"Tom Galvin" <tom### [at] impnospamorg> wrote in message 
news:41db0a6c$1@news.povray.org...
> Christopher James Huff wrote:
>> ...like claiming an image rendered in POV 3.0, with text saying so right 
>> on the image, was impossible to render in POV-Ray...
>>
>
> Actually he did not say that, and he further clarified his statements 
> concerning blooms, along with an apology for the confusion, in follow-up 
> posts.  Those posts no longer exist.

In fact, if you look at his web-site, he discusses the fact that the picture 
in question was created with POV-Ray, and he explains rather well what he 
meant in his post (regarding the blooms).  Additionally, he mentions many of 
the same things that he mentioned in his post.  I'm pretty sure that this 
web-page existed before his posts here.

My best guess is that he is someone who is somewhat familiar with POV-Ray 
(as he mentions that he has used it for many, many years), but his overall 
knowledge of POV may not be very in-depth.  Nevertheless, he has had casual 
contact with many renderers and has been impressed by what some of them do 
(including POV-Ray).  He made what he felt would be a helpful post.  While a 
strong case can be made for his "wrongness" and lack of knowledge, no one 
can prove his intentions were not honorable.

He first posted a lengthy statement which was met with a lot of name-calling 
among other things.  He probably felt that he would abandon that post and 
try to start over, with more examples, and a tone that was somewhat less 
arrogant.  Additionally, he was willing to follow-up to the replies he 
received.

If anything more troll-like happened, only Thorsten appears to know.

-- 
Jeremy
www.beantoad.com

Post a reply to this message