Epson Stylus Photo 785EPX no longer print black. Is it possible tofix?

Arthur Entlich

e-printerhelp stated:

>>>To me, Measekite is an example of that sad minority who tries to mess
>>>things up for the majority. It is not only annoying, it is
>>>potentially dangerous. He spreads inaccurate information, which he
>>>is fully aware is such. He does harm for no apparent benefit, even to
>>>himself. To me that's a pathological condition.
>>

Measekite stated:

>>Hey holier than thou
>>
>>If you do not like the opinions that I believe in that is too bad.
>>You can spread all of the information I do not believe and I will
>>spread all of the information that I do believe. If you do not like
>>it then do not read it. Others believe it. As a matter of fact I
>>would guess that about 80% or more of the printer owners who purchased
>>HP, Canon or Epson printers are using OEM ink. They may not like the
>>price but I do not either. But they want the best results that last
>>the longest and do not clog their printer as much and if they did not
>>believe it they would not buy OEM ink.
>>
>>So I do not appreciate your crap.

There is a great difference between what you believe to be and what is
factually correct. There is also a great difference between sabotaging
others' communication by distorting or altering quotes and attributions,
and giving your opinion. What percentage uses OEM versus 3rd party is
not the issue here, even if your statistics were accurate. I don't make
false claims about OEM product, but you make blatantly prejudicial and
false claims about 3rd party product. Some people buy OEM inks because
they believe doing otherwise will void their warranty. Some do not have
easy access to anything but OEM, some don't know there are alternatives,
some don't wish to be bothered with refilling cartridges, some OEMs have
made it nearly impossible to refill, and some people have adequate funds
available to them that they can't be bothered to use anything but OEM.
Some have tried poor 3rd party inks and had poor results and gone back
to OEM as a result. And some would rather toss a perfectly good printer
than BUY OEM inks for it, due to costs and inability to find good
quality 3rd party ink.



>>
>>>I know I can't protect the internet, or usenet, or even these printer
>>>groups. We get the occasional problem poster who usually realizes
>>>after a short period that he/she isn't appreciated or going to be
>>>engaged, so they leave.
>>
>>You are talking about the people who want to joint your club or you
>>holier then thou click. Well that is not me. You have driven off
>>some who believe as I but others stay. If you do not like it then you
>>can go else where.
>>

The only person I have any interest in driving off this newsgroups is
you, and that's only for one reason. You do not supply worthwhile or
accurate information most of the time, in fact quite the contrary, you
create confusion and misdirection and misinformation. If you indicated
your point of view for what it was, your opinion, I would not fault it.
I may or may not agree with it, but I would see no problem with it.
But you have no experience whatsoever from which you speak from in
regard to a matter that you have become a zealot about, and you
completely misrepresent the point of view of those who have that
knowledge and experience, leaving others to have to jump in to correct
that so people aren't mislead.

>>>Most of them are just bothers, foul mouthed, or bigots, or whatever,
>>>but the difference here is Measkite is persistent and malicious. He
>>>provided misinformation that is a least potentially costly to others
>>>if not possibly hazardous.
>>
>>So it is costly and hazardous to follow the recommendations provided
>>with the printer that is called a manual. What a joke.
>>

You have made many claims that cannot and will not be found in any
printer manual, and you have made claims not about OEM product which you
actually know something about, but about 3rd party cartridges which you
know next to nothing about, since you claim you never use them. And
further, when you can't win those debates, you sink to juvenile levels
of discourse using foul language, insults, and childlike language.

>>
>>Some times I think you are a liar. In some posts you claim you
>>filtered my posts out and never see them and now you appear to know
>>enough about them to comment on them. WOWEE
>>
>>>I have no idea if he plagues other groups with similar behaviour or
>>>not. I hope not. Most of us have come to ignore him,
>>
>>So what is your problem. You do not seem to ignore him.
>>
>>>or filter his posts out.
>>
>>You do not seem to do that either

As I stated in my previous post, I am not lying. I screen all your
posts under your email addresses I am aware of. I saw this because it
was quoted in its entirety by someone else. I would completely ignore
you if you did not make extra work for me by misleading people with your
statements which I then find necessary to correct for the sake of accuracy.

