PDA

View Full Version : LFPF censorship and moderation



richardman
23-Aug-2016, 22:37
This is archived as http://richardmanphoto.com/web/LFPFcensorshipandmoderation.html

I believe the LFPF (Large Format Photography Forum) moderators have finally crossed the line into censorship. As related fallout, I now expect to be banned and this post deleted, but if that's the case, then so be it. I will have saved a copy of this post.

The original post in question is this:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?131071-Hearts-On-Our-Sleeves-Portraits-and-Stories-of-Transgender

If the thread gets deleted, it's saved as a PDF file here:
http://richardmanphoto.com/web/HeartsOnOur%20Sleeves_%20PortraitsandStoriesofTransgender.pdf

I created the original thread to post images from my 4x5 film portrait project "Hearts on Our Sleeves, Portraits and Stories of Transgender People on large format 4x5 film". The initial post was made on May 21, 2016 and currently (Aug 23, 2016) has 2800+ views. I had been posting my portraits on the forum's (Monthly) Portraits threads, but I thought that this cohesive project should stand by itself, so that when I post a new image, the viewers could see the images from the beginning if they wish.

I had received only positive comments on and off the thread since the beginning, until Aug 22nd when one person, "Kent" raised a question as to "why is a political thread in a photography forum". Note that all the image posts are accompanied by text and stories from the image subjects themselves, documenting their personal experiences. As I and several other members made replies to"Kent", eventually the moderators decided to close the thread because they seem to have deemed that it's too "political", or "controversial".

You can see for yourselves that I am not the person who introduced the subject of alleged "politics" into this. The moderators could have deleted all comments deemed political and otherwise left the thread alone; this sort of deletion is frequently done on this forum.

When I inquired whether I can post future images in the (Monthly) Portraits posts, I was informed that it would be OK, and I can even post that they are part of such and such project, but I cannot post the text that accompanies the images. Note again that all the text are descriptions from the people being photographed themselves, and not my editorial commentary.

This where I feel I have to take a stand. While I agree with the great Mary Ellen Mark that good photos can stand up without words, and I do believe this series of portraits do well enough without words, I also feel that the subject's personal stories are important to enhance the depth of understanding of the photos. The photos are of a subset of members of American society from all walks of life, not even any kind of "radical fringe group" or any organization with a specific political bent. There is nothing inherent political about these people's individual stories; there is however a current political climate which actively encourages the arbitrary demonization of various groups of people, including transgender people, that may make their personal stories appear to some to be "political".

By exercising censorship, I believe that the moderators have clearly entered into the political fray themselves. I think this is an object example of how the voices of minority groups are routinely silenced, even under the possible auspices of "good intentions".

I do not know how long this thread will last, but here I stand.

Kirk Gittings
23-Aug-2016, 23:04
FWIW, as a former moderator, I could see it coming. No surprise. They weren't picking on you. That was standard practice. It did become political. I wouldn't take it personally, but that is easy for me to say. Moderation is always censorship and as a privately owned vehicle they can and do censor. I did it too. Frankly given the rules here as they have evolved in response to the Flame Wars (before you joined) it seemed quite necessary to us and I think it has served a purpose. Moderation never makes everyone happy. Ever. Its a shitty job and you get shit whether you act or don't act or act moderately or slash and burn. I did it for 4 years and would never do it again.

However let me say personally that I learned a lot from your thread and the discussions. Thank you for posting it. Coincidentally last night, where I teach photography in New Mexico, the faculty was invited to a session on transgender sensitivity. There was a huge turnout. Art schools have somewhat been a safe haven for gays, lesbians and transgender people. It always seemed to me that they constituted a much larger percentage of the art school populations than in the general population. At both universities I teach at we have tried to be sensitive to their issues but it has frankly been muddling through with good intentions. The school I teach at in Santa Fe though has recently become more proactive with policy and education and it has been enlightening to me and others. I think there is a growing awareness and to me that is a good sign. Little steps-two steps forward and one step backwards.

Roger Thoms
23-Aug-2016, 23:06
Richard, just want to say that your Hearts on Our Sleeves, is a very moving project and I'm saddened to hear that your thread was closed. I wholeheartedly agree that the moderators have stepped over a line here. I also sincerely hope that you aren't banned. Regardless of the outcome I do hope you will continue with the project.

Roger

rdenney
23-Aug-2016, 23:41
I found that the photos were beautiful and dignified, and accomplished far more to my photographic eye than the text, which could have been linked to a separate site, as we suggested to you.

This is a photography forum, and mixed media presents a challenge to us when the non-photography part incites the kinds of discussions that we have (of necessity) prohibited. This is an incendiary topic. The one complaint you saw in the thread was not all the comment we received. I think the comments we got are running about 50-50.

But the text was so dominant in the media mix that it seemed to me to reduce those wonderful portraits to mere illustrations of it. This isn't a writing, philosophy, or even mixed-media art site, and we have to be consistent with the guidelines as best we can.

I hope you post more of the photographs, and it's okay if you link to another site where the stories can be read.

Rick "not liking this one little bit, but agreeing with the action" Denney

richardman
23-Aug-2016, 23:53
// EDITED

Sorry, I will not post the images without the text. I know it's a privilege and not a right to post in this forum, and I will not participate in this forum.

The current decision makes the forum moderators political participants, indeed, IMHO, more than I have been.

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 00:02
+1 for Richard. Sorry guys, this is certainly a misstep on the part of the moderators.

The images AND writing had absolutely no political message at all. It was images and quotes/stories from the person in the image. Any political posts were brought on by one vocal complainer in the thread and the subsequent chatter.

From where I'm sitting, it seems like the "normal" moderator action here would be to delete the political banter and steer the thread back towards civility. Instead, it was outright locked. This is a troubling escalation IMO.

As for the other comments that you all received privately - it seems like that's irrelevant. If people don't like it, they don't have to look at it. The images and text had no intrinsic political message. Richard didn't editorialize anything. His one response to a post was the only apparent infraction (and one which was still fairly apolitical), after many photos and stories were posted. It is not a stretch whatsoever to assume this was mere pretext to closing a thread.

Let's not forget that anything can be twisted to be political. Many of us shoot landscape images - if I were to include a paragraph about my trip to a National Park, am I politicizing state lands and conservation?

The right thing to do is as you have been - delete offending posts with political banter and reopen the thread. Allow Richard to post stories that are not political in nature and don't take a stance on any issue.

Randy Moe
24-Aug-2016, 01:31
We must all hang together or we hang separately.

Ben Franklin.

Darin Boville
24-Aug-2016, 01:58
Very odd that gun threads--which really weren't about photographs at all--are allowed (pretending that they aren't extremely political) but a thread on Richard's project--which is most definitely a photography project--is censored.

Obviously moderators will always bring their own political views into the mix when deciding what is political and what is not--it is unavoidable. I get that. But the high comfort level with guns and the low comfort level with sexuality is revealing.

As for images incorporated with text, you don't have to look far. Would Jim Goldberg's amazing work, Rich and Poor (https://www.google.com/search?q=jim+goldberg+rich+poor), be allowed on this forum? What about Barbara Kruger's work (https://www.google.com/search?q=barbara+kruger)?

Isn't all of Chris Jordon's work (a former member here) political? (https://www.google.com/search?q=chris+jordon+photographer) What about Edward Burtynsky's work? (https://www.google.com/search?q=edward+burtynsky). Seems overtly political to me.

Should we only allow photos here that mimic Group f/64 work? (And do we ignore the politics of *that* work when we do?)

It strikes me that the moderators have moved from equating the word "political" with "politics" to equating "political" with "issues." Photography--serious, artistic photography--is much more than trees and white porcelain and slot canyons and flowers.

If you want this forum to be a photography forum as opposed to a gear-talk forum (and it is not at all clear that you, the moderators, do) then you are going to to have to think harder about allowing photography that deals with issues.

--Darin

Pfsor
24-Aug-2016, 02:34
This isn't a writing, philosophy, or even mixed-media art site, and we have to be consistent with the guidelines as best we can.




Image Sharing (LF) & Discussion
Post your own large-format images (based on 4"x5" or larger format) for sharing and discussion.

On Photography
Discuss aesthetics, philosophy, history, photographers and photographs.

Jody_S
24-Aug-2016, 04:15
I am saddened to hear the mods closed that thread. You are correct in insisting the text accompany the images, given the subject matter it would be impossible to infer the full stories from the photographs alone. I didn't post on the thread, but it was my favorite thread on LFPF. Yes, the mods have gone too far in this instance. If some individuals have a problem with transgender folk, it's their problem and their belief that the story of a transgender person's life is somehow 'political'. Perhaps their problem is with humanizing transgender folk?

pjd
24-Aug-2016, 04:56
I just looked at the thread, I'm sorry it's been shut down.

Jim Jones
24-Aug-2016, 04:57
Photographs without words resemble reading without understanding. Photographs are the product of technology and a subject: both are important. We learn from words that broaden our understanding of the technology. Some subjects need no words for understanding. Some subjects cannot be understood without words. Richardman's photographs without words teach us little. Richardman's words without photographs have no soul.

cowanw
24-Aug-2016, 05:24
From my perspective, it may be individual discomfort with the topic is the real issue.
What niggles at me is that apparently it was Richardman's post that was the problem.

"And Richard, your comment shows why this thread needs to be closed."

Bill "having an MD, like Kent, doesn't make me right, either"

Randy Moe
24-Aug-2016, 05:31
I daresay the eyes of the world are upon this thread. We have 2000 views of this thread in 7 hours overnight in the darkness.

Peter De Smidt
24-Aug-2016, 05:31
I fully support Richard's position. He should be allowed to post his photos and text.

faberryman
24-Aug-2016, 05:43
Are we having the Mapplethorpe discussion all over again 50 years later?

Ralph Barker
24-Aug-2016, 05:50
While we appreciate the fact that the quotes from the subjects are an integral part of Richardman's mixed-media (photo + text) presentation of the project, the LFPF is a photography forum, not a forum for presenting, documenting, or discussing sociopolitical issues. There are usually strong feelings on all sides of any sociopolitical issue. The quotes from the subjects in the project, however, open the door for discussion that is outside the scope of this forum. So, while some feel not allowing the text is unfair censorship, it would be equally unfair to censor the other side of the discussion.

Thus, our decision was to stay true to the focus of this forum, just the photography.

As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork. If we were to allow one topic, we'd be obliged to allow all.

bob carnie
24-Aug-2016, 05:54
I fully support Richard's position. He should be allowed to post his photos and text.

Plus one - I was following his work and I think that in the world I participate, words are required with a series to help give context to the work.
I find this odd that the moderators would close this down . I was dropping in on his thread daily to see new images and stories.

pjd
24-Aug-2016, 06:07
As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork. If we were to allow one topic, we'd be obliged to allow all.

Joining ISIS, the Nazi party or the KKK is a conscious political / religious choice. Conflating those things with the thread in question seems unfortunate.

Peter De Smidt
24-Aug-2016, 06:18
Joining ISIS, the Nazi party or the KKK is a conscious political / religious choice. Conflating those things with the thread in question seems unfortunate.

