PDA

View Full Version : Stricter Guildelines Enforcement Now In Effect



Ken Lee
2-Dec-2012, 15:04
Members who violate the Forum's Usage Guidelines (www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/faq.php?faq=vb_faq) will be banned for several days.

If they return and continue to violate forum guidelines, they will be banned permanently.

The following guidelines should be noted with particular attention:

"Name calling, personal attacks, character assassination, coarse or inappropriate language, or enticing/baiting others to violate forum guidelines will not be tolerated here."

"Topics and discussions of politics and religion are not allowed, here [the Lounge] or elsewhere on the forum, and the forum's general behavioral standards apply here, too."

"Readers of "For Sale" posts should refrain from intruding on the thread by making negative comments about the item or the price being requested. Doing so is rude, and thus in violation of general forum guidelines."

Darin Boville
2-Dec-2012, 15:11
Ken, what crisis requires all of this? Two threads mildly critical of the moderators? Perhaps the principle behind banning a member--giving them a chance to cool off a bit--might be taken up by the mods themselves?

--Darin

Ken Lee
2-Dec-2012, 15:41
It's very simple: moderators have limited time, and no longer want to spend it policing a small number of high-maintenance forum members.

There's no crisis, it's more a matter of patience having finally run out. There is a consensus among the moderators.

Nathan Potter
2-Dec-2012, 15:54
In a nutshell, this is a photography forum for the exchange ideas, experiences, comments, data and whatever else related to LF photography. No more - no less.

A private message can be used as a medium of encounter for extraneous discourse and an outlet for excess male hormones.

I think the Moderators are on the right track even tho I miss the wisdom of some who have been banned.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

r.e.
2-Dec-2012, 15:54
"Readers of "For Sale" posts should refrain from intruding on the thread by making negative comments about the item or the price being requested. Doing so is rude, and thus in violation of general forum guidelines."

Discussion about the quality of items for sale and the price is a regular and valuable occurrence. Making such observations, if they are negative (apparently positive is hunky dory), a ground to ban someone is stunning, especially given that people are expressly told that LF Info has nothing to do with transactions and that transactions are entirely at their own risk.

Sal Santamaura
2-Dec-2012, 16:25
It's very simple: moderators have limited time, and no longer want to spend it policing a small number of high-maintenance forum members.

There's no crisis, it's more a matter of patience having finally run out. There is a consensus among the moderators.Congratulations. I applaud the decision.

Sal Santamaura
2-Dec-2012, 16:31
...such observations, if they are negative (apparently positive is hunky dory), a ground to ban someone is stunning...The world is full of things more stun-inducing. :)

Although I have always been against the very existence of a "For Sale/Wanted" category, since we have one, refraining from "pissing in the well" of a selling poster is just as appropriate as avoiding the other forbidden behaviors. Let decency prevail.

Bill_1856
2-Dec-2012, 16:40
Sorry that you're having problems. Hope that I'm not part of it.

Darin Boville
2-Dec-2012, 16:41
It's very simple: moderators have limited time, and no longer want to spend it policing a small number of high-maintenance forum members.

There's no crisis, it's more a matter of patience having finally run out. There is a consensus among the moderators.

Ken, as another post here pointed out, the LFF has more active members than ever before. Yet I believe there are the same number of moderators as when I first joined in 2004. Is it possible the root cause of all this stress is not so much bad behavior on the part of members as over-work on the part of the mods? After all, if the *rate* of posts needing moderating stays the same, as the forum grows you will nevertheless eventually be overwhelmed with more and more work. Maybe you need one or two more mods?

--Darin

Tim Meisburger
2-Dec-2012, 16:46
Good!

lenser
2-Dec-2012, 16:55
Ken, Would this mean that if a potential buyer of a product asked an open question about others' experience with a similar product, and if that answer out of truth was a negative one, that the member giving that solicited answer would be banned? That would seem out of line and of poor service. Note that I am not referring to some smart ass who just wants to get noticed for their negativity, but rather a statement that would be along the lines of a product review.

