[Tom C]

Point taken.  I did give reasons for my reaction.

Yes, most of the time a non-reaction from myself means I did not feel 
compelled for one reason or another.

Tom C.


>From: "Bob W" <pdml at web-options.com>
>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml at pdml.net>
>To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <pdml at pdml.net>
>Subject: RE: Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 20:35:22 +0100
>
> > >
> > > >Almost every single photo shown here meets with praise.
> > >
> > >That's because a lot of people here won't comment on pics
> > that don't do
> > >anything for them. Me included. Policy.
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >   Cotty
> > >
> >
> > That's my general policy also.  It seems a disparity exists
> > as to how the
> > policy is applied. :-)
> >
> > Tom C.
>
>By stating that you only comment on pictures you like, you appear to
>be saying that if you don't comment, you don't like the picture - so
>you are apparently commenting implicitly! Of course, this is a
>fallacy, but one that many people would commit.
>
>In my case I comment on some photos that I like, and sometimes I don't
>comment on photos that I like. Sometimes I even comment on photos I
>don't like, if I think my comments can be useful. Absence of a comment
>from me should never be taken to mean that I don't like the shot.
>
>Furthermore, I may say "Nice picture, Henri!", with no further
>explanation, but I would never say "Shit shot, Chim!" without some
>additional reasons why.
>
>Bob
>
>
>--
>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>PDML at pdml.net
>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net