What a total loser you are. Not
content with half a dozen socks gushing praise of your pathetic
plastic crap, you reckon the only time what you do is illegal is when
you get caught.

Those 2 year old pictures still sell too. Right alongside the 24 other
photos I published in the Minjerribah calendars of 2007 and 2008.

The thing you haven't yet grasped fool, is that your jealousy of me is
destroying your soul ... Any dumb dick (as several have since) can
take a snap of that beach and crop the shit out it trying to copy
me... But don't forget, I'm the one they try to copy. You really do
have to ask yourself why, if I'm as bad as you make out, so many
people buy my work and try to imitate it with their own snaps.

The gallery of trolls, thieves and jackasses is the name of it and
it's managed by that idiot in Chattanooga: "The Tennessee Jackass" at
rec.photo.equipment.35mm. You'll easily spot him. He has half a dozen
socks doing his dirty work and a huge gallery of my photos he stole
from my web sites. You can read all about his disgusting behavior and
criminal activity at: http://www.annika1980.com... For at least
another five years! LOL.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 6:11:47 PM2/21/08
to
On Feb 22, 12:58 am, "Rita Berkowitz" <ritaberk2...@aol.com> wrote:

> Annika1980 wrote:
> > Just so I'm following correctly, if I do contrast enhancement to my
> > photos in Photoshop then that's bad ("plastic looking" as the other
> > idiot troll calls it), but if you use fake plastic flowers arranged on
> > a beach setting where they don't even grow then that's OK.
>
> LOL! It's so good to see you back! Where's "Helen" at these days? Anyway,
> to answer your question. That "plastic shit" you make is a derivative of
> over cropping and trying to hide noise from the 40D noise generator. If you
> learn to how to compose and zoom with your feet to fill the frame you won't
> need any Photoshop creations that look like water colored excrement. As for
> D-Macs plastic flowers, he zoomed with his feet and didn't need any
> Photoshop trickery to mask problems.
>
> Rita

I forgot to mention also... The flowers were from a beach wedding I
did the afternoon before and they were real flowers.

Steve Brooks

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 6:14:39 PM2/21/08
to


Must be your slow server because I just opened it and saw two little
girls and a beach shot that looks like one 3rd of it is mirrored.


<rest of Dog's dribble deleted>

Steve Brooks

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 6:21:19 PM2/21/08
to

Are you talking about Bundaberg?
Last time I stayed at Bargara it was a good 10 minute drive into
Bundaberg. Bargara being on the coast and the 10 minute drive inland.

Not many beach's 15k's inland.

More proof you are an idiot.
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=bundaberg&ie=UTF8&ll=-24.851861,152.411613&spn=0.1324,0.2314&t=h&z=12


Bit of useless information, I was driving into the Puddles carwash in
Bundaberg (just down the road from the Rum Distillery) when they
announced Don Bradman had passed away.

Steve Brooks

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 6:25:46 PM2/21/08
to

Annika1980

unread,
Feb 21, 2008, 7:37:48 PM2/21/08
to
On Feb 21, 6:09 pm, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The thing you haven't yet grasped fool, is that your jealousy of me is
> destroying your soul ... Any dumb dick (as several have since) can
> take a snap of that beach and crop the shit out it trying to copy
> me...

You really are delusional. Nobody who has ever held a camera would be
jealous of you and your laughably horrible pics.

>But don't forget, I'm the one they try to copy.

Delusional, I say.


> You really do
> have to ask yourself why, if I'm as bad as you make out, so many
> people buy my work and try to imitate it with their own snaps.

Nobody is buying your work. You are ......... uh, what's the word I'm
looking for here?

>I forgot to mention also... The flowers were from a beach wedding
>I did the afternoon before and they were real flowers.

Bullshit. They're the same two plastic flowers that you admitted
using in the pic on your Julian site. Where is old J these days?
Still professoring at the local college?

mark.t...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 22, 2008, 2:50:46 AM2/22/08
to
Off topic. Just another point for Doug's legal team.

On Feb 22, 9:09 am, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Those 2 year old pictures still sell too. Right alongside the 24 other
> photos I published in the Minjerribah calendars of 2007 and 2008.

It's probably worth reminding Douglas of the "honest john" promise he
made when he sold his calendar 'business' on Ebay (170077195281, Feb
07). He said this:

> I will not be doing any more calendars and if I get a request for
> one, I'll guarantee to pass it on to you. The gear is easy to use
> and in perfect working order.

Let's repeat that. "I'll not be doing any more calendars".

So, about those calendars for 2007 and 2008....? I wonder if his
buyer reads usenet?

Carry on as usual Doug.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 22, 2008, 8:58:54 PM2/22/08
to

I passed the order on. He had given up on his ideal of being a
"calendar king" satisfied he got the binding equipment for a song. So
I started printing them again. What's wrong with that? You have way
too much shit from brains. It's made you dreams fertile.