Really unfortunate!

mdarnton
24-Aug-2016, 06:18
If anyone cares, notice that I hardly post here these days. Wonder why. . . .
The world is bad enough without having to deal with people with rectal-cranial inversion and a lick of power.
There's a fine line between respect and censorship, and IMO the mods here often don't get it. I would like to see a higher, more sensitive, quality of moderation--not necessarily none--but I doubt that will happen.

I try to find places where I'm comfortable, myself. If I'm not, I leave. Usually it's not reasonable to expect systems to change around one person's needs, and I'm fine with that.

bob carnie
24-Aug-2016, 06:21
Wow - I think this is not a good day for this forum. Richard keep up the good work and you can send updates to me on your project, I find the work compelling.

bob@bobcarnieprintmaking.ca

Pfsor
24-Aug-2016, 06:28
While we appreciate the fact that the quotes from the subjects are an integral part of Richardman's mixed-media (photo + text) presentation of the project, the LFPF is a photography forum, not a forum for presenting, documenting, or discussing sociopolitical issues.


http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?22057-Katrina-Update&highlight=katrina

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?19113-Ed-Richards-Katrina-photos&highlight=katrina

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?14683-Katrina-360-Panoramas&highlight=katrina

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?121986-Hurricane-Katrina-10-years-later&highlight=katrina

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?18748-Katrina-in-black-and-white&highlight=katrina

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 06:34
While we appreciate the fact that the quotes from the subjects are an integral part of Richardman's mixed-media (photo + text) presentation of the project, the LFPF is a photography forum, not a forum for presenting, documenting, or discussing sociopolitical issues. There are usually strong feelings on all sides of any sociopolitical issue. The quotes from the subjects in the project, however, open the door for discussion that is outside the scope of this forum. So, while some feel not allowing the text is unfair censorship, it would be equally unfair to censor the other side of the discussion.

Thus, our decision was to stay true to the focus of this forum, just the photography.

As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork. If we were to allow one topic, we'd be obliged to allow all.
Wow, I never thought I'd see the moderators of this forum equating transgender people with Nazis.

Ralph, that's just not true at all. The moderators have the ability to draw the line wherever they like, and they do, and here, we see that they have. Very disappointing. It's especially bad here because the thread was allowed to exist for three months before it was locked, so we can see clearly that the problem isn't actually the thread itself at all. As richardman said, the usual practice is to delete explicitly political posts and responses to them, and that could have been done here too. The other reason this moderator decision is especially disappointing is because, as I mentioned in a PM to Oren, it amounts to implicit support for the erasure of trans people's stories, an explicit political agenda pushed by the very person responsible for derailing the thread (Kent). This may not have been intended as a political gesture, but it is. The very existence of trans people should not have to be political (as Jody mentioned), but that's not a choice they made simply by existing. I guess that my having expressed this opinion makes this post liable for deletion, but oh well.

Just because my work rarely includes accompanying text doesn't mean that it doesn't have a fully intentional political message. If political work isn't allowed here, I won't be posting here at all.

Eric Biggerstaff
24-Aug-2016, 06:39
Lovely work and lovely words to go with it, nice job Richard.

However I see where the moderators are coming from, and they do not have an easy job to say the least in that no matter what they do someone will be ticked off. The thread was set up more as a presentation, or publication, of a photographic project (and one you should be proud of as the subject is important) which sort of blurs the line of critique, discussion, announcements, etc. It is really not even a photo sharing thread such as the "Nude" or "Alternative Process" threads out there which are really just people posting images they are proud of for the purpose of discussion or critique. Even the title of the thread sort of set it up as a publication vs. an image share.

I hope you continue the project and search for a publisher or a place to exhibit the work with the stories as it certainly demands to be seen. Perhaps we need to start a new site that is set up as a place for photographers to "publish" works such as this (regardless of format), likely there is one out there already but I just don't go out and find them. If you decide to no longer participate in the forum, well that is your choice, I wish you all the best and keep up the good work! You are heading down a path that is rarely taken, and will be the better for doing so.

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 06:45
the LFPF is a photography forum, not a forum for presenting, documenting, or discussing sociopolitical issues.

Not a forum for "presenting" or "documenting" sociopolitical issues? So now you are saying even photos can not be posted. Again, quite an escalation.

My images documenting a Trump rally should've been banned then. (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?129134-Images-from-a-Donald-Trump-rally-and-corresponding-protest)

Jmarmck
24-Aug-2016, 06:53
Like most here, I think the thread should have been left alone and the comments edited. Yes, that is more work for the moderators but it is also their purpose. I see comments deleted by moderators all the time. Why not in Richard's thread? The act of deletion is political in and of itself.

I like Eric's idea calling for a separate site but I also feel that a new board here serving the same purpose would work quite well, a board for "Published Works: Review & Comment, Note: All political comments will be removed" or something similar.

Very nice work Richard.

lecarp
24-Aug-2016, 07:03
As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork. If we were to allow one topic, we'd be obliged to allow all.

So the position of the forum is that members of the LGBT community (and forum members) are akin to Neo-Nazis, KKK or Isis. That is both insane and offensive on a level beyond my ability to describe at the moment. You have more than crossed the line, you are now probably bordering on breaking the law.
These actions and statements should be reported.
The moderators involved should be removed at the very least.

bob carnie
24-Aug-2016, 07:12
So the position of the forum is that members of the LGBT community (and forum members) are akin to Neo-Nazis, KKK or Isis. That is both insane and offensive on a level beyond my ability to describe at the moment. You have more than crossed the line, you are now probably bordering on breaking the law.
These actions and statements should be reported.
The moderators involved should be removed at the very least.

We all make bad judgement calls - I feel you are going a bit overboard - I just hope Richard will still be allowed to post his images and stories and we move on.

Chance2
24-Aug-2016, 07:13
I too was disappointed to see the thread closed and can fully understand the OP's frustration.

It might not have been a topic for everyone, but for those folks there's always the back button.

faberryman
24-Aug-2016, 07:18
Conflating the the LGBT community with Neo-Nazis, the KKK, and ISIS is beyond the pale.

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 07:18
From my perspective, it may be individual discomfort with the topic is the real issue.
What niggles at me is that apparently it was Richardman's post that was the problem.

"And Richard, your comment shows why this thread needs to be closed."

Kent's posts were problematic as well, and were factors in the decision to close the thread.

But you've neglected to reference what Richard wrote:


Dear Kent, I daresay your comments show why this project is needed. Thank you for proving its necessity.

And, later in the thread:


This project is about Transgender people. Another group with a label, and Kent is correct that a currently politically "hot-topic" label at that. They are a minority, but minorities have rights too. The Chinese Exclusions were written specifically for a minority group. Heck, 50 years ago, a Chinese person could not buy the house I am living in now, because of the community covenant. The entire group of Japanese American were treated like potential enemy of the state, etc. I can go on.

The lesson from the gay and lesbian community is that when people realize that "these people" are their neighbors, their friends, even their relatives, that's when acceptance begin. Transgender people are a minority, but they are here, they are there, they are us.

With that, Richard made clear that his agenda is fundamentally one of politico-social reform, and that he meant to promote it here and to call out those who object to it.

Richard is free to be passionate about whatever causes move him and to advocate those causes vigorously; as an artist it's his prerogative to decide that his photos and texts as indivisible parts of his work. There's nothing wrong with that! But given what he is trying to accomplish it simply means that this is not the place for this body of work. His website presents the work in full - everyone is free to view and enjoy it there.

The Forum, and we as moderators, take no position on the substantive merits of Richard's agenda or of Kent's objections to it. Everyone is free and welcome to have their own views on this and other political topics and to advocate those views vigorously in appropriate venues. This is not one of them.

Hand-to-hand combat over divisive political and social issues is highly disruptive of the purpose and functioning of this Forum. That is why it is not allowed. We are as entitled to maintain a space free of such distracting controversy as others are to seek a venue which encourages charged debate. We are sorry if that is disappointing to those who are moved by particular causes and would like to see those addressed through the photographic medium. If you feel strongly enough about that, you should create an "Activist Photographer" forum, with its rules tailored accordingly, to host such material and discuss it freely.

Ralph Barker
24-Aug-2016, 07:18
So the position of the forum is that members of the LGBT community (and forum members) are akin to Neo-Nazis, KKK or Isis. That is both insane and offensive on a level beyond my ability to describe at the moment. You have more than crossed the line, you are now probably bordering on breaking the law.
These actions and statements should be reported.
The moderators involved should be removed at the very least.

You're obviously missing the point. I'm not equating anyone to anyone else, but rather saying that the other topics would require similar treatment.

Pfsor
24-Aug-2016, 07:21
So the position of the forum is that members of the LGBT community (and forum members) are akin to Neo-Nazis, KKK or Isis. That is both insane and offensive on a level beyond my ability to describe at the moment. You have more than crossed the line, you are now probably bordering on breaking the law.
These actions and statements should be reported.


Indeed. Feel free to report the thread to any LBGT community organization that deals with these issues. It's appealing how far the comparison goes!

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 07:22
You're obviously missing the point. I'm not equating anyone to anyone else, but rather saying that the other topics would require similar treatment.

No, they wouldn't. That's your choice, and it is absolutely a political one.

Fr. Mark
24-Aug-2016, 07:22
I come here much more for technical or how to information than anything else except maybe a bit of social/club membership reminder that I'm not the only one lugging around almost 100 pounds of LFP gear. I think I found this forum after someone gave me a press camera and I wanted to know how to load film holders in the dark and its escalated from there. I do look at some of the photo sharing threads from time to time, too, and your work collectively is very inspiring to me even if I would never make pictures that resemble most of what I see.

I looked at this thread that caused this controversy, until I figured out what it was. I don't support LGBTQ agenda, there are both religious and scientific reasons for my position but I've seldom/never found it effective to get into that line of argumentation on line. So, upon being presented with a "hearts on sleeves thread" I had a look, realized it was a promotional piece for something I know to be misguided and went somewhere else with my time.

Given the preponderance of support in most artistic communities for doing things shocking and new and counter cultural I did not waste my time complaining about it.

That said, if the nudes thread was labeled some other way where it wasn't obvious what it was, it could get clicks from people who believe that people should keep their clothes on except for intimate relations with the person (singular) of the opposite sex to whom they are married and might inadvertently offend people. As it is, labeled as it is, the nudes thread is relatively safe and doesn't draw a firestorm of controversy as far as I know. Similarly, we have a "lounge" section where things are less restrictive etc.

So, I tend to think here that a bit of truth in advertising could've avoided escalating this situation.

Also, folks, we are adults. It's a fallen world. There will be people who have well considered (at least in their minds) reasons for holding positions contrary to yours. This does not make them non-human or stupid (those aren't synonymous). Nor is it particularly effective to hurl invective at them to try to change their positions. Can we all take a deep breath and exhale slowly while backing away from the edge of the cliff?

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 07:26
While we appreciate the fact that the quotes from the subjects are an integral part of Richardman's mixed-media (photo + text) presentation of the project, the LFPF is a photography forum, not a forum for presenting, documenting, or discussing sociopolitical issues. There are usually strong feelings on all sides of any sociopolitical issue. The quotes from the subjects in the project, however, open the door for discussion that is outside the scope of this forum. So, while some feel not allowing the text is unfair censorship, it would be equally unfair to censor the other side of the discussion.