Ken Lee
2-Dec-2012, 17:21
Thank you R.E. for your good point about the For Sale section.

The term "intruding", like some of the other terms ("coarse", "inappropriate", "rude") is open to interpretation.

The moderators do their best to distinguish between constructive suggestions on the one hand, and mean-spirited or meddlesome behavior on the other.

Lachlan 717
2-Dec-2012, 17:23
Congratulations. I applaud the decision.

+1

Lachlan 717
2-Dec-2012, 17:27
Ken, Would this mean that if a potential buyer of a product asked an open question about others' experience with a similar product, and if that answer out of truth was a negative one, that the member giving that solicited answer would be banned? That would seem out of line and of poor service. Note that I am not referring to some smart ass who just wants to get noticed for their negativity, but rather a statement that would be along the lines of a product review.

The issue is with hijacking a thread.

If you're a potential Buyer, just start another thread about "quality of product X" and see what information you get.

In this way, you are not jeopardising the original Seller's sale, nor are you jeopardising your status in the Forum.

And, perhaps more importantly and more in line with the original intent of the whole Forum, you are increasing the intellectual base of the site.

Ken Lee
2-Dec-2012, 17:34
Ken, Would this mean that if a potential buyer of a product asked an open question about others' experience with a similar product, and if that answer out of truth was a negative one, that the member giving that solicited answer would be banned? That would seem out of line and of poor service. Note that I am not referring to some smart ass who just wants to get noticed for their negativity, but rather a statement that would be along the lines of a product review.

What Lachlan said :cool:

You're right, and I think we all agree with you.

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/donkey.png

The smart asses to whom you refer, are easy to spot: they are often bright, well-informed and charming, but they have extreme views and little regard for others.

That's OK, live and let live: until they take up too much of the moderator's time.

Ken Lee
2-Dec-2012, 17:41
Ken, as another post here pointed out, the LFF has more active members than ever before. Yet I believe there are the same number of moderators as when I first joined in 2004. Is it possible the root cause of all this stress is not so much bad behavior on the part of members as over-work on the part of the mods? After all, if the *rate* of posts needing moderating stays the same, as the forum grows you will nevertheless eventually be overwhelmed with more and more work. Maybe you need one or two more mods?

You're a mind-reader :)

Another moderator may be in the wings - but the moderators here are Large Format photographers, not psychiatric nurses.

Most members can tell the difference. Not all, but most.

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/ansell.jpg http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/psychNurse.jpg

Those few members with social and cognitive impairment will either learn how to follow the forum's simple guidelines, or find themselves banned - no matter how many moderators we have.

Kirk Gittings
2-Dec-2012, 18:01
Ken, as another post here pointed out, the LFF has more active members than ever before. Yet I believe there are the same number of moderators as when I first joined in 2004. Is it possible the root cause of all this stress is not so much bad behavior on the part of members as over-work on the part of the mods? After all, if the *rate* of posts needing moderating stays the same, as the forum grows you will nevertheless eventually be overwhelmed with more and more work. Maybe you need one or two more mods?

--Darin
I have watched those numbers closely for years. We are actually down a couple hundred regular users from a few years ago .

mikebarger
2-Dec-2012, 18:07
I agree


+1

RichardSperry
2-Dec-2012, 18:09
Good.

When I first started posting here I thought the board was unmoderated, by the Wild Wild West toleration of insults and ad hominem attacks. I moderated the board trolls myself, and they have ignored me ever since.

I have since seen the same trolls attack other newbies or those asking questions here. Good that you guys are not tolerating their behavior... Finally.

lenser
2-Dec-2012, 18:13
Ken,

Many thanks for the clarification. There are many things I see on here that I wish I could buy and about many of those, I would want to ask for clarification. I feel very good knowing that I could still get the honest opinions this way.

Bill_1856
2-Dec-2012, 18:27
What camera is the old guy with the beard wearing a Stetson using?

Darin Boville
2-Dec-2012, 19:41
What Lachlan said :cool:

You're right, and I think we all agree with you.

