8mm Forum: Osi's Statement.

This is topic Osi's Statement. in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003000

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 19, 2014, 12:55 PM:

We constantly flag up bad sellers in the forum when we come across them on ebay, etc. so we would be somewhat hypocritical if we were to shelter such sellers here, if they exist.

For this reason I'd like to ask Osi about this statement:

quote:
I have dealt with people, some on this forum, some others some quite prominent that are quick to find fault, but are far from being innocent themselves, (when I have been innocent), and I have never even thought of going after them or calling them a liar publicly, though with all I have on them, (facts mind you), I could end they're "honorable" status on the forums at a heartbeat.

Osi, you'd be doing us all a favour if you would elaborate.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on February 19, 2014, 07:37 PM:

Mike, I think this should be done privately.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 20, 2014, 12:29 PM:

Winbert, Osi made a public statement. What seems to be the problem?

I asked Doug's permission before posting this.

Posted by Vidar Olavesen (Member # 3354) on February 20, 2014, 12:35 PM:

As I think I mentioned, I would be happy to know who to avoid ... Instead of being ripped off, given an inferior print or whatever

I know a few I do trust completely, but not who to avoid

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 20, 2014, 12:50 PM:

Micheal, since you asked ...

I have dealt with people over the years that are quick to point out others faults or even non-existing faults, when they are far from "pristine" ...

While I have no intention of "outing" any of these rotten eggs (and yes, some still are actively posting), they do exist ...

It's just that I "chaff" at people who would dare to call others liars (or as politicians would say, have "mis-spoke" [Smile]

), just because they don't understand how to do something.

In other words, if they don't understand how something can be done, then it can't be done, and therefore, whoever has proposed that it can be done, are liars.

Now, there are those who love to point out others wrongs, whether wrongs exist or not, all I am saying is that those who would do so had best have they're own "backyards clean", as someone, with less character than myself, would quickly "out" those people ...

Vidar ...

you can trust most people on the forums, but before buying from someone, if you have any doubts whatsoever as whether you should buy or not, just make it a post on this forum and ask "Have you had a good sale through "so and so" and your fears will certainly be laid to rest. [Big Grin]

Posted by Vidar Olavesen (Member # 3354) on February 20, 2014, 01:00 PM:

Yeah, can try to do that :-) But, I am mostly for giving everyone a chance, though it costs a bit, I still do this. Just had a couple of transactions now, I do not have doubt they will be good :-) Two forum members and a third soon I hope

Thanks

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 20, 2014, 01:27 PM:

quote:
While I have no intention of "outing" any of these rotten eggs (and yes, some still are actively posting), they do exist ...

Do you not think it in the best interests of the hobby and this forum of collectors to let us know who's hiding among us?

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on February 20, 2014, 01:56 PM:

I don't think so, because that would provide a means for anybody with an axe to grind to trash somebody else's reputation, and all the accused could do is deny.

(Which after all is what guilty people do as well.)

Even if there really was a bad transaction, the 99 other good ones wouldn't count for anything if they weren't with the accuser.

We've actually have had a few of these kangaroo courts go on here. I've never seen them solve anything.

-and no: I've never sold a film to anybody on this or any forum...or anywhere, actually. It seems even the ones I don't like I just watch less than the others!

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 20, 2014, 02:07 PM:

I wonder why Osi made the statement in the first place.

quote:
I don't think so, because that would provide a means for anybody with an axe to grind to trash somebody else's reputation, and all the accused could do is deny.

Well, I wasn't interested in a free-for-all.
Osi did intimate that he had enough to ensure that there could be no doubt at all about the guilt of whoever these people are:

quote:
...though with all I have on them, (facts mind you), I could end they're "honorable" status on the forums at a heartbeat.

I feel that Osi should be prepared to back up such a statement, otherwise it constitutes nothing more than a shady threat.
But, ...no biggie to me. I'm not interested enough to cause an argument about it.
Cool out... [Smile]

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on February 20, 2014, 04:51 PM:

Mike you questioned something you had already known. it was yourself who sent me a PM that there were some members here who were not using their real names. This I call they are liars already.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 20, 2014, 04:59 PM:

Winbert,

I'm not at all sure what the connection is. Osi's statement referred, I presume from the wording, to film selling, not whether or not people are using real names. Not using a real name is not harming anybody here.
Osi's was a PUBLIC statement.

You asked me privately about the person (ONE person, singular) who I had learned uses an alias and I answered you privately.

See the difference?

You're not paying attention, Winbert. I am trying to help the forum out, and you're bringing up a PRIVATE correspondence we had!?
Shame on you, my friend. I don't think you'll get too many PMs from here on.
[Wink]

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on February 20, 2014, 05:27 PM:

I didn't think it was possible, "not" to be using your real name on this forum, when you first register.