Thus, our decision was to stay true to the focus of this forum, just the photography.

As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork. If we were to allow one topic, we'd be obliged to allow all.

Climate change is a hot button issue when will you be adding photos of; cars, trees, mines of any kind, fires, plastic, people, roads, stores, and air to the list of banned subjects? Thank you in advance for your learned and not at all personally biased response.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 07:26
Hand-to-hand combat over divisive political and social issues is highly disruptive of the purpose and functioning of this Forum. That is why it is not allowed.

Great, so just delete the posts that involve "hand-to-hand combat."

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 07:30
So the position of the forum is that members of the LGBT community (and forum members) are akin to Neo-Nazis, KKK or Isis.

Ralph said no such thing. He talked about projects, not people. If someone tried to use the Forum as a platform to promote a pictures-with-text project about gun rights under siege that would be shut down too.

This is an example of why political threads are a problem. Once people's hot buttons, whatever they are, get pushed, it becomes impossible to see clearly.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 07:31
Ralph said no such thing. He talked about projects, not people. If someone tried to use the Forum as a platform to promote a pictures-with-text project about gun rights under siege that would be shut down too.

This is an example of why political threads are a problem. Once people's hot buttons, whatever they are, get pushed, it becomes impossible to see clearly.

Look at all these people getting fired up over human rights, weird.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 07:32
I looked at this thread that caused this controversy, until I figured out what it was. I don't support LGBTQ agenda, there are both religious and scientific reasons for my position but I've seldom/never found it effective to get into that line of argumentation on line. So, upon being presented with a "hearts on sleeves thread" I had a look, realized it was a promotional piece for something I know to be misguided and went somewhere else with my time.

And this is why the thread shouldn't have been locked: reasonable people can decide to move on when they disagree with a political agenda, or what they perceive as one. The thread is clearly labeled. Posts that instigate open political warfare can be deleted.


Given the preponderance of support in most artistic communities for doing things shocking and new and counter cultural I did not waste my time complaining about it.

All art is political. It's becoming clear to me that this is actually a forum for gear chat, not art.


Ralph said no such thing. He talked about projects, not people. If someone tried to use the Forum as a platform to promote a pictures-with-text project about gun rights under siege that would be shut down too.

This is an example of why political threads are a problem. Once people's hot buttons, whatever they are, get pushed, it becomes impossible to see clearly.

Lack of text doesn't make an artistic subject political or not.

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 07:36
Once people's hot buttons, whatever they are, get pushed, it becomes impossible to see clearly.

Explicit political statements (with pictures) about guns/2nd amendment rights are not the same thing as pictures of people with a couple of paragraphs of their personal life story.

Again, I am confused why the overt political posts and arguing was not simply deleted rather than the thread being locked, and I also don't think the life story of anyone is automatically political. The hot-button issue here IMO is unfortunately the moderation.

pjd
24-Aug-2016, 07:39
Really unfortunate!

Well, yes. I'm fond of understatement, though it looks a bit odd on internet forums ;)

I like your quote from President Dale.

FredrickSummers
24-Aug-2016, 07:43
I hate to hear about your thread being locked! I don't think I ever replied to it, but I often don't, though I did browse it frequently and check updates. The stories that went along with it is what really made the portraits as well, and I really hate to hear that this will not be allowed because apparently people are unable to keep their mouth shut if they don't agree with anything and turn everything into a politcal BS. I also strongly disagree with the moderation decision. I am new here, but do a great deal of searching and think that the moderation is a bit out of hand on this board, and I have used various boards like this for many years.

I frequently find threads with information that get "moded to death" and eventually locked because of a few trouble makers, but then other threads that it is largely ignored.

bloodhoundbob
24-Aug-2016, 08:11
FACT: There was nothing political about the photos and the subjects' comments until Kent decided to politicize it. Richard's response to him was very measured and reasonable, IMO. How unfortunate that one disgruntled individual has been allowed to disrupt a beautiful thread.

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 08:39
The other reason this moderator decision is especially disappointing is because, as I mentioned in a PM to Oren, it amounts to implicit support for the erasure of trans people's stories, an explicit political agenda pushed by the very person responsible for derailing the thread (Kent). This may not have been intended as a political gesture, but it is.


All art is political.

We reject both the conclusion and the premise. But we're not going to argue the philosophical point.

This is not an art forum. It's a discuss-materials-and-methods forum, with picture sharing as a valued auxiliary feature. People's motivations in making the pictures they post don't concern us as moderators, so long as the posting doesn't cause inordinate grief. If it does, then as with the FS/WTB sections, we will do what we need to do to prevent the auxiliary functions from derailing the core ones.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 08:52
We reject both the conclusion and the premise. But we're not going to argue the philosophical point.

This is not an art forum. It's a discuss-materials-and-methods forum, with picture sharing as a valued auxiliary feature. People's motivations in making the pictures they post don't concern us as moderators, so long as the posting doesn't cause inordinate grief. If it does, then as with the FS/WTB sections, we will do what we need to do to prevent the auxiliary functions from derailing the core ones.

Maybe you should just shut down the image sharing section entirely? Close every thread that isn't strictly about materials or methods. Your excuses for poor moderation are causing me inordinate grief perhaps you should delete your own posts? I'm glad you are here looking out for your own personal agenda at the expense of the members of this site.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 08:53
We reject both the conclusion and the premise. But we're not going to argue the philosophical point.

This is not an art forum. It's a discuss-materials-and-methods forum, with picture sharing as a valued auxiliary feature. People's motivations in making the pictures they post don't concern us as moderators, so long as the posting doesn't cause inordinate grief. If it does, then as with the FS/WTB sections, we will do what we need to do to prevent the auxiliary functions from derailing the core ones.

If posting photos isn't a core feature, then you clearly don't need to worry about discussion of it derailing core features. Make up your mind and be consistent.

Or is the issue actually that Richard's subjects make you, personally, uncomfortable?

Vaughn
24-Aug-2016, 08:56
I am disappointed in this action by the moderators.

I still support the work of our moderators, but mistakes have been made and to err is human.

note...edited to show that I still appreciate our moderators.

mdarnton
24-Aug-2016, 08:59
This is not an art forum. It's a discuss-materials-and-methods forum, with picture sharing as a valued auxiliary feature. . . . .we will do what we need to do to prevent the auxiliary functions from derailing the core ones.

May I point out that this is patently false as long as the Lounge exists. Given the presence of the lounge, this type of subject should at least be open to discussion. In point of fact, I just went through the site FAQ and found absolutely nothing to justify many of the actions the moderators have taken recently to maintain an imagined forum "purity".

If you don't like it, I suggest a change of rules that more clearly supports the moderators' currently-arbitrary actions. . . . or better, a wholesale change of moderators. It seems that when a number of people are complaining, there might be a problem. Certainly I see almost no support in this thread for the moderators' stance. Perhaps there's a message there that should be heard?

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 09:15
Let me contribute with my view as a US foreigner.

I'm in Catalonia, Spain, near Barcelona...

Here nobody would consider that was about "politics". Also here there is no debate about if a student can bring a .44 magnum Desert Eagle to a University Campus.

So what it is politics or not it depends on location.

To us U.S. looks contradictory, a child can enjoy viewing how Dirty Harry blows away the head of somebody but a femenine nipple it is a major concern.


Well... if something generates too much controversy then perhaps better to close the thread, but tolerance it is a great thing, if one is a puritan and do not like Transgender issues he can enjoy other threads, at the end it was a separated thread that says "Portraits and Stories of Transgender". Are you a puritan ?? then don't click on Transgender !


Then we all have to realize that moderation it cannot be perfect, mistakes are possible, and we all have to accept that sometimes that is to happen. Also there is no reason to get very angry about it.

A better way is to discus it with the moderator, and see what the limits are, and how they can be improved. Was the text the problem because this site is not about histories? then post the photos and also post a link to the histories.


I think Kent was wrong, and I also think Richard should understand that moderation is not perfect and, with calm, he can discuss about it with moderator.


Also... nice photographs !!

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 09:25
May I point out that this is patently false as long as the Lounge exists. Given the presence of the lounge, this type of subject should at least be open to discussion. In point of fact, I just went through the site FAQ and found absolutely nothing to justify many of the actions the moderators have taken recently to maintain an imagined forum "purity".

If you don't like it, I suggest a change of rules that more clearly supports the moderators' currently-arbitrary actions. . . . or better, a wholesale change of moderators. It seems that when a number of people are complaining, there might be a problem. Certainly I see almost no support in this thread for the moderators' stance. Perhaps there's a message there that should be heard?


My view... what Oren says it is the key: "This is not an art forum. It's a discuss-materials-and-methods forum, with picture sharing as a valued auxiliary feature" .

Lounge it is intended for threads that do not fit in "discuss-materials-and-methods" arena.

Perhaps a possibility was to move the thread to the Lounge...

lecarp
24-Aug-2016, 09:38
I am disappointed in this action by the moderators.

I still support the work of our moderators, but mistakes have been made and to err is human.

note...edited to show that I still appreciate our moderators.

Yes to err is human. However continuing to justify the mistake takes it to another level.

Sal Santamaura
24-Aug-2016, 09:59
...I see almost no support in this thread for the moderators' stance. Perhaps there's a message there that should be heard?The message that should be heard from my silence until this point is that I'm weary of those complainers who think they, rather than the site's owner and his agents, ought make and enforce its rules. I'm tired of them not going off and founding their own anarchic forums to discuss all the "art" (whatever they decide the word means) they want.

In other words, support for moderators' decisions in threads like this garners only accusations of sucking up. So I've remained part of the 'silent majority' who stay out of the bitch fests until it seems our absence is being used as a cudgel against the moderators.

For the record, I neither participated in the subject locked thread nor used the "Report Post" function in connection with it.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 10:06
The message that should be heard from my silence until this point is that I'm weary of those complainers who think they, rather than the site's owner and his agents, ought make and enforce its rules. I'm tired of them not going off and founding their own anarchic forums to discuss all the "art" (whatever they decide the word means) they want.

In other words, support for moderators' decisions in threads like this garners only accusations of sucking up. So I've remained part of the 'silent majority' who stay out of the bitch fests until it seems our absence is being used as a cudgel against the moderators.

For the record, I neither participated in the subject locked thread nor used the "Report Post" function in connection with it.

Nice contribution, I'm sure all the things you silently support appreciate your staunch approval of them. For the record, I'm not accusing you of sucking up I'm accusing you of being spineless.

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 10:07
Do you have any proof that a "silent majority" are for (or against) moderator actions??

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 10:09
Do you have any proof that a "silent majority" are for (or against) moderator actions??

Or are even aware that a thread might be locked on a whim because the subject of their photographs is deemed "too inflammatory" for that matter.

Sal Santamaura
24-Aug-2016, 10:12
...support for moderators' decisions in threads like this garners only accusations of sucking up...


...I'm not accusing you of sucking up I'm accusing you of being spineless.And other ad hominem attacks.

jnanian
24-Aug-2016, 10:17
sorry to see the thread locked - they were really nice portraits and stories
something some photographers can do, and do well ...
that said, i understand why it was closed. it wasn't hard to see it coming on the last page.