Your problem is you are so obsessed with me, you try find crooked
dealings in everything I do and can't. When that happens you start to
invent fictitious scenarios like when you "THOUGHT" the EPA couldn't
possibly be issuing commercial permits to photograph in National
Parks. Instead of asking, you slandered me with your despicable lies.
When I posted the evidence, complete with EPA letterhead, you tried to
worm you way out of it instead of apologize to me.

The you tried to belittle me with more lies that just because you
couldn't figure out the name of my print centres. They don't exist,
you cried. When I posted the evidence to prove at least one of them
existed, right along with the list of other business I owned on the
window, instead of apologizing for your smear campaign, you went off
looking for a bunch of aliases I'd used in an attempt to shake off
your bullying. That actually back fired when you demonstrated some
rare intelligence and figured out if the post was about my
enlargements, it had to come from me... Missing altogether the IP that
identified me remained constant.

I thought eventually you'd be exposed for the lying swine you are.
Certainly plenty of people recognize it but like the weeds in my
garden, whatever you do without killing off the whole garden, sees
twice as many grow. You've already been warned by your ISP to stop
bullying me and decided to ignore it. Why is something you'll no doubt
explain with more lies and defamation. I didn't bother to pursue a
legal solution against you because the possibility of recovering costs
from you simply didn't make it worthwhile me spending $5000 to get you
into court.

The real issue with Usenet and the idiots like you and that jackass
from Tennessee who thrive on it, ensuring in the process it will self
destruct, is you think you can say and do whatever you like, knowing
you have nothing to lose if you get sued because you have nothing in
the first place. How's it feel to be worthless?

That makes you and the jackass real life losers. Unable to cope with
the truth and the possibility someone you attack might just be an
honest, upstanding community member, you attack them here banding
together with a bunch of childish fools hiding their identity, lets
their mother finds out and kicks their ass.

All along knowing you don't have the spine for a personal
confrontation. That's why you sneaked around Margie's craft stall
without identifying yourself. Good for you Mark. It must have make you
feel rewarded that you got to see rejects from my gallery experimental
enlargements - still good enough to sell at a market but not quite
gallery quality. Then like a hunter returned from the field, proudly
criticize them here, knowing you got away without needing to face the
people you defame. You are absolutely the scum of the earth mate.
What's worse is you think you aren't.

Annika1980

unread,
Feb 22, 2008, 10:51:50 PM2/22/08
to
On Feb 22, 8:58 pm, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> All along knowing you don't have the spine for a personal
> confrontation. That's why you sneaked around Margie's craft stall
> without identifying yourself. Good for you Mark. It must have make you
> feel rewarded that you got to see rejects from my gallery experimental
> enlargements - still good enough to sell at a market but not quite
> gallery quality.

Hey speaking of galleries, where exactly did you say that your gallery
is located? I must have missed your reply to my earlier query. Oh
yeah, and where are some of those galleries that you "feed?"

See if you can answer without mentioning park permits or your website
that you obsessively dedicated to me. And while you're at it, how
about disclosing the super-secret location of all those digital print
centers you have so cleverly hid all across Brisbane. That one you
showed a pic of has been closed down for years. BTW, is that the one
where you were given free space by some other business and chose to
leave when the owner tried to feel Margie up? Yeah, we all believe
that story.


Douglas

unread,
Feb 24, 2008, 1:49:35 AM2/24/08
to

Based on you form detailed at http://www.annika1980.com. You won't get
a reply so why don't you stop trying?

mark.t...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 24, 2008, 2:24:42 AM2/24/08
to
Off topic.

On Feb 24, 4:49 pm, Douglas <crypto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 23, 1:51 pm, Annika1980 <annika1...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Hey speaking of galleries, where exactly did you say that your gallery
> > is located? I must have missed your reply to my earlier query. Oh
> > yeah, and where are some of those galleries that you "feed?"
>

> > And while you're at it, how
> > about disclosing the super-secret location of all those digital print
> > centers you have so cleverly hid all across Brisbane. That one you
> > showed a pic of has been closed down for years.

> ...


> You won't get
> a reply so why don't you stop trying?

Douglas, this is a public forum. There are many people who would like
to examine your work up close and try out your printing services - I
mean there must be, given what you say about baiting folk to get
hits.... Or isn't that true?

You never reply, your website says nothing, they aren't in the phone
book under any of your webnames. They simply don't seem to exist.

So that means one of two things:

1. It's all a fantasy.
2. You are a coward who won't face his critics.

Or both. Maybe we should start a thread asking for a vote on whether
Douglas should post the names/addresses of his franchises?

