Yes I can see where that would be a problem, and I agree that would have been wrong of me to equate the two phenomena (edit: or any of the key players from either event to an implied counter part). However I did not say Truth and Reconciliation Commission, I said "a truth and reconciliation phase" as if to suggest that the tone of the article was less divisive, more inclined to trying to see a way through the stalemate.Voronwë the Faithful wrote:But equating the criticism of the high frame rates with the truth and reconciliation commission is completely out of line in my opinion (speaking completely as a poster, not as a Marshal, Shirriff or Thain) because it suggests that liking the high frame rates is fundamentally wrong (just as apartheid is fundamentally wrong), and that just isn't right. Again, in my opinion.
How much better it is for the source to say: be prepared, this format may not agree with you; rather than to say: oh well that was raw (unfinished) footage, or the problem is with the viewer, not the technology, or oh by the way, even if it is a problem with the technology it's our call so take it or leave it.
I hope my intent is a little clearer now. For what it's worth, I don't see PJ as an evil overlord, I'm just not as enamoured of him as I once was ... also if any persons that you or I know personally actually like the new format, I hope that they will say so, regardless of what anyone else has said. I really do. I understand Al will be seeing the movie within hours. Al does not strike me as an apologist for anyone. Therefore I'm looking forward to seeing his impressions of his first time out (should he choose to share them broadly).