>>
>>>Unfortunately people who come here for help and information who don't
>>>know better may walk away with false information as a result of his
>>>postings and that does harm.
>>
>>It is true. When you buy Canon or Epson ink you know what you are
>>getting and it is a real brand. The after marketeers buy from a
>>source that they will not disclose and will never tell you when they
>>change suppliers so you are never assured what you are getting. On
>>top of that some have multiple websites selling the same stuff under
>>different names and others are selling the same thing under different
>>names. So when a person has a problem with one generic name some will
>>go to another source and get the same thing under a different name.
>>You do not have that problem with Canon or Epson. And yes the price
>>is too high.
>>

If you didn't continually disparage 3rd party ink distributors, and
instead took that same time and read the testimonials on these
newsgroups you would see some consistency in the names of trustworthy
suppliers which consistently come up from individuals who have used
their products for years and years. Instead of continually stating that
the sky is falling if anyone uses 3rd party inks, if you took some
attention, you might be able to council people as to which products in
eh 3rd party market were a s usual, better than usual, or heaven
forbade, maybe better than OEM, and draw people away from poorer
distributors and brands. Instead you operate as a zealot without
experience into the other ways of accomplishing things.

>>
>>I think you are tarnishing what I have to say.

I hope I am, because much of what you have to say shouldn't see the
light of day, and much of the rest is tarnished by your own lack of
credibility.

You will note that I mentioned that at some brief interludes you were
providing helpful and useful (and accurate) information in the
comp.periphs.printers group. Then you decided to play the foolish game
of black and white views on OEM versus 3rd party inks, which was poorly
appreciated because so many people who were regular readers and
contributors here had country experiences and you were, quite honestly
talking out of your hat. When that didn't go your way, you began making
juvenile postings, which only furthered tarnish your reputation here.

I want people to hear both sides of an issue and make a well educated
decision. That means them having a balanced reporting of real
information. You assume these is some kind of conspiracy against you
here based upon a belief that all the members, or a vast number of them
were making their livings on selling 3rd party inks. That was untrue.
If anything, your harassment drove off several representatives of 3rd
party ink companies who used to occasionally try to provide some
information and feedback about their product lines, which was helpful.
Most were very respectful not to make this into a list of advertisers.

What ultimately calmed down much of this was a campaign of those who
contribute the most to this group filtering you out of the newsgroups
received.

You have sullied your own credibility and only you can fix it, if you so
desire.

Art

measekite

Arthur Entlich wrote:
> e-printerhelp stated:
>
>>>> To me, Measekite is an example of that sad minority who tries to
>>>> mess things up for the majority. It is not only annoying, it is
>>>> potentially dangerous. He spreads inaccurate information, which he
>>>> is fully aware is such. He does harm for no apparent benefit, even
>>>> to himself. To me that's a pathological condition.
>>>
>
> Measekite stated:
>
>>> Hey holier than thou
>>>
>>> If you do not like the opinions that I believe in that is too bad.
>>> You can spread all of the information I do not believe and I will
>>> spread all of the information that I do believe. If you do not like
>>> it then do not read it. Others believe it. As a matter of fact I
>>> would guess that about 80% or more of the printer owners who
>>> purchased HP, Canon or Epson printers are using OEM ink. They may
>>> not like the price but I do not either. But they want the best
>>> results that last the longest and do not clog their printer as much
>>> and if they did not believe it they would not buy OEM ink.
>>>
>>> So I do not appreciate your crap.
>
> There is a great difference between what you believe to be and what is
> factually correct. There is also a great difference between
> sabotaging others' communication by distorting or altering quotes and
> attributions, and giving your opinion. What percentage uses OEM
> versus 3rd party is not the issue here, even if your statistics were
> accurate. I don't make false claims about OEM product, but you make
> blatantly prejudicial and false claims about 3rd party product. Some
> people buy OEM inks because they believe doing otherwise will void
> their warranty.
It certainly can. If these inferior inks are the cause of the problem
the printer mfg do not have to repair those damages caused by those
inferior inks under the warranty.
> Some do not have easy access to anything but OEM,
Another false statement. They all have available on
their computers. I think their printers are connected to a computer and
I think their computer is connected to the internet.
> some don't know there are alternatives, some don't wish to be bothered
> with refilling cartridges,
It certainly is a messy bother.
> some OEMs have made it nearly impossible to refill,
They are entitles to mfg their printer according to the design they
think is best and to make the most money they can. They are entitled to
make the most money from their ink also. I do think they overcharge for
the ink. I also think they charge more than they need for all of their
upscale printers like the Epson 3800 and the Canon Pro9500 and Pro9000
and probably charge a little less on certain mainstream models like the
Canon IP4500 but they have a right to do so.
> and some people have adequate funds available to them that they can't
> be bothered to use anything but OEM. Some have tried poor 3rd party
> inks and had poor results and gone back to OEM as a result.
That is one point. You never know what you are getting with off brand
ink. Many vendors are selling the same thing from the same suppliers
under different names. When a person claims to have trouble with one
name others buy another name thinking it is different but it is the
same. Some of the fly by niters even maintain multiple websites selling
the same junk under different names as marketing as different sources.