I can see both Steve and Michael points of view. The trouble is about making comments about other members, is that it really can open a can of worms.

I can also see some collectors becoming a bit "wary" of everyone they deal with, simply because they might not know who they "can" or "cannot" trust, which is a shame.

Its a "Catch 22" folks....so best of luck.

Graham.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 20, 2014, 05:36 PM:

OK, then.

How about Osi emails or PMs the details of these people to whoever wants to know?

Would that be fair?

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on February 20, 2014, 07:04 PM:

Mike, that's why since the beginning I said to ask this matter privately, which I did previously for that very matter.

If I make a public statement here (e.g) "I think someone here cleaned his films not with FilmGuard while he claimed using it before selling to me". How do I know? "because the smell is different".

If you want to know who that person, send a PM, but no need to ask publicly (hence the answer will be published too). Because my assumption is not always right. The sensitivity of my nose might be different with others.

An assumption is not an exhibit.

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on February 20, 2014, 07:05 PM:

I think positive feedback about forum members is helpful and appreciated. But negative comments serve no useful purpose except to encourage forum feuding, as we have here. As a moderator on another forum, Osi should know it is best to avoid unfounded and contoversial statements about other members.

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on February 20, 2014, 10:14 PM:

I agree that if you want to know about someone just back channel. Our community is one of the largest on the net (Super 8 Film Community) but still small in the overall scheme of things.
It would have been a shame to lose Osi over a small misunderstanding! Even though I have grown to hate Grizzly Adams (ha ha!) I would miss his posts. I have found back channeling is better for the health of the board and also for the persons involved. After all...this is our hobby and it should be fun!

Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on February 21, 2014, 01:52 AM:

Seems Osi is getting too close to home. He's describing both my ex-wives.

Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on February 21, 2014, 02:40 AM:

Larry not your ex's sounds like my old boss from BT He was also the character played by Tommy Lee Jones in a 'Batman' film.

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 21, 2014, 12:51 PM:

Winbert,

I repeat:

quote:
You're not paying attention, Winbert. I am trying to help the forum out, and you're bringing up a PRIVATE correspondence we had!?
Shame on you, my friend

Folks,
What I find it hard to understand is why it's OK to flag up bad sellers on the forum here, but not if they are members of the forum. That just doesn't make sense at all. Can someone explain the logic?

[ February 21, 2014, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: Michael O'Regan ]

Posted by Joe Taffis (Member # 4) on February 21, 2014, 02:47 PM:

There are now 3853 registered Forum members. I don't think just being a member means much as far as reputation goes, unless you prove it by being honest in film related dealings both here and on eBay. I mention eBay because I'm sure most of us watch eBay film auctions regularly, including item descriptions and feedback ratings. After a while you get a pretty good idea of who the "cuties" are [Wink]

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on February 21, 2014, 05:22 PM:

I agree fully Joe on all points!

Posted by Vidar Olavesen (Member # 3354) on February 21, 2014, 06:52 PM:

Michael, perhaps Spock can?

I agree with you, being a member shouldn't automatically mean they should be allower to do whatever they want (whomever they are)

I wouldn't let a friend deal with someone I knew was bad

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on February 21, 2014, 07:12 PM:

quote:
Folks,
What I find it hard to understand is why it's OK to flag up bad sellers on the forum here, but not if they are members of the forum. That just doesn't make sense at all. Can someone explain the logic?

Mike you answered your own question. Long time ago I was questioning why it was OK to flag up a dealer in Australia (not a member) for its prices, while when I did the same to a UK dealer who was happen to be a member here, the comment you gave:

quote:

Nobody has any business publicly criticising anyone elses prices. If you don't like don't buy. If you want to negotiate with the dealer directly, do so privately - not on a public forum.

I won't give the link of this old thread because it has been closed. Find yourself.

The world is not fair indeed.

And oh yeah... Shame on you too!
[Wink]

Posted by Bill Phelps (Member # 1431) on February 21, 2014, 07:28 PM:

That seems like apples and oranges....bad dealers and not liking prices...two different things.

Bill [Smile]

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on February 21, 2014, 07:53 PM:

It is different Bill, but the main idea is the same, i.e. to write publicly member/non member for something that we don't like

Posted by Bill Phelps (Member # 1431) on February 21, 2014, 09:06 PM:

To be honest I really don't like getting involved here but this is so far removed from the original post....

Osi...you claimed out in the open for everyone to see that you could end some peoples honorable status on the forum because you had facts about their bad dealings and you could do that very quickly....that is a threat as far as I can see. Are you going to tell us who that is?

If not we should probably end this discussion and come to the understanding that we are not going to learn who they are and be done with it.

Bill

Posted by Tommy Woods (Member # 2437) on February 22, 2014, 04:39 AM:

"Caveat Emptor" even if your buying off the Pope,before you part with your hard earned.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2