And this is why the thread shouldn't have been locked: reasonable people can decide to move on when they disagree with a political agenda, or what they perceive as one. The thread is clearly labeled. Posts that instigate open political warfare can be deleted.

All art is political. It's becoming clear to me that this is actually a forum for gear chat, not art.

Lack of text doesn't make an artistic subject political or not.

part of the problem is that sometimes reasonable people do not move-on, they grind an axe, they cause trouble, they stir a pot.
i am guessing the moderators got "heads up of potential problems " messages about the thread
and it was fine until the OP made the statement that it was a political thread, knowing or not knowing they are frowned upon on this forum
because in the past there were problems with political threads ... and it was unpleasant for most people who logged on,
or who searched using google to find some sort of large format information, and they were greeted with hotheads baiting and arguing...
i am guessing that if the OP ignored kent's post and didn't say anything in response the moderators might have
continued to monitor the posts and the thread might still be open, because while it seemed like a political thread, it was not overtly political.
==
regarding all art being political with or without text ...
i don't make political art, i don't attempt to, and if someone wants
to claim some sort of political subtext about what i do, i will
tell them they are wrong.

Sal Santamaura
24-Aug-2016, 10:17
Do you have any proof that a "silent majority" are for (or against) moderator actions??Count the number of posters in this thread complaining. Compare to the total number of members. Reach you own conclusion.


Or are even aware that a thread might be locked on a whim because the subject of their photographs is deemed "too inflammatory" for that matter.First, your premise is flawed. The thread was stated to have been locked because of the text accompanying its photographs, not the photographs themselves.

Second, the thread was stated to have been locked because of complaints and the moderator workload dealing with such things entails. That's consistent with moderator explanations in similar previous complaint threads and by no stretch "a whim."

bloodhoundbob
24-Aug-2016, 10:18
Do you have any proof that a "silent majority" are for (or against) moderator actions??

"Silent Majority"? Hmmm seems like I remember a famous person using that term. Oh, yes, it was Dick Nixon in 1969. Spooky.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 10:18
The message that should be heard from my silence until this point is that I'm weary of those complainers who think they, rather than the site's owner and his agents, ought make and enforce its rules. I'm tired of them not going off and founding their own anarchic forums to discuss all the "art" (whatever they decide the word means) they want.

In other words, support for moderators' decisions in threads like this garners only accusations of sucking up. So I've remained part of the 'silent majority' who stay out of the bitch fests until it seems our absence is being used as a cudgel against the moderators.

For the record, I neither participated in the subject locked thread nor used the "Report Post" function in connection with it.

The issue is that the rules are applied unevenly in a way that exhibits bias. Also, what makes you think your view is shared by the majority? You're right that silence isn't agreement, but you stray from the mark after that.

richardman
24-Aug-2016, 10:19
So Oren uses "my words" as justifications. I call BS. Even in what I wrote, I did not call for Transgender Rights or anything political like that. I present MY CASE as to why I photograph the subjects.

And there are plenty of threads where moderators delete multiple replies in a row. This is what should have been done.

And to mention Nazi and KKK are the "same issue" further shows the moderators' true colors.

As for "unexpected" thread, the TITLE of the thread clearly says what it is. If the browser or the app you use does not display it, I have tried my best.

Look in the mirror, if the images do not make you uncomfortable, but their stories do, then ask yourself why.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 10:21
The moderators make me uncomfortable.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 10:22
I wonder what would happen if photographs of the people in Richard's thread were posted in the Nudes thread - without words, even?

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 10:28
Climate change is a hot button issue when will you be adding photos of; cars, trees, mines of any kind, fires, plastic, people, roads, stores, and air to the list of banned subjects? Thank you in advance for your learned and not at all personally biased response.

We've never had a problem with photography--this is a photography forum. The photos are welcome. Personally, I thought they made the desired point here all by themselves.

Rick "wondering if we are photographers" Denney

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 10:35
Count the number of posters in this thread complaining. Compare to the total number of members. Reach you own conclusion.

There is absolutely no correlation between how many posts are made vs. how many members are active or look at a thread and whether or not they agree! To even suggest such a thing is appallingly dense.

In twelve hours we are approaching 7,000 views - despite the forum software saying we only have 3,000 "active" members and about 750 members online right now. Many of those views are probably the same people reading multiple pages or coming back but for the thousands of others who are passive readers, you assign them opinions based on your own??

Your bias is obvious here. I don't think you are sucking up but I do think you are as guilty as anyone to wanting the forum run the way you want it run.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 10:35
We've never had a problem with photography--this is a photography forum. The photos are welcome. Personally, I thought they made the desired point here all by themselves.

Rick "wondering if we are photographers" Denney

With the "Hearts on our Sleeves" thread having been open without incident for three months and with Richard having made actually political comments about certain subjects in his sci-fi portraits series, you can see how we might have thought the words that accompany the photos were welcome, too.

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 10:37
I wonder what would happen if photographs of the people in Richard's thread were posted in the Nudes thread - without words, even?

The pictures without words would be fine in a "Portraits" thread. We've said as much, but Richard's view is that for his purposes the parts are inseparable. That's fine; we respect his decision not to post if he cannot do it in exactly the way he wants.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 10:37
We've never had a problem with photography--this is a photography forum. The photos are welcome. Personally, I thought they made the desired point here all by themselves.

Rick "wondering if we are photographers" Denney

Sorry but the official position of the forum staff is that photographs are an unintended side effect of the materials-and-methods used to create photographs. Photographs are not welcome, they are auxiliary.

Sal Santamaura
24-Aug-2016, 10:39
Count the number of posters in this thread complaining. Compare to the total number of members. Reach you own conclusion.
...


...To even suggest such a thing is appallingly dense...Yet more ad hominem.

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 10:42
No Sal it's simply the truth. Do you truly think that thousands and thousands of views and hundreds of currently online members are in agreement with the moderators? If so, speak up.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 10:46
The pictures without words would be fine in a "Portraits" thread. We've said as much, but Richard's view is that for his purposes the parts are inseparable. That's fine; we respect his decision not to post if he cannot do it in exactly the way he wants.

That wasn't the question I asked.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 10:47
Sal is the only one brave enough to speak out. I'm sure he takes solace in the thousands of people who wordlessly agree with him.

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 10:50
That wasn't the question I asked.

Then I'm not sure what question you're asking. If they're not nudes, they don't belong in a "nudes" thread. What is the issue?

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 10:52
Then I'm not sure what question you're asking. If they're not nudes, they don't belong in a "nudes" thread. What is the issue?

I question whether the moderation of this forum is applied evenly to all subjects.

Sal Santamaura
24-Aug-2016, 10:55
...In other words, support for moderators' decisions in threads like this garners only accusations of sucking up. So I've remained part of the 'silent majority' who stay out of the bitch fests until it seems our absence is being used as a cudgel against the moderators...


No Sal it's simply the truth...No, it's an ad hominem attack against someone with whom you disagree.


...Do you truly think that thousands and thousands of views and hundreds of currently online members are in agreement with the moderators? If so, speak up.I've not noticed a propensity for members here to withhold their opinions when new subject matter is discussed. That so many have viewed this thread and not posted is a pretty good indication that they're just as tired as I am of complaints about the moderators and disgusted with repetitious feedback threads like this one.

Other than a small subset who want things their way in someone else's "home," yes, I think the membership is in general agreement with the moderators.

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 10:57
I question whether the moderation of this forum is applied evenly to all subjects.

We apply it as best we can, and sometimes, inevitably, we will make mistakes or encounter hard cases that necessarily result in debatable judgment calls. We will never achieve perfect consistency, nor will there ever be universal agreement here as to what that would consist of.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 10:58
No, it's an ad hominem attack against someone with whom you disagree.

I've not noticed a propensity for members here to withhold their opinions when new subject matter is discussed. That so many have viewed this thread and not posted is a pretty good indication that they're just as tired as I am of complaints about the moderators and disgusted with repetitious feedback threads like this one.

Other than a small subset who want things their way in someone else's "home," yes, I think the membership is in general agreement with the moderators.

A post can simultaneously have ad hominem and point out that you're wrong. The two aren't mutually exclusive. And as Corran, 8thsamurai, and even yourself have posted, silence isn't assent.

DonJ
24-Aug-2016, 11:00
I've not noticed a propensity for members here to withhold their opinions when new subject matter is discussed. That so many have viewed this thread and not posted is a pretty good indication that they're just as tired as I am of complaints about the moderators and disgusted with repetitious feedback threads like this one.

It's at least equally likely that they agree with the opinions expressed by the majority who have already posted to the thread, and have nothing original to add. Your assumption that the silent ones must agree with you is baseless and a bit strange.

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 11:05
Yep - in fact I would say it's more likely they agree with the premise of the thread, and therefore do not feel the need to post as many already have. Sal, regardless of whether or not "dense" is an ad hom, your post is still baseless conjecture at best.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 11:06
No, it's an ad hominem attack against someone with whom you disagree.

I've not noticed a propensity for members here to withhold their opinions when new subject matter is discussed. That so many have viewed this thread and not posted is a pretty good indication that they're just as tired as I am of complaints about the moderators and disgusted with repetitious feedback threads like this one.

Other than a small subset who want things their way in someone else's "home," yes, I think the membership is in general agreement with the moderators.

Actually for it to be an ad hominem attack he would have had to insult you instead of refuting your argument not in addition to insulting you. I've noticed a propensity for appallingly dense people to misuse logical fallacies when their argument isn't quite panning out. I think you'll find most people on this forum agree with me regarding your lack of capacity to effectively argue your points based on the fact that none of them have said anything at all on the subject.

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 11:06
Folks, let's not waste energy on speculating about what the "silent majority" thinks about what has been said in this thread. My own view is that since they haven't spoken, I don't know what they think.

Please keep your comments focused on any issues specifically raised by Richard's thread and/or our handling of it.

MrDespair
24-Aug-2016, 11:12
Speaking as a member of the silent majority, I'm disgusted and appalled by the bigotry and hate shown by members of this forum and it's moderation. The thread shouldn't have been closed in the first place, and seeing comments such as this:



As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork. If we were to allow one topic, we'd be obliged to allow all.

make me ashamed that I ever bothered making an account on this forum in the first place.

Sal Santamaura
24-Aug-2016, 11:21
A post can simultaneously have ad hominem and point out that you're wrong...That one simultaneously contained ad hominem and expressed an opinion that I was wrong. The latter is acceptable; the former is not.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 11:27
That one simultaneously contained ad hominem and expressed an opinion that I was wrong. The latter is acceptable; the former is not.

It's appallingly dense to think that any refutation of your obviously flawed logic is simply an opinion.

Sal Santamaura
24-Aug-2016, 11:27
...someone with whom you disagree...


It's at least equally likely that they agree with the opinions expressed by the majority who have already posted to the thread, and have nothing original to add...I disagree. In my opinion, that condition is much less likely.


...Your assumption that the silent ones must agree with you is baseless and a bit strange.I base it on observing the behavior of this forum's membership daily since 1998. And I never claimed all "silent ones" agree, only that a majority probably do.

