You will note in the description of the YouTube video, I said that probably the hottest debate in forums (outside of RAW vs JPG) is AdobeRGB and sRGB. I'm here, yes, absolutely because I wanted to see how hot this topic would get.
I haven't seen an apology, but did I ask for one? The YouTube video is staying up, is getting great feedback because it contains useful (not irrelevant) information that the typical photographer can put to good use. How many times have I explained that the use of analogies like, "wide rainbows" or "muffin tops" were used to help people make a simple distinction about which to choose? How many times have I explained that changing the monitor profile was an illustration to show what happens when wide gamut is expressed in narrow gamut equipment?
Will Crockett has lectured nationwide, and is (alongside Eddie Tapp) the most recognized color expert among any of the top experts. His video was fantastic. He is an incredible teacher and extremely popular. His (and my) type of instruction helps photographers move forward and appreciate photography. All this group tries to do is intimidate people who are simply trying to take more pleasing photos. I'm sorry you thought I was declaring myself famous and laughing at you. I'm not. I'm simply telling you that any individual in this group, or the group as a whole of its members, has absolutely no influence, anywhere. So while you may claim to be out "saving the world from misinformation" you have two obstacles: 1) nobody knows or cares about you and 2) you don't have a unified cause anyway. You all just argue with each other.
The typical photography enthusiast does not have a goal in life to wear a Coloritti blazer, or to purchase wide gamut monitors, or to make 3D animated diagrams of gamut balloons. They just want to take photos they love. Experts like you on the internet try so hard to top each other in minutiae so that I can't even get a clear cut picture of any consensus that you share. I just see you all arguing with each other.
I have businesses to run. This is an important part of my business - illustrating the madness that ensues when a handful of color science experts (and not working photographers, as in the case of Andrew Rodney) get together in a forum and try to outwit each other.
Surely there have got to be simpler analogies than ebola and what happens in Sierra Leone. You all are trying to impress each other with your deep, immense expertise of your mental horsepower, it takes someone like me to make you all mad at how I call it out on the open.
Surely you could say something like, "putting a ferrari engine in a SmartCar", or "swatting flies with a bazooka", but choosing words like "promulgating information" or "photographers generally in the formative stages of learning about photography in general" - but you choose these words and jargon to get attention. To rise to the top of the class by sounding like you are so smart.
This is not what helps the industry. Read my articles on PDN about my yearly state of the industry. Intimidation of this kind discourages people from enjoying photography because you make them feel stupid, when they are not. They may be beginners, but they are not an island of irrelevant gripers.
I manage people in groups. You folks are not a functioning group because of all of you out there, when I said I was going to do a visible test of two prints staying in their prospective workspaces from capture to output, while I asked many times, only one of you would go on the record and predict an AdobeRGB win. So while you may be sure what is happening in Liberia, you sure weren't confident enough to say that your wider gamut would produce noticeably better results, with the exception of one person. The rest of you called foul before I printed the test, yet your wider gamut print won! That has got to sting!
Here's another thought for you. You all know this group much better than I do. Let me ask you a question. Do you think Sony, or Lumix, or any company at all would hire this group to engineer the next innovation in color technology? Or would they hire people who are not, as Will says, "falling in love with their workflow".
"You would rightly castigate me for not telling them the truth about how one really acquires Ebola." - you are SO smart for not talking normal.