Well, I certainly don't. I say the more information the better and bad info is best handled by good info. The market doesn't work without good information and a separate, unlinked, thread doesn't do it. Nor do I think that selling gear is a protected, special class of activity on this board, or at least I hope not.

But I've covered all this ground before in the thread where you guys imposed the new rule.

--Darin

Darin Boville
2-Dec-2012, 20:53
You're a mind-reader :)

Another moderator may be in the wings - but the moderators here are Large Format photographers, not psychiatric nurses.

Most members can tell the difference. Not all, but most.

If members get a vote I'd suggest that you need more variety in the world view in the mods. All good people but I'd like to see someone who when you say "Large Format Photographer" *doesn't* immediately think of Ansel Adams. I'd love to see someone who doesn't shoot landscapes etc at all, in fact! :)

--Darin

msk2193
2-Dec-2012, 21:19
Wow, 3 pages of posts on somethng that each member can and ought to manage on his or her own.

If you do not care for a particular forum member's posts, simply go to "setting" on the top right, then under "My Account" select the "Edit Ignore List" and put that member's username in there.
You will never see a post that might offend you and by doing so you will make the moderators' life so much simpler.

No need for autocratic actions when a mere 20 seconds can permanently solve the problem on a personal level. Personal responsibility why relegate that to others?
84700

RichardSperry
2-Dec-2012, 21:37
The ignore list only works if you're logged in.

And the board seems to kick regularly, me at least every hour. I don't log in a fraction of the time I use the site.

The trolls do react well to kicking them back in the teeth with personal insults(self modding does work), but those result in just more moderation duties for the mods. I have seen more posters effectively insulting the board trolls, which is most likely the reason for this moderation change.

Sal Santamaura
2-Dec-2012, 21:49
If members get a vote I'd suggest that you need more variety in the world view in the mods. All good people but I'd like to see someone who when you say "Large Format Photographer" *doesn't* immediately think of Ansel Adams. I'd love to see someone who doesn't shoot landscapes etc at all, in fact!...I disagree. A moderator's "world view" is irrelevant. The only view they need to have when performing their duties is of the forum rules.

Merg Ross
2-Dec-2012, 21:56
I have watched those numbers closely for years. We are actually down a couple hundred regular users from a few years ago .

Yes, a few years ago this forum was quite a different place to visit and contribute.

Sal Santamaura
2-Dec-2012, 22:03
Yes, a few years ago this forum was quite a different place to visit and contribute.How so Merg? Other than a couple of hundred fewer regular users, what differences do you perceive?

Kirk Gittings
2-Dec-2012, 22:10
June 2008:
Threads: 32,221, Posts: 340,521, Members: 13,693, Active Members: 2,234

January 2010
Threads: 51,598, Posts: 524,061, Members: 16,885, Active Members: 2,814

December 2010
Threads: 61,069, Posts: 623,964, Members: 18,914, Active Members: 3,012

Today
Threads: 87,925, Posts: 920,063, Members: 23,568, Active Members: 2,788

Darin Boville
2-Dec-2012, 22:16
June 2008:
Threads: 32,221, Posts: 340,521, Members: 13,693, Active Members: 2,234

January 2010
Threads: 51,598, Posts: 524,061, Members: 16,885, Active Members: 2,814

December 2010
Threads: 61,069, Posts: 623,964, Members: 18,914, Active Members: 3,012

Today
Threads: 87,925, Posts: 920,063, Members: 23,568, Active Members: 2,788

O.K., well, that still supports my point, doesn't it? If the *rate* of problem posts has remained constant you'd still be overworked just because people are posting almost three times as often as they did just a few years ago. Your house may be underwater but it may not be bigger waves--the ocean level is just higher. Those little waves that never bothered you before are now crashing into your bedroom window.

Sounds like you don't need one new moderator but two or three times the current number--just to catch up with past growth.

