Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Worst Piece of Nonsense ever "Published"...

Status
Not open for further replies.
RE: Andrae Palmer

I don't see why I would spend $20k when I could do what I need with $5k -- at least as promised by RED for a $3.5k Scarlet last year! I already put an extra $1500 in that budget. But I won't go put another $15k into this, "just because". Even if I had Bill Gates' money I still wouldn't. It makes no sense to me to spend money on something I don't need or it's too big, or requires more crew, or whatever else. I always buy what I need, nothing more.

When we buy a car, we go buy what we need too. We don't go buy a Porsche, even if we might have the money for it, don't we? So I do the same with cameras and everything else in life.
 
Eugenia Loli-Queru said:
I am bitter because I feel that I have been lied upon. I feel that RED sells us dreams.
Click to expand...
Not to belabor the point Eugenia but what part of ....
"Everything in life changes... including our camera specs and delivery dates..."
do you not understand?

On the bright side .... in five years all these specs might be obsolete ... used Epic-X's (brains) might be very affordable.
 
Not to belabor the point Eugenia but what part of ....
"Everything in life changes... including our camera specs and delivery dates..."
do you not understand?
Click to expand...

The fact that RED should not have promised anything in the first place. Why do you think that most companies don't do forward looking statements and announce products that they don't already have almost ready? While RED is not a public company, it doesn't change the fact that whatever they do or say, HAS an impact. Having RED saying "yeah, we might change stuff we promised", it only fuels my disapproval, not removing it.
 
Eugenia Loli-Queru said:
RE: Andrae Palmer

I don't see why I would spend $20k when I could do what I need with $5k
Click to expand...

Because 5K can't get you what you want. You want something of a price point that you can't afford. Of course I'm just speculating that you can't afford it... just like you speculated Jim Jannard is an hobbyist... its just my opinion of you.
 
Eugenia it sounds like the best thing you could is hide under a rock for 6 months.
Click to expand...

In reality, dude, Eugenia has done a lot more for the low budget flimmakers than what you have done for anybody in the video community. Her work for making Vimeo be more user friendly for us is one among many other contributions. If she wants to speak her mind fine. She originally does it in her blog and if she wants to complain about something she and many many others perceive is wrong she has the right to. In the United States of America we still have that right. You don't have to read her comments, it's your right not to. In this case her complains are 100% legitimate.
 
Hate to feed the fire here, but her updated message on her blog now says "RED banned me from their forum", which is inaccurate; RED did not ban her. Jarred Land (Landmine Media) owns this forum, not RED. And the moderator who banned her, Ace, does not work for RED. She was banned from the Reduser community by a moderator. The reason I point this out is that it's misleading to those who don't know any better, and is slanderous IMO. I don't know if banning her was the best thing, but it sounds like she wouldn't want to spend much time around here anyway.

EDIT: The message has now been aptly changed on her blog.
 
First of all, I haven't posted here much, so I never put in a request with regard to the "real name policy". But my name is James Kirsch, in case that matters. If a mod would like to change my screenname, that would be great.

Anyway, I want to preface this by saying that I completely disagree with Eugenia, for reasons which have already been stated in this thread. I think it's absurd to accuse RED of breaking promises, when their policy has been that everything might change. Therefore, I was happy to see her complaints addressed in this thread, and in comments on her blog.

However, I was not happy to see that she was just banned here. I mean, it seems to me that she got into this thread because the original poster (quite rightly) trashed her blog. Again, I too believe that her views on RED and Jim Jannard are way off, but this situation brings to mind that old quote, "I disagree with what you are saying, but I will fight to the death defending your right to say it"...

It would be one thing if she had posted the thread herself, and started attacking RED. But in this case, the thread was made by someone else in order to criticize her blog. So it just doesn't seem right to me that she was banned for jumping in and trying to defend herself. I mean, it seemed like she discussed things in a civil manner, at least.
 
Right on, Craig.

I moved this thread into the OT section because it was no longer a constructive discussion about RED, but a bunch of back and forth between Eugenia and a few others. Ace took it one step further, and did the right thing, by removing her.