Why do you feel it necessary to attack others' opinions as "strange" just because you don't agree with them?

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 11:28
You can tell based on this research paper that thousands of people didn't write.

dukeku
24-Aug-2016, 11:29
Why do you feel the need to put words in the mouths of people who aren't actively posting in this thread, Sal? Not every member navigates into the feedback forum to keep up, but that doesn't suddenly make you an expert on those who aren't actively involved in the discussion.

The world has changed quite a bit since 1998, I'm surprised you think your observations of an internet community from over a decade ago are still relevant today, and especially in this thread.

Sal Santamaura
24-Aug-2016, 11:30
It's appallingly dense...With nothing more to offer than a different opinion, you fall back on ad hominem.

OK, that's enough for me. Let our apparently masochistic moderators be the ones to continue dealing with these attacks. I cannot fathom why they volunteer for such abuse.

bloodhoundbob
24-Aug-2016, 11:34
With nothing more to offer than a different opinion, you fall back on ad hominem.

OK, that's enough for me. Let our apparently masochistic moderators be the ones to continue dealing with these attacks. I cannot fathom why they volunteer for such abuse.

The only one who has been truly abused on here is Richard.

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 11:35
It's telling when you don't respond to two fresh posters refuting your "opinion" which put words in their mouth. But, moving on:

It seems the moderators have circled the wagon here. I thought it at least possible that an admission of slight overreach could happen, with a concurrent deletion of any overtly political posts and reinstatement of the thread (as well as allowing the project images and non-political life stories to be posted). But I guess that's not happening.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 11:38
I cannot fathom why ...

This is probably due to the previously mentioned appalling denseness and lack of faculty for making logical assumptions. Maybe another 18 years of intense study of the posting daily habits of this forum will help you out, see you in 2034 Sal.

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 11:43
I think that moderation deserves a respect.

One can think that a mistake is there or that things could be done in an other way, but moderation is necessary.

The important thing it is not if it is perfect or not, but that it works.

There is no reason to get angry because this. Moderation has a lot of tolerance with us a lot of times, we also have to tolerate some possible mistakes, and perhaps those are not mistakes, it depends on interpretation.

Somebody has the role to interpret the rules, let's him do it. Let's argue our opinion, but let me repeat it: moderation deserves a respect.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 11:47
I think that moderation deserves a respect.

One can think that a mistake is there or that things could be done in an other way, but moderation is necessary.

The important thing it is not if it is perfect or not, but that it works.

There is no reason to get angry becfause this. Moderation has a lot of tolerance with us a lot of times, we also have to tolerate some possible mistakes, it is a hard job.

Making mistakes is natural. Doubling down on them is stubbornness.

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 12:01
Making mistakes is natural. Doubling down on them is stubbornness.


It is not about stubbornness, a consistent criterion is there to interpret rules.

If you don't like that criterion you have a choice: in Site Forums / Feedback you can open a thread about a moderation rule and to discuss it there.

For sure that if enough users agree moderation has to end considering it.

This forum is about materials and methods, not about art. This is about sharing knowledge and discussing that. For the rest there is the Lounge. That's very clear.

I undesrtand that posting portrais here (Lounge excluded) it is not about art, it's about showing technical LF results, or techno-artistic LF results.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 12:04
This forum is about materials and methods, not about art.

Then why do the image sharing subforums exist? Even if the forum were truly solely about "techno-artistic LF results" we're discussing a case in which the words affect the viewer's relationship to or assessment of the results.

edit: you forgot another option people have: don't contribute to forums where the moderation is arbitrary and capricious.

Taija71A
24-Aug-2016, 12:10
Dear Kent, I daresay your comments show why this project is needed. Thank you for proving its necessity.


Every photography project has an "agenda", that's usually part of the so called Artist Statement.

When a label is applied to a person, naturally we would have ASSUMPTIONS about that person. For example, I am Chinese-American, immigrated from Hong Kong. If someone sees me, a good number of the people would immediately form some kind of opinions about me just from their fact. (or if I am labelled "large format photographer", no doubt that may form an image to some people as well etc.)

I am currently doing three portrait projects. The first one is about costumers/cosplayers, and aims to show that these people are just like anyone else, they are just very dedicated to their craft. Yes, some of them spend THOUSANDS of hours on a particular project etc. but in the end, they are just human being.

This project is about Transgender people. Another group with a label, and Kent is correct that a currently politically "hot-topic" label at that. They are a minority, but minorities have rights too. The Chinese Exclusions were written specifically for a minority group. Heck, 50 years ago, a Chinese person could not buy the house I am living in now, because of the community covenant. The entire group of Japanese American were treated like potential enemy of the state, etc. I can go on.

The lesson from the gay and lesbian community is that when people realize that "these people" are their neighbors, their friends, even their relatives, that's when acceptance begin. Transgender people are a minority, but they are here, they are there, they are us.

Finally, as other people observed, those are not "my writing", but their words. If the words have meaning to you, that's because of their personal stories.

Thank you.

As soon as the above cited comments were stated...
The OP crossed 'The Thin Red Line' -- With his hidden "Agenda".


And Richard, your comment shows why this thread needs to be closed. This is not the place for debating social change agendas.

Correct.

+1 for 'Moderator Intervention'...
Before the Thread escalated any further. Thank-you!

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 12:12
Then why do the image sharing subforums exist? Even if the forum were truly solely about "techno-artistic LF results" we're discussing a case in which the words affect the viewer's relationship to or assessment of the results.

The forum title it says:

Forum: Image Sharing (LF) & Discussion
Post your own large-format images (based on 4"x5" or larger format) for sharing and discussion. Critiques should only be offered if requested by the original poster.


Techno-artistic it is not "poetry-artistic".

DOF, Bokeh, Contrast, microcontrast and Lp/mm are techno-artistic discussion, the story behind the subject is "poetry-artistic", and this is for the Lounge.


Personally, for me, that "poetry" is nice and I like it...


To me it is clear. Anyway if some people think that explaining the subject history is good then it may be debated...

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 12:12
As soon as the following comments were stated...

The OP crossed 'The Thin Red Line' -- With his hidden "Agenda".

His "hidden agenda" that minorities are people, congrats you caught him.

Jmarmck
24-Aug-2016, 12:18
I actually think that this whole situation is a good thing. It is letting the moderators know what the peoples of this forum think. Be glad that we can express our opinions about the moderation. There are many places where such a discussion would not be permitted.

I do have one question on allowable subject matter. Kock et. al. are trying to get permits to mine uranium from the regions around Grand Canyon. Would such a subject be open for discussion? I do believe that denying such a topic such as the preservation of the very subject matter of many photographers is extremely important and warrants some attention on this site. Is that viewed as a political topic? If it is not then I would state that Richard should be allowed to post the thread.

Kevin Harding
24-Aug-2016, 12:18
I come to this forum because there are occasionally substantive discussions about the practice of photography and not merely its materials or gear. I'm tired of photo forums where all activity is discussion about gear and gear and gear. I've learned about people's approaches, thoughts towards their work, and have learned about other communities and parts of the world though text attached to photos that are being shared in addition to discussions about technique, practice, and materials. LFPF has always had a good balance, in my mind.

That aside, this quote bothers me:

As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork. If we were to allow one topic, we'd be obliged to allow all.

No one obliges you to "show all" subjects. In fact, in some jurisdictions, showing off the handiwork of groups officially listed as terrorists may be considered under the law as aiding and abetting them. This argument that Ralph has made is specious at best and offensive to our collective intelligence at worst.

Richard's photos showcase an historically disadvantaged group. There's a need in our society to hear stories from disadvantaged groups. White supremacists, however, are not disadvantaged groups - and they don't need a platform here. But to suggest that opening the door to story sharing such as Richards must open the door to sharing the photos of ISIS is ridiculous. Does the same go if someone were to share a series of portraits of feminist activists? Would that series not be opening the door? I'm building a body of work about Chinatown in my city, which was an ethnic enclave when Asians were not permitted to own other property. Does that open the door?

I can appreciate that the forum is privately owned and operated and its operators may decide the content rules. I may decide to go elsewhere. I can appreciate different viewpoints, too, like Fr. Mark who would prefer not to engage in a thread such as Richard's, much like I would probably not prefer to engage in a thread about the intricacies of a Catholic church. To a degree, we must each allow the other their own - but we also must not engage in ridiculous ad absurdum argumentation.

Poor Richard. Poor us.

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 12:18
This is not an art forum. It's a discuss-materials-and-methods forum, with picture sharing as a valued auxiliary feature.

Dude. Really? Where is that in the guidelines? Of what point is all the tech stuff if not in the pursuit of art? Maybe that is just my preoccupation but I sincerely doubt it.

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 12:19
It seems the moderators have circled the wagon here. I thought it at least possible that an admission of slight overreach could happen, with a concurrent deletion of any overtly political posts and reinstatement of the thread (as well as allowing the project images and non-political life stories to be posted). But I guess that's not happening.

We've thought about it, and are still thinking about it. I don't know where we will end up. Most likely we'll stand where we are. Conceivably somebody could say something that will change our minds; accusing us of bigotry isn't going to do it, though. Indeed, the overall tenor of the reaction tends to reaffirm our fears that certain kinds of topics bring out the worst in people and are way more trouble then they are worth to try to manage.

Vaughn
24-Aug-2016, 12:22
I think that moderation deserves a respect...

Nicely stated, Pere. Thank you.

Besides the name-calling that Sal pretty much predicted, the only real disturbing comment (my opinion, of course) made so far was based on religious bigotry...that apparently went un-noticed by most. So it goes.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 12:22
Oren, the overall tenor of your response reaffirms my fears that this is not a welcoming place for photographs that touch on anything that anybody might politicize and that I shouldn't bother posting on this forum at all.

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 12:23
I think that here there is a bad cocktail.

Trans civil rights vs puritanism is confused with Materials&Methods vs Lounge&Art

Taija71A
24-Aug-2016, 12:24
His "hidden agenda" that minorities are people, congrats you caught him.

As has already been so eloquently stated elsewhere:

"This is not the place for debating social change agendas."

Thank-you!

Corran
24-Aug-2016, 12:26
the overall tenor of the reaction tends to reaffirm our fears that certain kinds of topics bring out the worst in people

Thank you for at least considering it. However I would like to point out that I think the majority of these posts were not incited by Richard's thread - instead, they are a response to the moderation taken towards that thread. Hence my questions regarding deletion of the offending posts that brought overt political discussion into the thread. As Richard and others have pointed out - the thread was left alone for something like 3 months with no issues. This should clearly indicate that something changed, not that something was wrong to begin with. I would also point out my thread on the Trump rally as a clear example of a thread steeped in politics but which was not closed and has plenty of non-political posts (after some initial chatter as you know).

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 12:28
I come to this forum because there are occasionally substantive discussions about the practice of photography and not merely its materials or gear. I'm tired of photo forums where all activity is discussion about gear and gear and gear.

Me too. I'm sorry to see this forum is just another one of those after all.

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 12:28
RHITMrB, I'm not a tenor, I'm baritone... in fact I'm a modest opera singer...

Don't get angry... life is nice.