Pete D

unread,
Feb 24, 2008, 2:45:56 AM2/24/08
to

<mark.t...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:049abbf5-5c3a-4053...@b29g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...

I am thinking that a poll to actually decide if he does really exist in the
first place would be in order. Even if he did exist (of which I am quite
doubtful) we could simply shun him and therefore he will actually cease to
exist.


All those in favour say AYE.


mark.t...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 24, 2008, 4:33:26 AM2/24/08
to
Off topic.

On Feb 24, 5:45 pm, "Pete D" <n...@email.com> wrote:
> I am thinking that a poll to actually decide if he does really exist in the
> first place would be in order. Even if he did exist (of which I am quite
> doubtful) we could simply shun him and therefore he will actually cease to
> exist.
>
> All those in favour say AYE.

I've often thought that surely he must be a troll, and that this was
all a clever (?) intricate hoax. And indeed, some of it seems to be
just that, eg the printing franchises and his 'valuable' enlarging
algorithm (sold to Samsung, doncha know).

But I have actually witnessed his market stall at Cleveland!! It was
singularly uninspiring, and attracted interest in line with that
although admittedly he said he was selling his rejects there (grin, as
you would)... Sadly that stall is now defunct, I gather, although
there were two *decent* photographers there last time I visited.

The time I saw his stand is also the time that Douglas has FALSELY
stated that:
- I took photos of his images, presumably to resell at enormous profit
(umm, I didn't have a camera that day...)
- I waited until the attendant left the stand, and then stole stuff
(obviously I didn't do that, and he has *retreated* from that
defamatory claim now)
- I 'sneaked' around
(*why* would I do that, when Douglas doesn't have a clue what I
look like?)

He states he has footage of me on security tape, but when I have asked
him to prove that by simply describing me, he goes competely quiet.
Again, that claim begs an obvious question - how would he know *who*
was on the security tape? Was I perhaps wearing a name badge? (O:
(I *am* very easy to spot in a crowd, for a reason that Douglas isn't
aware of - that's a bit of a problem for him as he doesn't have a clue
how to describe me, despite his 'tape'..)

As further evidence he is not entirely trolling, he did send a few
large prints out to garner support for his enlarging claims. But
those prints were carefully selected ones, he refused to supply any
original files to verify his claims, and in fact the comments (that he
frequently misrepresents) from folk like Gordon Moat, Alan Browne,
Colin D and 'Avery' all indicate they were 'nice', but showed no
evidence of an enlarging breakthrough of any kind. In fact, in most
of those cases the prints showed quite the reverse - indeed Douglas
was recently busted when he admitted one of the prints was actually a
stitched panorama! Then there's the challenge issued by Gisle
Hannemyr (http://hannemyr.com/photo/interpolation.html) that Douglas
ran away from, and of course just about every time Douglas has posted
'evidence' of his abilities on the web he has been quickly busted for
false claims and has had to remove the pages in embarrassment. Call
me obsessive, but I've kept them all, neatly cached. They may come in
handy...

If anyone can find his many business addresses in a phone book, let us
all know. And has *anyone* at all used his services and wish to
comment?

...Hello???

...Is this thing on??

(Now's probably the time to up the ante with some more sockpuppets,
Doug.)

PS - No sign of a return to that panorama thread, I see, Doug? Take
your time.

(O:

Pete D

unread,
Feb 24, 2008, 4:50:42 AM2/24/08
to
Ummmm, okay!!!


Rob.

unread,
Feb 24, 2008, 5:46:12 AM2/24/08
to
mark.t...@gmail.com wrote:
> Off topic.


Mark

Can you make anything of this??

Where's Rainbow beach?

Rainbow Beach
**** 5747
***** photographers.com

Pete D

unread,
Feb 24, 2008, 5:56:24 AM2/24/08
to

"Rob." <me...@mine.com.> wrote in message
news:47c14af3$1...@news.peopletelecom.com.au...

Rainbor Beach is on the mainland just below Fraser Island. The rest is up to
you.....


mark.t...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 24, 2008, 6:15:13 AM2/24/08
to
On Feb 24, 8:46 pm, "Rob." <m...@mine.com.> wrote:

> mark.thoma...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Off topic.
>
> Mark
>
> Can you make anything of this??
>
> Where's Rainbow beach?
Like Pete said, quite a drive north of Brisbane..

But Doug used to claim his shopfront was based in Cleveland or Wynnum,
iirc.

> ***** photographers.com

That would be his prized site (here's some more free publicity for
him):
http://www.brisbaneweddingphotographers.com

No address there last time I looked. Maybe you should email and ask?
(O:

Douglas

unread,
Feb 25, 2008, 7:16:23 PM2/25/08
to
On Feb 24, 5:45 pm, "Pete D" <n...@email.com> wrote:
> <mark.thoma...@gmail.com> wrote in message

Absolutely... Pete.
While we're at it let's have a poll to see who supports anonymous
identities and who would rather see people (like me) identify
themselves and be subjected to the antics of this creep calling
himself Mark Thomas (this year) and the likes of childish idiots like
you who use Usenet for their own personal entertainment at the expense
of others.