Not all generic ink is bad but the good is very very few. Pantone is a
good source but it costs even more than OEM ink. There is another mfg
of ink that may not be bad but they do not sell it in carts and only in
gallons so that is not an option. They will not reveal where you can
buy it.
> And some would rather toss a perfectly good printer than BUY OEM inks
> for it, due to costs and inability to find good quality 3rd party ink.
>
>
>
>>>
>>>> I know I can't protect the internet, or usenet, or even these
>>>> printer groups.
That is a sign of releif.
>>>> We get the occasional problem poster who usually realizes after a
>>>> short period that he/she isn't appreciated or going to be engaged,
>>>> so they leave.
>>>
>>> You are talking about the people who want to joint your club or you
>>> holier then thou click. Well that is not me. You have driven off
>>> some who believe as I but others stay. If you do not like it then
>>> you can go else where.
>>>
>
> The only person I have any interest in driving off this newsgroups is
> you, and that's only for one reason. You do not supply worthwhile or
> accurate information most of the time,
Most of the time you write compositions with a holier than thou attitude.
> in fact quite the contrary, you create confusion and misdirection and
> misinformation.
That is because you have a different opinion.
> If you indicated your point of view for what it was, your opinion, I
> would not fault it. I may or may not agree with it, but I would see
> no problem with it. But you have no experience whatsoever from which
> you speak from in regard to a matter that you have become a zealot
> about, and you completely misrepresent the point of view of those who
> have that knowledge and experience, leaving others to have to jump in
> to correct that so people aren't mislead.
>
>>>> Most of them are just bothers, foul mouthed, or bigots, or
>>>> whatever, but the difference here is Measkite is persistent and
>>>> malicious. He provided misinformation that
you do not agree with. I do not care what you think. For an ego like
your who claims not to read my stuff you are certainly spending a great
deal of time spouting your stuff about me.

This is what I say all of the time

OEM ink is better.
OEM ink has reduced risk of fading
OEM has better color
OEM ink is more consistent
You know what you are getting
You can track the quality because the same thing under one name is sold
in a variety of places like Costco, Staple, and onlin sources.

Even Wilhelm Labs, a respected company, has written articles stating
that aftermarket ink is inferior.

The same crap is sold by many suppliers under different names and is
sold even by multiple site they operated to confuse the public. Their
websites are not clear on what they sell and they do not disclose all of
the information needed to make a good decision. These are facts. If
you do not like it that is too bad.
>>>> is a least potentially costly to others if not possibly hazardous.
>>>
>>> So it is costly and hazardous to follow the recommendations provided
>>> with the printer that is called a manual. What a joke.
>>>
>
> You have made many claims that cannot and will not be found in any
> printer manual, and you have made claims not about OEM product which
> you actually know something about, but about 3rd party cartridges
> which you know next to nothing about, since you claim you never use them.
I know about the Apple operating system but I never have used it. I
know much about Nikon and Canon DSLR but I have never used them. I know
how to drive a Mini Cooper S but have never sat in one. I even know
some of the types here.
> And further, when you can't win those debates, you sink to juvenile
> levels of discourse using foul language, insults, and childlike language.
>
>>>
>>> Some times I think you are a liar. In some posts you claim you
>>> filtered my posts out and never see them and now you appear to know
>>> enough about them to comment on them. WOWEE
>>>
>>>> I have no idea if he plagues other groups with similar behaviour or
>>>> not. I hope not. Most of us have come to ignore him,
>>>
>>> So what is your problem. You do not seem to ignore him.
>>>
>>>> or filter his posts out.
>>>
>>> You do not seem to do that either
>
> As I stated in my previous post, I am not lying. I screen all your
> posts under your email addresses I am aware of. I saw this because it
> was quoted in its entirety by someone else. I would completely ignore
> you if you did not make extra work for me by misleading people with
> your statements which I then find necessary to correct for the sake of
> accuracy.
>
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately people who come here for help and information who
>>>> don't know better may walk away with false information as a result
>>>> of his postings and that does harm.
>>>
>>> It is true. When you buy Canon or Epson ink you know what you are
>>> getting and it is a real brand. The after marketeers buy from a
>>> source that they will not disclose and will never tell you when they
>>> change suppliers so you are never assured what you are getting. On
>>> top of that some have multiple websites selling the same stuff under
>>> different names and others are selling the same thing under
>>> different names. So when a person has a problem with one generic
>>> name some will go to another source and get the same thing under a
>>> different name. You do not have that problem with Canon or Epson.
>>> And yes the price is too high.
>>>
>
> If you didn't continually disparage 3rd party ink distributors, and
> instead took that same time and read the testimonials on these
> newsgroups you would see some consistency in the names of trustworthy
> suppliers
Those are claims by a few. I called those sources. I asked them to
tell me the brand they sell. They refused. I asked them to tell me how
I can know if other vendors sell the same ink from the same supplier as
they do under a different name and they refused. I asked them to inform
me how I can determine that if I had trouble with ink from another
supplier how I would know if the ink they sell is not the same exact
ink under their name and they said that there is no way I can tell short
of both sources disclosing the real mfg of the ink.