Just post art and poetry in the Lounge and technical knowledge in the LF forum... not that difficult

Jmarmck
24-Aug-2016, 12:30
We've thought about it, and are still thinking about it. I don't know where we will end up. Most likely we'll stand where we are. Conceivably somebody could say something that will change our minds; accusing us of bigotry isn't going to do it, though. Indeed, the overall tenor of the reaction tends to reaffirm our fears that certain kinds of topics bring out the worst in people and are way more trouble then they are worth to try to manage.

Then consider this. The motivation of the entities put forth all based on hate (or fear however you may see it). These are often labels that members CHOOSE to have put to themselves.
Most people I know hate labels, particularly those LGBT community (and I apologize for using that label) are not motivated by hate or fear. They are just people who are seeking nothing more than to be treated as equals, just like anyone or minority. I would suggest that there is huge difference between the two and one should not be treated as the other.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 12:30
As was already so eloquently stated elsewhere:

"This is not the place for debating social change agendas."

Thank-you!

Then the moderators shouldn't take actions that push an agenda.

richardman
24-Aug-2016, 12:33
I would like every moderator to answer the question:

Why are people's stories make them uncomfortable.

And Ralph a specific response to his statement about Nazis and KKK and my images.

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 12:35
Me too. I'm sorry to see this forum is just another one of those after all.

Oh... it is not about "gear only"...

I've been learning a lot here, this is not about gear:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?132280-Adox-CMS-20-Slides-what-bleaching-chem

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?132285-TMY-film-and-Xtol-developer

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?120629-Poll-Tmax400-(TMY-2)-vs-Tri-X-Pro-(320TXP)-which-do-you-favor-more&p=1344441#post1344441

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?132570-How-good-are-contact-prints-in-reality/page8

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 12:35
I do have one question on allowable subject matter. Kock et. al. are trying to get permits to mine uranium from the regions around Grand Canyon. Would such a subject be open for discussion? I do believe that denying such a topic such as the preservation of the very subject matter of many photographers is extremely important and warrants some attention on this site. Is that viewed as a political topic? If it is not then I would state that Richard should be allowed to post the thread.

No, it would not be allowed. Such a discussion would be highly likely to end up like this one, with some participants convinced that their opponents are evil, ad hominem attacks flying, and the tone of the debate getting nastier and more vicious with every turn.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 12:39
For what it's worth, I don't think anybody here is evil; at worst, just misguided and ignorant of the unintended consequences of their actions.

I still don't see why more overtly politicized threads (like Corran's) were not closed and this one was. The only conclusion I can come to is that there's something about this particular topic that bothers the moderators - in which case I ask, like richardman, why?

Jmarmck
24-Aug-2016, 12:40
No, it would not be allowed. Such a discussion would be highly likely to end up like this one, with some participants convinced that their opponents are evil, ad hominem attacks flying, and the tone of the debate getting nastier and more vicious with every turn.

Really?

Perhaps I am in the wrong place.

richardman
24-Aug-2016, 12:43
It is clear that I will not post images further on this forum. Just remember, these words that are so dangerous that need to be shut down, may be to preserve whatever mission this site has, are people's stories.

Innocent people's stories.

They just want to be who they are.

Whatever noble principles you think you hold, you are afraid of their stories.

RDenney, I specifically think that you are better than that.

Pere Casals
24-Aug-2016, 12:43
I would like every moderator to answer the question:

Why are people's stories make them uncomfortable.

And Ralph a specific response to his statement about Nazis and KKK and my images.

Because your society it is like this

Interesting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_v._Ziherl

Until a few years ago you could go to jail in Virginia because "dirty".

U.S. it is an amazing country, with some issues to solve...

This is something that your society has to solve, but not here... perhaps in the Lounge...

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 12:45
Then the moderators shouldn't take actions that push an agenda.

There is no political consensus amongst the moderators on much of anything so the likelihood that the moderators would push a political agenda is frankly.......pardon my French, silly.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 12:46
With the "Hearts on our Sleeves" thread having been open without incident for three months and with Richard having made actually political comments about certain subjects in his sci-fi portraits series, you can see how we might have thought the words that accompany the photos were welcome, too.

The words were fine until responses to them showed evidence of degenerating into a political discussion. We did not delete Richard's posts--we simply closed the thread. We are defending that action, but we are still listening.

Rick "those thread is growing faster than he can read" Denney

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 12:47
There is no political consensus amongst the moderators on much of anything so the likelihood that the moderators would push a political agenda is frankly.......pardon my French, silly.

I'm not claiming that it is intentional or that it's your agenda, but you've collectively very well accomplished Kent's agenda.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 12:49
The words were fine until responses to them showed evidence of degenerating into a political discussion. We did not delete Richard's posts--we simply closed the thread. We are defending that action, but we are still listening.

Rick "those thread is growing faster than he can read" Denney

Well, thank you for not silencing the words that have already been spoken, I guess that's something. I'm equally concerned with the words that haven't been spoken (written) yet.

richardman
24-Aug-2016, 12:50
Because your society it is like this

Interesting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_v._Ziherl

Until a few years ago you could go to jail in Virginia because "dirty".

U.S. it is an amazing country, with some issues to solve...

This is something that your society has to solve, but not here... perhaps in the Lounge...

Pere, but the point is that there was NO POLITICAL DISCUSSION until Kent brought it up, and the moderators can easily delete the comments. They do it all the time.

Then they specifically forbidden the words from the subjects, which are not political.

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 12:54
I'm not claiming that it is intentional or that it's your agenda, but you've collectively very well accomplished Kent's agenda.

Well I'm not a moderator, just another guy with an interest in LF photography. I used to be moderator-a long time ago. Now I have absolutely 0 influence on the moderation.

As a former moderator, I can say that in my day post #24 of that thread would have sealed its fate and it would have had nothing to do with taking sides on the issue, as I am personally sympathetic to Richardman's project's intent as I understand it.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 12:58
Well I'm not a moderator, just another guy with an interest in LF photography. I used to be moderator-a long time ago. Now I have absolutely 0 influence on the moderation.

As a former moderator, I can say that in my day post #24 of that thread would have sealed its fate and it would have had nothing to do with taking sides on the issue, as I am personally sympathetic to Richardman's project's intent as I understand it.

My apologies for lumping you in with the current moderators! I'm just still surprised that post #24 sealed the fate of the entire thread, rather than just that one post and responses to it being deleted. My point stands: the action may not have been meant to take a side, but it still accomplished the goals of one particular side of the discussion. Deleting posts from both sides wouldn't have done that.

Pfsor
24-Aug-2016, 12:59
This is not an art forum. It's a discuss-materials-and-methods forum, with picture sharing as a valued auxiliary feature.


Dude. Really? Where is that in the guidelines? Of what point is all the tech stuff if not in the pursuit of art? Maybe that is just my preoccupation but I sincerely doubt it.

In case you forgot, it is not in the guidelines but from the almanac of a moderator's decision taking. Take a beer to swallow. Cheers.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 13:00
It is clear that I will not post images further on this forum. Just remember, these words that are so dangerous that need to be shut down, may be to preserve whatever mission this site has, are people's stories.

Innocent people's stories.

They just want to be who they are.

Whatever noble principles you think you hold, you are afraid of their stories.

RDenney, I specifically think that you are better than that.

Richard,

Those original words remained posted for a long time with no action from us. We didn't take action until the resulting discussion went down a certain path. Think about that.

Rick "respectfully submitted" Denney

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 13:03
Richard,

Those original words remained posted for a long time with no action from us. We didn't take action until the resulting discussion went down a certain path. Think about that.

Rick "respectfully submitted" Denney

I ask yet again, since the question still hasn't been answered: why did the fact that the discussion went down a certain path result in the closing of the thread, rather than in the deletion of specific posts, as in other threads that touched on politicized topics?

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 13:03
As has already been so eloquently stated elsewhere:

"This is not the place for debating social change agendas."

Thank-you!

It's cute that you think treating people as if they were actual people is a "social change agenda".

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 13:08
My apologies for lumping you in with the current moderators! I'm just still surprised that post #24 sealed the fate of the entire thread, rather than just that one post and responses to it being deleted. My point stands: the action may not have been meant to take a side, but it still accomplished the goals of one particular side of the discussion. Deleting posts from both sides wouldn't have done that.

Naive. Oh yes it would. No one would agree with your choices. When I was a moderator I was willing to become the bad guy. It seemed someone had to be. For the first few years I carefully picked through all the posts deleting the bad ones. That made NO one happy either. It was endless bitching about which posts I deleted. "Why didn't you delete his post - why did you delete mine you fascist pig?. You must be taking his side".........endless whinny dribble puke. At one point I said to myself "who has time for this?". So I became the bad guy and then just started slashing and burning. No one liked that either but the level of pissed members wasn't any greater. After doing that awhile and getting some threats from members I quit. WHO needs this? Its a fricken volunteer job with NO upside. They should hand out razor blades to new moderators. Jeez.

Kevin Harding
24-Aug-2016, 13:09
It's cute that you think treating people as if they were actual people is a "social change agenda".

Or that preserving the status quo - ie, not treating people as if they were actual people - is something worth defending against evils of social change.

richardman
24-Aug-2016, 13:10
Richard,

Those original words remained posted for a long time with no action from us. We didn't take action until the resulting discussion went down a certain path. Think about that.

Rick "respectfully submitted" Denney

EXACTLY, so why aren't the offending comments deleted and leave the thread alone as it has been.

If you have a son or daughter, think about how it feels if they have a story to tell, and they are told not to.

In fact, go ahead, look them in their eyes, and tell them that.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 13:12
When I was a moderator I was willing to become the bad guy. It seemed someone had to be. For the first few years I carefully picked through all the posts deleting the bad ones. That made NO one happy either. It was endless bitching about which posts I deleted. "Why didn't you delete his post - why did you delete mine you fascist pig?. You must be taking his side".........endless whinny dribble puke. At one point I said to myself "who has time for this?". So I became the bad guy and then just started slashing and burning. No one liked that either but the level of pissed members wasn't any greater. After doing that awhile and getting some threats from members I quit. Who needs this? Its a fricken volunteer job.

Who needs a forum where rules are applied arbitrarily?

This has been the only forum I've posted on that forbade political discussion, by the way - it's a slippery slope. The other forums I post on somehow manage it just fine and apply evenly the rules about the quality of posting.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 13:14
I ask yet again, since the question still hasn't been answered: why did the fact that the discussion went down a certain path result in the closing of the thread, rather than in the deletion of specific posts, as in other threads that touched on politicized topics?

Because that was the decision made at the time.

Everyone complains when the guidelines are too prescriptive, and then they complain when the mods use the latitude more general guidelines provide.

Rick "still listening" Denney

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 13:17
EXACTLY, so why aren't the offending comments deleted and leave the thread alone as it has been.

If you have a son or daughter, think about how it feels if they have a story to tell, and they are told not to.

In fact, go ahead, look them in their eyes, and tell them that.

There are a zillion places to tell any story that needs to be told. This forum doesn't have to be open to all of them.

I have many stories to tell that are just as important to me, but I don't tell them here.