BTW... Not getting the results you wanted. Hmmm? I wonder why? Could
it be you are the cause of much of the shit destroying these groups
and no one is interested in what you have to say ...or is it all
someone else's fault? (again).

Get a life idiot. Including personal insults in your message headers
and posting insulting comments through my form mailer (which
pinpointed you as the anonymous - ROTFL - idiot doing it) is hardly
going to endear you to any group of people with a grain of
intelligence.

Troy Piggins

unread,
Feb 25, 2008, 7:36:06 PM2/25/08
to
* Douglas :

> On Feb 24, 5:45 pm, "Pete D" <n...@email.com> wrote:
> [---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 34 lines snipped |=---]
<snip />

> While we're at it let's have a poll to see who supports anonymous
> identities and who would rather see people (like me) identify
> themselves and be subjected to the antics of this creep calling

Hypocrite.

Please explain Sarina Sarin, Julian Abbot, .., Cryptopix, Ryadia
and all the other identities you have created.

How is this different?

> himself Mark Thomas (this year) and the likes of childish idiots like
> you who use Usenet for their own personal entertainment at the expense
> of others.

Hypocrite.

Please explain your use of USENET for your own business
promotion, google hit-count "benefit", and personal entertainment


at the expense of others.

How is this different?

--
Troy Piggins

Douglas

unread,
Feb 25, 2008, 7:55:12 PM2/25/08
to

Here's an offer... Post me (anonymously through my form mailer if you
want (LOL) your address and I'll send you a registered letter needing
your signature as proof you got it. Inside will be photos of all my
photo labs, my studio and my art gallery along with the exact address
of all of them... And a little present from the Queensland
magistrate's court.

Couldn't be fairer than that,eh? You show me yours and I'll show you
mine! Come out from under your rock, fanboi and let's get this show on
the road.You've been spreading lies and defamation about me for long
enough.

You changed you name when you escaped from South Australia and never
bothered to be recorded on the Electoral Roll in Queensland or take
out a Queensland drivers license... At least not in the name(s) you
use to identify yourself here. Maybe it's you who don't exist?

Silly me. I pay my taxes (ABN number highly visible) I'm listed on
the Electoral Roll, my driver's license and all my vehicles are
listed with Qld Transport as is my boat registered with maritime
services and Lloyds, along with both my addresses. My phone number is
in the white pages. My print labs are advertised in the yellow pages
and you can't find any of them? Gimme a break. No one is that
stupid... Hmm on the other hand... Maybe you've just proven me wrong!

As for Gisle? Instead of asking a controversial, part time
mathematician why I refused to share my math with him... Try
discovering what a real, prominent and highly respected professional
fine art and commercial photographer had to say about my enlargement
algorithm... Gordon Moat is his name. Quite a well known Photographer
who owns a commercial studio in San Diego. http://www.allgstudio.com/technology.html
Just click on "printing technology".

So who is right? The idiot hiding behind assumed names, who defamed me
from a SA Government workstation and who now hides out to Queensland
under an assumed nae after being reprimanded for it. The man who
claims to have been a "Professional Wedding Photographer" but can't
prove it "for family reasons" LOL. Or ...one of the United States'
most respected photographers?

Come on out and play Mark or Charles or whoever you claim to be today.
Let's get it all out in the open. Tell us first about your "family
reasons" for not proving your claims. Frightened someone back home
will find you? Careful. They might be closer than you think.

Douglas

unread,
Feb 25, 2008, 10:54:45 PM2/25/08
to

Personal Entertainment?
Surely this is not Troy Piggins the guy who uses Aus.Photo for his own
personal entertainment writing this?

Some time ago, Google appointed themselves host of all things Usenet.
Some might call it a conflict of interests. You know, publishing
information from shonky sources whilst taking the high ground and
claiming to only publish existing data.

When they produce Usenet messages posted by the most despicable scum
on this earth who post through mail2news gateways that were long ago
banned by responsible newsgroup hosts when someone searches for
information about me (and a plethora of other people these childish
idiots target), and then spout their rhetoric whilst refusing to do
anything about removing the query replies without a (USA) court order
which would cost me about $7000 per message posted to have removed
plus $12,000 for a New York Lawyer to do the court action... I think
it's fair enough I use their inclusion of Usenet posts in search
results as a means to inflate my rankings for legitimate searches.

You might feel different but seeing as you stuck you nose into it,
What's you opinion about that?

Troy Piggins

unread,
Feb 25, 2008, 11:32:42 PM2/25/08