I do not have this problem with HP or Canon and I am sure not with Epson
either.
> which consistently come up from individuals who have used their
> products for years and years.
They do not know what they use. They only know where they got it from.
They do not know if their vendor changed their suppliers. While one
posted they had problems with ink and that if was found out their their
supplier changed the magenta they were getting. You do not have these
problems with OEMs.
> Instead of continually stating that the sky is falling if anyone uses
> 3rd party inks, if you took some attention, you might be able to
> council people as to which products in eh 3rd party market were a s
> usual, better than usual, or heaven forbade, maybe better than OEM,
> and draw people away from poorer distributors and brands.
There are no brands. There are vendors who sell unknown stuff from mfg
and one has no assurances that the next batch they buy that was based on
price may be something different.
> Instead you operate as a zealot without experience into the other ways
> of accomplishing things.
>
>>>
>>> I think you are tarnishing what I have to say.
>
> I hope I am, because much of what you have to say shouldn't see the
> light of day, and much of the rest is tarnished by your own lack of
> credibility.
Only from member of your club. There have been other poster who
disagreed with the click and were driven off when ganged up upon but I
think that people should know the truth.

Any one can call a supplier and ask who the mfg is. Anyone can read the
multitude of websites and see that all of the information full
disclosure is not there.
>
> You will note that I mentioned that at some brief interludes you were
> providing helpful and useful (and accurate) information in the
> comp.periphs.printers group. Then you decided to play the foolish
> game of black and white views on OEM versus 3rd party inks, which was
> poorly appreciated because so many people who were regular readers and
> contributors here had country experiences and you were, quite honestly
> talking out of your hat. When that didn't go your way, you began
> making juvenile postings, which only furthered tarnish your reputation
> here.
>
> I want people to hear both sides of an issue and make a well educated
> decision. That means them having a balanced reporting of real
> information. You assume these is some kind of conspiracy against you
> here based upon a belief that all the members, or a vast number of
> them were making their livings on selling 3rd party inks.
Many are. Many were.
> That was untrue. If anything, your harassment drove off several
> representatives of 3rd party ink companies
That is good. They were using this forum for marketing and not fully
disclosing who they were and what they were doing. This is deceitful.
Once the information on who they were became known they decided their
marketing edge was not their. This group is not supposed to be a
marketing group.
> who used to occasionally try to provide some information and feedback
> about their product lines,
nor a public relations forum.
> which was helpful. Most were very respectful not to make this into a
> list of advertisers.
>
> What ultimately calmed down much of this was a campaign of those who
> contribute the most to this group filtering you out of the newsgroups
> received.
>
> You have sullied your own credibility and only you can fix it, if you
> so desire.
>
> Art

Frank

measekite wrote:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

....you're an fukkin brain dead idiot who also just happens to a real
moron...but we've known that all along.
Frank

Frank

measekite wrote:

--------------------------------------------

....you're an fukkin brain dead idiot who also just happens to a real
moron...but we've known that all along.
Frank

Frank

measekite wrote:

----------------------------------------

....you're a POS fukkin brain dead idiot who also just happens to a real
moron...but we've known that all along.
Frank