This forum is independently owned and operated from RED Digital Cinema. Other than Jarred, none of us moderators are employed or compensated by RED. However, RED does indeed treat these forums as their official discussion area.

That said, when someone comes into this place, it is like stepping onto RED's front porch. If they come here and mouth off, they can expect to get punched in the nose.
 
Craig Ryan said:
Hate to feed the fire here, but her updated message on her blog now says "RED banned me from their forum", which is inaccurate; RED did not ban her. Jarred Land (Landmine Media) owns this forum, not RED. And the moderator who banned her, Ace, does not work for RED. She was banned from the Reduser community by a moderator.
Click to expand...

This is a blatant misquote what it actually says is

"UPDATE 2: And now I am BANNED me from the REDUser forum, for discussing my points VERY CALMLY with others. I was name called, but I never name called back. I simply explained my points, civilized, as you can read there."

edit/
I've been told the quote was different but updated shortly after.
 
Craig W. Bickerstaff said:
This is a blatant misquote what it actually says is

"UPDATE 2: And now I am BANNED me from the REDUser forum, for discussing my points VERY CALMLY with others. I was name called, but I never name called back. I simply explained my points, civilized, as you can read there."
Click to expand...

Actually she fixed it since then (proof by the typo "I am BANNED me" which originally read as "RED BANNED me"); I'll redit my previous post now that it's settled.
 
John Caballero said:
In reality, dude, Eugenia has done a lot more for the low budget flimmakers than what you have done for anybody in the video community. Her work for making Vimeo be more user friendly for us is one among many other contributions. If she wants to speak her mind fine. She originally does it in her blog and if she wants to complain about something she and many many others perceive is wrong she has the right to. In the United States of America we still have that right. You don't have to read her comments, it's your right not to. In this case her complains are 100% legitimate.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Plus, banning her for being a loud dissenter was not appropriate, simple as that. She wasn't being vulgar, and was incensed by the thread title "worst piece of nonsense ever".
This is not the way of red guys, dissent is just as important as the love (so long as it doesn't fall to vulgarity). In fact for healthy development, it is more important than the lover. Evolution, 101.
 
Why was she banned? I disagree with her, but she was (as I saw) discussing her points calmly. I don't think the she creates such a disturbance here.

What difference does it make to let her discuss her points. Who would agree with her? If some agrees, what is the difference?


So please, don't make a religion from RED.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
That said, when someone comes into this place, it is like stepping onto RED's front porch. If they come here and mouth off, they can expect to get punched in the nose.
Click to expand...

But did she "come here and mouth off"? Again, I think her views on RED are ridiculous, but this thread was started in order to bash her, and she simply showed up to defend herself. She didn't post that blog here -- somebody else brought it up, linked to it, and criticized her for it (as did others who replied in the thread). So I don't see how you can justify banning somebody for defending themselves in that situation, no matter how absurd their viewpoints may be.
 
My gawd, I find this all funny and absurb at the same time. She was stirring shat up on her blog, Tom posted his opinion here with a link, she came whined her position a bit, Ace gave her the boot in what to me seemed like a "tongue in cheek" moment (Aussie sort a way).

I mean seriously, some of her comments, guys gals... never mind.
 
John Caballero said:
In reality, dude, Eugenia has done a lot more for the low budget flimmakers than what you have done for anybody in the video community. Her work for making Vimeo be more user friendly for us is one among many other contributions. If she wants to speak her mind fine. She originally does it in her blog and if she wants to complain about something she and many many others perceive is wrong she has the right to. In the United States of America we still have that right. You don't have to read her comments, it's your right not to. In this case her complains are 100% legitimate.
Click to expand...

In reality dude that's neither here nor there. She was complaining that RED was sharing too much information unlike Canon which doesn't discuss their plans until they release a product. My recommendation was to stop listening to RED and "hide under a rock" until RED ships a product. What better advice do you have? Hiding under a rock for 6 months solves ALL of her complaints. I'm sorry that I provided a useful and actionable course of action, I didn't realize it was just an excuse to vent about something unrelated to the problems raised in the post.

That all being said I don't think she was any more inflammatory than Tom.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top