Rick "who thought the photos eloquent on their own" Denney

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 13:17
Who needs a forum where rules are applied arbitrarily?

This has been the only forum I've posted on that forbade political discussion, by the way - it's a slippery slope. The other forums I post on somehow manage it just fine and apply evenly the rules about the quality of posting.

So. Is there the same members there? I suggest if you actually want to understand THIS forum go back some years before you joined and read up on the Flame wars.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 13:19
There are a zillion places to tell any story that needs to be told. This forum doesn't have to be open to all of them.

I have many stories to tell that are just as important to me, but I don't tell them here.

Rick "who thought the photos eloquent on their own" Denney

It's telling which stories are and are not allowed to be told.


So. Is there the same members there? I suggest if you actually want to understand THIS forum go back some years before you joined and read up on the Flame wars.

I didn't say there aren't flame wars on those other forums - they're just handled differently.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 13:20
Who needs a forum where rules are applied arbitrarily?

This has been the only forum I've posted on that forbade political discussion, by the way - it's a slippery slope. The other forums I post on somehow manage it just fine and apply evenly the rules about the quality of posting.

Every forum I frequent bans political talk, and applies that ban with far less consideration and openness to comment than do we.

Rick "not that what other forums do applies here" Denney

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 13:22
Every forum I frequent bans political talk, and applies that ban with far less consideration and openness to comment than do we.

Rick "not that what other forums do applies here" Denney

I don't post on those forums either.

diversey
24-Aug-2016, 13:24
I was shocked when I saw Richard's "Hearts On Our Sleeves: Portraits and Stories of Transgender+" thread was closed. It was unfair to close his tread just because one person disagreed with him and Richard tried to show his large format photos and make an artist statement as a photographer in this forum. Please follow the common sense. If this forum does not support his photos, who will support them?

Jac@stafford.net
24-Aug-2016, 13:26
Who needs a forum where rules are applied arbitrarily?

Arbitrary is a judgement we tend to find when nothing else seems to fit our view, so I, personally, do not go there unless there is conspicuous prejudice. In some responses by members I find some rather astounding sub-text of grave agendas. I also find the original post with pictures enlightening! Balance.

So here we are with a locked thread, however Richard Man's personal/alternate web publication has been posted in the thread. That does not occur in strident censorship.

Thank you, Richard, and good will to the moderators who must deal with this. In the end. Richard's work is out there, outside of this forum; in the free expression zone.

richardman
24-Aug-2016, 13:27
By the silence of all the other moderators refusing to address the last sentence of this post, we know where they stand:

http://richardmanphoto.com/web/ralph_barker.JPG

Ralph could have used another example, such as "poor children in NYC" but he specifically chose 3 groups that any reasonable people would agree should not be promoted.

This is the problem.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 13:29
Every forum I frequent bans political talk, and applies that ban with far less consideration and openness to comment than do we.

Rick "not that what other forums do applies here" Denney

It's wonderful that you are so open "Mistakes were made, but not by the mods" that really makes us feel welcome as a community.

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 13:36
It's telling which stories are and are not allowed to be told.

Last week I had a thread closed talking about the increasing dust in the American West. I plucked it out of a thread I started on dealing with dust when drying film. I knew it would lead to talk about global warming and I knew it would be quickly shut down. And it was. Asi es la vida aqui. I don't know of a more important discussion about the future and frankly about the future of photography. But that discussion will not happen here.

BrianShaw
24-Aug-2016, 13:37
Sal is the only one brave enough to speak out. I'm sure he takes solace in the thousands of people who wordlessly agree with him.

...

Eric Biggerstaff
24-Aug-2016, 13:37
Oh man, the FLAME WARS! Well, those were some truly crappy times on the good old LFPF! However, they were good for getting people to click on the threads to see what was going down, just like this thread.

That said, I don't miss them AT ALL!

Simple answer is, if you don't like the rules don't join the forum.

I think Richards work deserves to be seen and appreciated but this may not be the best vehicle for that purpose. I am sure there are other forums which would be open to it and have a greater audience then this small, specialized group of amateur, semi-professional and professionals who love LF photography. Had he posted something along the lines "My New Project - Need Input" then posted the images and ask for a discussion about the IMAGE it would still be open. The stories are great and important, but the title of the thread and the work / stories posted seem more of a way to publish than to get input. I like the stories and the portraits, but am just not sure how that body of work fits into the purpose of this particular forum. As I said earlier, I am sure there is a better forum out there where this body of work might be a good fit.

I don't think anyone is trying to demean Richard, or his work. In fact, I would guess everyone, including the mods, would say the work has a purpose and is moving in an interesting direction, one I hope he continues to feel strongly about and goes after. Stories of people left aside by society are always important and can have a profound impact on our understanding. These types of stories and this type of work is not new of course and has been around for as long as there have been photographers who want to make a change in the world we live in.

This thread has become one that is dissolving into a good old flame war. I hope Richard finds his footing and follows his passion but if I were him, I would ask that this thread be closed as nothing good will come from it and all that can be said has been said.

lecarp
24-Aug-2016, 13:38
We've thought about it, and are still thinking about it. I don't know where we will end up. Most likely we'll stand where we are. Conceivably somebody could say something that will change our minds; accusing us of bigotry isn't going to do it, though. Indeed, the overall tenor of the reaction tends to reaffirm our fears that certain kinds of topics bring out the worst in people and are way more trouble then they are worth to try to manage.

It is not bring out the worst in people when they stand up against whats been done to Richard or against comments from a moderator such as
Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Barker
As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork. If we were to allow one topic, we'd be obliged to allow all.

When people stand up against bigotry it is bringing out the best in humanity not the worst!

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 13:40
I ask yet again, since the question still hasn't been answered: why did the fact that the discussion went down a certain path result in the closing of the thread, rather than in the deletion of specific posts, as in other threads that touched on politicized topics?

The thread was on watch from the start; based on experience we figured a high likelihood that it would go south. When it did, we were faced with a delete-vs-close judgment call. My judgment was that the thread would be a source of recurrent trouble. That's a debatable call. But following up on the point I made to Bryan, if the topic is so inflammatory and so sensitive that a thread closure, well-judged or not, is taken as presumptive evidence of bigotry and elicits a torrent of nasty ad hominem attacks, we might indeed be well advised to steer clear of it.

richardman
24-Aug-2016, 13:41
...
This thread has become one that is dissolving into a good old flame war. I hope Richard finds his footing and follows his passion but if I were him, I would ask that this thread be closed as nothing good will come from it and all that can be said has been said.

Oh for sure I will continue the project. No, I would not want this thread be closed.

It's good to see the true colors of some people.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 13:46
The thread was on watch from the start; based on experience we figured a high likelihood that it would go south. When it did, we were faced with a delete-vs-close judgment call. My judgment was that the thread would be a source of recurrent trouble. That's a debatable call. But following up on the point I made to Bryan, if the topic is so inflammatory and so sensitive that a thread closure, well-judged or not, is taken as presumptive evidence of bigotry and elicits a torrent of nasty ad hominem attacks, we might indeed be well advised to steer clear of it.

Or could it be that censoring such a thread for extremely thin reasons and then comparing the subject matter to literal human garbage like nazis and ISIS elicits well deserved criticism? If you don't want people to presume you are a bigot maybe try not acting like one.

lecarp
24-Aug-2016, 13:49
Or could it be that censoring such a thread for extremely thin reasons and then comparing the subject matter to literal human garbage like nazis and ISIS elicits well deserved criticism? If you don't want people to presume you are a bigot maybe try not acting like one.

+1

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 13:52
The thread was on watch from the start; based on experience we figured a high likelihood that it would go south. When it did, we were faced with a delete-vs-close judgment call. My judgment was that the thread would be a source of recurrent trouble. That's a debatable call. But following up on the point I made to Bryan, if the topic is so inflammatory and so sensitive that a thread closure, well-judged or not, is taken as presumptive evidence of bigotry and elicits a torrent of nasty ad hominem attacks, we might indeed be well advised to steer clear of it.

Oren, you still misunderstand me. I don't accuse you of bigotry; however, your actions have abetted the bigots. Perhaps you might have considered that in your delete-vs-close judgement call. If you don't mind that, well, that only deepens my disappointment in the moderation of this forum.


Or could it be that censoring such a thread for extremely thin reasons and then comparing the subject matter to literal human garbage like nazis and ISIS elicits well deserved criticism? If you don't want people to presume you are a bigot maybe try not acting like one.

8thsamurai's post may be hyperbolic, but he has a point. The stated reasons for closing the thread and not others might be a little bit more believable if transgender people hadn't been compared BY A MODERATOR to Nazis, white supremacists, and terrorists.

Willie
24-Aug-2016, 13:54
Last week I had a thread closed talking about the increasing dust in the American West. I plucked it out of a thread I started on dealing with dust when drying film. I knew it would lead to talk about global warming and I knew it would be quickly shut down. And it was. Asi es la vida aqui. I don't know of a more important discussion about the future and frankly about the future of photography. But that discussion will not happen here.

Interesting that someone would shut it down. The topic is not political but one of science. Moderators could delete political posts if they want but shutting down a topic just because it gets posts and disagreements is not a good thing.

No wonder the old posters like Jorge and Steve Simmons and such don't take part here any longer.

pdh
24-Aug-2016, 13:55
As a side note, this position also precludes other, similarly-presented projects, such as portraits of members of the American Nazi Party, members of the KKK, or portraits of ISIS members showing their handywork.

Quite spectacularly insensitive ...

lecarp
24-Aug-2016, 14:01
I can overlook comments from other members easily enough, not however comments made by a moderator like the one from Ralph.
Please can someone tell me how to remove my membership here? I can't find a place to delete it.

BrianShaw
24-Aug-2016, 14:03
...
Please can someone tell me how to remove my membership here? I can't find a place to delete it.

My understanding is that all one needs to do is log off and not log back in. Too bad you feel that way, though.

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 14:05
Interesting that someone would shut it down. The topic is not political but one of science. Moderators could delete political posts if they want but shutting down a topic just because it gets posts and disagreements is not a good thing.

No wonder the old posters like Jorge and Steve Simmons and such don't take part here any longer.

The topic is science AND extremely political. Dude. Where have you been?

Jac@stafford.net
24-Aug-2016, 14:10
Last week I had a thread closed talking about the increasing dust in the American West. I plucked it out of a thread I started on dealing with dust when drying film. I knew it would lead to talk about global warming and I knew it would be quickly shut down. And it was. Asi es la vida aqui. I don't know of a more important discussion about the future and frankly about the future of photography. But that discussion will not happen here.

Yes, that was just wrong. IMHO, it is important to our constituency to know how our fellow photographers live and cope with resources. I lived in the High Plains Desert of New Mexico where water was our major expense. The water we paid for was piped right through of us to Southern California at a penny to the dollar for them.

Best of luck to you, Kirk.

Taija71A
24-Aug-2016, 14:13
Gentlemen...

As 'Members' of this Private Photography Forum...
We have all previously agreed to the 'Terms and Conditions' -- For using this FREE, Forum space.

One of those Terms and Conditions is as follows:

"The decisions of the moderators are always final, even if they are wrong."

