"I think you might be taking oneself a trifle to seriously " ....another one of Churchill's quotes.


I am sure you are the only person who values his ownopinion's.

 

I am not keen on the Idea of forum Censorship ( in mm or ")

It is no bad thing that problems come to light.
Only then can Facts can be corrected, and systems put in place to prevent a recurrence.

The Reliability of information served up by AP is of paramount importance, if only because it becomes part of a digital reference archive, which leads to errors being repeatedly compounded.

Mat is unfortunate in that he is a newboy in a senior position. As such he is under considerable scrutiny. Just as his predecessor was, who also had the temerity to be Female. She came out of the process with great respect for her abilities as both a photographic specialist and a writer.

Mat is an excellent writer, however this does not seem to be matched by his eye for detail.
I amongst others have noted this here or elsewhere. The important thing though, is that a way is found round the problem. It is not a question of who might or might not be embarrassed.

 

I'm a writer myself and know all too well that it is easy for mistakes to slip through - I find that I can sometimes read a piece through several times and have a blind spot for something pretty obvious so editing is useful but not always possible with deadlines, etc. The main problem here, as others have pointed out, is the ridiculous way in which we have different people/firms describing sensor size - its like trying to give a visitor directions to your house using miles while they think in kilometres. Perhaps the useful diagram of sensor sizes in the recent Pentax Q test could be included in every issue (perhaps in the adds section) to help us all?

 

Well said !.
I couldn't agree more with you.
Time to Cut the lad some slack now I think.

 

The issue is with the obnoxious and personal nature in which some of the criticisms were couched. I couldn't care less about your opinion on forum censorship; the fact remains that some of the posts came close to breaching the rules, and if they do breach the rules, they will be censored.

 

That's incredibly rich coming from you - your few postings scream loud and proud that you fall into that category.

 

Behave yourself mate. I was never personal regarding MG. As churchil also said ". Get off my case, and go and put the kettle on luv "

Enjoy your cuppa !

 

I wasn't actually on your case about personal attacks on Mat, as it happens; there were comments from others I was concerned about, in some cases people who have certainly been around long enough to know better. Hence the "in general..." bit. I've actually no issue with the tone of your postings at all, just it would be nice to hear something else from you on another subject. There's a cup of tea here for you - if you want something stronger, I'm at the bar.

 

Well I could not see them. It was comments on the errors not Matt personally. Bear in mind we are taliking about a camera test. Which I believe go into the archive for future camparision against newer models down the line.

If anything some posts accept that mistake can happen and more positve about MG.

Please bear in mind I was the one who posted that another member had flagged up a error this week.

As I said in the other thread it is abit more serious than the sensor thing last week. Given the paragraph on page 50.

But MG is human and humans make mistakes. I assumed that AP ran fact checkers or proof readers ie different eyes on all pieces before publishing.

I for one will now not comment any further on the matter and leave it to the staff of AP to sort out.

PS: still like the magazine.

 

I do not believe my criticisms were either obnoxious or personal; I was simply pointing out that in such an authoritative magazine as AP, one expects that facts are checked before they are printed.

As for your comment "I couldn't care less about your opinion on forum censorship......", I think that's a bit strong. Surely as a highly rated Moderator you should care about others' opinions, whether you agree with them or not.

 

Hear hear! Well said young Mr Roberts.

Graeme

 

No problem. Will join you there .

Cheers Ian

 

To P_Stoddart and Roy: clearly from his post Mat thought there were personal attacks (not just in this particular thread, to be sure), and I agree with him - I have been watching them grow over the last couple of days with increasing concern. It's not just been a case of pointing out errors, which is not only entirely fine, but actually helpful; it's when the professionalism of someone is impugned that we're on dangerous ground.

And Roy, please don't presume to tell me what or how to think, OK? As a moderator, I will strive to allow individuals to express their views within the limits of the site rules regardless of my opinion about their views. As an individual member, I will personally hold whatever views I wish about the opinions of others. Neither requires me to care less about any other member's views about site censorship, to be frank, and when it's an issue that rubs up against the way moderators are asked to act, I will err in favour of those who appointed me in the first place, not those who hold any other particular view of how the site should be run.

 

Blimey.....

1) I was not telling you how or what to think
2) You are as entitled to your views as anyone else
3) I repeat that for a Moderator not to care less about others' views is a bit strong
4) No one is trying to rub up against the way you are asked to act, just expressing an opinion
5) No-one is telling you how the site should be run.

For goodness sake, lighten up, will you. Have another cup of tea!

 

Hmmm, they're consistant - NOT!

If only various people had followed that advice before bashing poor old Mat we wouldn't be here now...

 

Boys and girls - I'd hate anyone to fall-out over this, so let's all just calm down a little.

Any mistakes that appear in the magazine are my responsibility. I'm the editor and I have the last read of everything that we print - apart from the adverts (those are my Saturday treat.) We do occasionally make mistakes, and it seems we've made two in a row. For these I apologise, and I will do my utmost to ensure it doesn't become a habit.

I appreciate you rely on us to be accurate, and I appreciate the depth of feeling when we are not. I can only think comes about because you care about the magazine as much as we do.

Now, let's all be nice to each other. I'm going to have a rum and coke, and suggest you do similar.

 

Well said that man!

(sycophant mode now off!)

 

A simple width x height - in mm - would do me
I get frustrated with CSC reviews that refer to MFT sensors - usually to make them appear more inferior to APS-C CSC offerings.

 

That's a real good point about reviewers quite often start the review about the downside compared to APS-C sensors. Shame , because I have had nothing but great results from my Pen EP-1 , and a lumix DMC L10.

It might be because it isn't a system used by Canon or Nikon.
And yes , a straight measurement in mm would be great !

Ian