--
Nobody of course likes having their hand slapped... And we all understand that.
But, sometimes it really is just best to: "Give It a Break"... And move on.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 14:15
Gentlemen...

As 'Members' of this Private Photography Forum...
We have all previously agreed to the 'Terms and Conditions' -- For using this FREE, Forum space.

One of those Terms and Conditions is as follows:

"The decisions of the moderators are always final, even if they are wrong."

--

Nobody of course likes having their hand slapped... And we all understand that.
But, sometimes it really is just best to: "Give It a Break"... And move on.

We were also given this FREE feedback forum, I wonder what we could use it for...

jnanian
24-Aug-2016, 14:20
Last week I had a thread closed talking about the increasing dust in the American West. I plucked it out of a thread I started on dealing with dust when drying film. I knew it would lead to talk about global warming and I knew it would be quickly shut down. And it was. Asi es la vida aqui. I don't know of a more important discussion about the future and frankly about the future of photography. But that discussion will not happen here.


kirk

there is no such thing as manmade global warming
it is just a hoax put to us by people who want to further
their global agenda put forth by the pink-filled illuminati-clench
to divide and conquer slackless pinks until the x-ists comeback
( they got lost in 1996 )
to enjoy glorp and global domination of pinks .
or so the sacred text of the subgenii suggests ...

i do admit, it is getting kind of warm though.

prais "bob"

Oren Grad
24-Aug-2016, 14:22
I've deleted all of the non-photographic commentary posts from Richard's thread, so that they won't serve as an ongoing, gratuitous provocation.

However, the thread will remain closed. We have no problem whatsoever with members becoming aware of, following and supporting Richard's work on this project; we will retain the closed thread so that those who are interested can find and follow the link to his site to view more of it.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 14:40
It's wonderful that you are so open "Mistakes were made, but not by the mods" that really makes us feel welcome as a community.

I can't connect your paraphrase with what I wrote, anywhere.

We are, of course, still listening, but invective makes doing so less easy.

Rick "Kirk is right" Denney

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 14:56
Gosh this topic is so inflammatory User Taija71A called me a "fag" in a PM. I hope this is just his way of saying that he's sorry for being a terrible person and would like to make it up to me with a date.
154296

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 14:58
Gosh this topic is so inflammatory User Taija71A called me a "fag" in a PM. I hope this is just his way of saying that he's sorry for being a terrible person and would like to make it up to me with a date.
154296

It seems that we were right about at least some of the people coming down on the side of the thread being closed. Take a good, hard look at yourself, moderators, and ask if you want to be seen as supporting the position of people like this.

Jac@stafford.net
24-Aug-2016, 14:59
Gosh this topic is so inflammatory User Taija71A called me a "fag" in a PM. I hope this is just his way of saying that he's sorry for being a terrible person and would like to make it up to me with a date.

I laughed out loud. Hey, I'm not gay but you strike me as an interesting person to talk to over coffee. :)
.

Willie
24-Aug-2016, 15:00
The topic is science AND extremely political. Dude. Where have you been?

It only becomes political if you let it. Stick with the science and let people discuss and post images to their heart's content.

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 15:04
It only becomes political if you let it. Stick with the science and let people discuss and post images to their heart's content.

Who controls that? It NEVER worked before.

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 15:04
He also just PM'd me my full real name and email address, like some kind of internet tough guy. It's weird that he would think that upsets me, I put my name on my website. Does he think it got there by magic?

Kirk Gittings
24-Aug-2016, 15:06
He also just PM'd me my full real name and email address, like some kind of internet tough guy. It's weird that he would think that upsets me, I put my name on my website. Does he think it got there by magic?

What an idiot on every level. That's why I have had him on my ignore list for some 2 years.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 15:21
It seems that we were right about at least some of the people coming down on the side of the thread being closed. Take a good, hard look at yourself, moderators, and ask if you want to be seen as supporting the position of people like this.

We do not associate with any side. The fact that there ARE sides committed to engaging in flame wars is the point. The equivalency of preventing a flame war with agreeing with one side or the other is logically vacuous.

Had this been a topic with a different set of advocates, we'd just be hearing from different people.

Rick "who has no interest in engaging the issues advocated by the 'sides'" Denney

Taija71A
24-Aug-2016, 15:27
My opinion obviously does upset you.
After all... You have been 'Trolling' myself and others -- All afternoon! :)

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 15:28
We do not associate with any side. The fact that there ARE sides committed to engaging in flame wars is the point. The equivalency of preventing a flame war with agreeing with one side or the other is logically vacuous.

Had this been a topic with a different set of advocates, we'd just be hearing from different people.

Rick "who has no interest in engaging the issues advocated by the 'sides'" Denney

Like it or not, by closing the thread and by equating transgender people with Nazis, white supremacists, and terrorists, you (collective, as in the moderators) have come down firmly on one side.


He also just PM'd me my full real name and email address, like some kind of internet tough guy. It's weird that he would think that upsets me, I put my name on my website. Does he think it got there by magic?

...and people like that are allowed to continue to harass other members on this forum... why?


My opinion obviously does upset you.
After all... You have been 'Trolling' myself and others -- All afternoon! :)

Wow, the puppetmaster reveals himself! Well played, sir, well played. :rolleyes:

8thsamurai
24-Aug-2016, 15:32
My opinion obviously does upset you.
After all... You have been 'Trolling' me and others -- All afternoon! :)
I took the liberty of correcting your grammar, use reflexive pronouns properly when calling me out for trolling to distract from accusations of homophobia.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 15:39
1. Like it or not, by closing the thread and by equating transgender people with Nazis, white supremacists, and terrorists, you (collective, as in the moderators) have come down firmly on one side.



...2. and people like that are allowed to continue to harass other members on this forum... why?



3. Wow, the puppetmaster reveals himself! Well played, sir, well played. :rolleyes:

1. Equating groups willing to light fire to the forum over the topic they hold dear is not moral equivalency between what those groups believe. Our feelings on the morals of each group have no bearing on the decisions we make. If you can't accept that such is possible, then I think you'll struggle with calm discourse over topics you care about.

2. Everyone is harassing everyone in this thread, and we are willing to let it go for a while to see what light might be allowed to pass through the heat and smoke. You are not without blame, as identified (at least) by 3. But if you received a PM you think violates the forum guidelines, report it and we will take action. Edit: this thread reinforces the need for moderation and our current guidelines, it seems to me.

Rick "lack of affirmation does not constitute a position" Denney

unityofsaints
24-Aug-2016, 15:47
We have at least two nude threads and some gun posts too but pictures of transgender people are not allowed? That's objectively wrong and I don't believe the inclusion of text makes a difference - it can be ignored just as easily as technical details about exposure and development can.

Having said that, the tastes of the general populace are such that moderating the thread the way it was moderated is the best way to go about it. I don't like it personally but can appreciate that it needs to be done.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 15:48
1. Equating groups willing to light fire to the forum over the topic they hold dear is not moral equivalency between what those groups believe. Our feelings on the morals of each group have no bearing on the decisions we make. If you can't accept that such is possible, then I think you'll struggle with calm discourse over topics you care about.

2. Everyone is harassing everyone in this thread, and we are willing to let it go for a while to see what light might be allowed to pass through the heat and smoke. You are not without blame, as identified (at least) by 3. But if you received a PM you think violates the forum guidelines, report it and we will take action.

Rick "lack of affirmation does not constitute a position" Denney

1. Excuse me, but this post strikes me as even more ridiculous. When were the morals of transgender people at issue? I've said it before and I'll say it again: actions can have consequences that are not intended. You may choose to ignore these consequences, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Yours is exactly the kind of thinking that contributes to the continuing stigmatization of this minority and others. I have no desire to contribute to a community that does such a thing, intentionally or otherwise, and I know I'm not the only one in this thread with that perspective.

2. Regardless of what you think of my posts, I don't think that any of them rise to the level of "harassment," as attempting to intimidate a member by sending him his personal details does. I also don't think I have to be the target of such behavior to criticize the fact that it is allowed to happen on this forum.

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 15:52
We have at least two nude threads and some gun posts too but pictures of transgender people are not allowed? That's objectively wrong and I don't believe the inclusion of text makes a difference - it can be ignored just as easily as technical details about exposure and development can.

Having said that, the tastes of the general populace are such that moderating the thread the way it was moderated is the best way to go about it. I don't like it personally but can appreciate that it needs to be done.

No, no, you have it wrong. The photos are allowed, but quotes from the subjects are not. That makes it totally okay. :rolleyes:

richardman
24-Aug-2016, 15:54
It's clear that the moderators are doubling down.

Contrary to what some people think, this is not a free site. The are consequences of action, and inaction.

Yes, moderation IS VERY HARD, but not as hard as taking a stand against bigotry.

Please all bigots do come out of the woodwork.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 15:56
We have at least two nude threads and some gun posts too but pictures of transgender people are not allowed?

Again, we never had a problem with the photographs.

Rick "is this the fourth or fifth time saying this?" Denney

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 15:57
When were the morals of transgender people at issue?

That was precisely my point.

Rick "thank you" Denney

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 16:06
That was precisely my point.

Rick "thank you" Denney

Great, I'm glad we agree that the personal stories of an oppressed minority should not be suppressed because some take issue with their morals.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 16:06
It's clear that the moderators are doubling down.

Contrary to what some people think, this is not a free site. The are consequences of action, and inaction.

Yes, moderation IS VERY HARD, but not as hard as taking a stand against bigotry.

Please all bigots do come out of the woodwork.

Richard, please back away. You are reading this, and us, wrong.

But this was never a "free" site. It has always been moderated according to guidelines that provide a lot of latitude.

Again, do not equate our moderating actions with our views on your topic.

It is not our job as moderators to litigate bigotry, or to allow flame wars simply because bigotry is being litigated.

I encouraged Oren to keep this thread open, but now I'm seeing injury and so much reciprocal attack that people will end up hating each other, which is precisely what we are trying to avoid. So, thread closed.

Thank you all for expressing your views; we will continue to discuss it amongst the moderators.

Rick "we do listen" Denney

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 16:07
Richard, please back away. You are reading this, and us, wrong.

But this was never a "free" site. It has always been moderated according to guidelines that provide a lot of latitude.

Again, do not equate our moderating actions with our views on your topic.

It is not our job as moderators to litigate bigotry, or to allow flame wars simply because bigotry is being litigated.

I encouraged Oren to keep this thread open, but now I'm seeing injury and so much reciprocal attack that people will end up hating each other, which is precisely what we are trying to avoid. So, thread closed.

Thank you all for expressing your views; we will continue to discuss it amongst the moderators.

Rick "we do listen" Denney

Again, your intent isn't the issue.

rdenney
24-Aug-2016, 16:07
Great, I'm glad we agree that the personal stories of an oppressed minority should not be suppressed because some take issue with their morals.

We did not agree to that. We agreed that our moderating action was not in any way related to the morals they believe.

Rick "done for now" Denney

RHITMrB
24-Aug-2016, 16:08
We did not agree to that. We agreed that our moderating action was not in any way related to the morals they believe.

Rick "done for now" Denney

Right, I never said it was about your intent in taking the action, but about the actual effect of doing so.

Isaac "You're Missing the Point" Sachs