--Darin

Merg Ross
2-Dec-2012, 22:33
How so Merg? Other than a couple of hundred fewer regular users, what differences do you perceive?

Sal, I would consider the mere necessity of this thread as one. And, for those into the numbers, quantity is not quality. Are the For Sale and Lounge included in those figures? Kirk? Thanks.

jeroldharter
2-Dec-2012, 22:35
Although I am guilty at times, I agree with the moderators. Even if I didn't agree, it would not matter as the forum is a private venture and those in charge make the rules. Because of the rules here, this forum is a much better place than APUG which I rarely look at anymore.

I agree that some discretion is advised: I would have a much higher tolerance for a few obsessive old men arguing heatedly about lens design or the merits of pyro than I would arguments about the politics/economics.

photobymike
2-Dec-2012, 23:53
Sure is a lot about nothing..... Ken ..while i am in your house i will abide by your rules... Can you imagine if all these members actually met each other.... We could all meet in the Buccaneer football stadium ... sell tickets and take bets on who would survive ....

soeren
3-Dec-2012, 00:17
I still wonder why this is neccesarry. I participate in a couple of other foras and this place is the only one regularly exposing such troubles, why? Are members here less polite? More narrowminded? Don't we know how to behave on an internet forum, like children who don't know when to back off and let it go? Or are the rules and their enforcement different? Does a union for Fora moderators exist, some place for exchanging views and info for mods only? Or is it just that I'm blind to the issues facing all internet foras?
I find the idea about using the ignore function more to be quite good. maybe it just works when locked in but most lock in to see whats new and to ansver in threads. Remember it takes two to tango :)

Best regards

Doremus Scudder
3-Dec-2012, 03:36
Am I the only one who is blind or oblivious to this problem?

I have been reading and posting here since 1998. Although I do see some of the "dumbing down" referred to above, I rarely read posts that contain personal insults. Maybe I'm just lucky in choosing topics to read/respond to.

Any vehement disagreement is bound to get a bit intense, but as long as the tone and the manner of address are no more belligerent than that in the British Parliament ("I submit that my esteemed colleague has lost touch with reality or is out of his blinkin' mind!" ... "Hear, hear!"), I find nothing to object to. If one engages in controversy, one must be prepared to accept contrary opinions and even politely-framed attacks on his/her competence. I sincerely hope that no one is ever banned for such an exchange.

Mods, I appreciate what a hard job you have and appreciate greatly your efforts and your dedication. Let me express my utmost gratitude and admiration here before I wager a bit of constructive criticism. I might suggest that banning someone immediately, even for a few days, is a trifle harsh, maybe even overreacting. Deleting the offending post and sending a warning as a private message first seems adequate to me for first offenders. For those that have a history and have been warned once, an immediate ban may appropriate. I would, however, not go about banning people for polite, but vehement disagreement. Suggesting that someone does not know what he/she is talking about, is misleading others or is just simply dead wrong, even when expressed in strong terms, does not fall in the category of personal insult or coarse language or name-calling in my book.

More objectionable to me are vulgar terms thinly disguised by using acronyms (WTF) or using special characters in place of some letters ($h!t) used by many to spice up their posts. However, I wouldn't dream of banning anyone for that... (I might consider it for those who overuse "lol" though...)

As for buying and selling here; if it is forbidden to point out that someone is trying to rip off unsuspecting buyers or is misrepresenting an item, then I'll just stick with eBay and its buyer protection plan.

Best,

Doremus

Ken Lee
3-Dec-2012, 05:22
Out of 2700 active members, there are probably only 2 or 3 who might be affected by the stricter guidelines.

Those are the high maintenance members who are frequently rude, insulting, political, and meddling.

My arithmetic may be wrong, but I believe they represent around 1/10 of 1%, and they (used to) take up 99% of moderators time. Moderators who are themselves Large Format photographers, not psychiatric nurses.

Ken Lee
3-Dec-2012, 05:38
If members get a vote I'd suggest that you need more variety in the world view in the mods. All good people but I'd like to see someone who when you say "Large Format Photographer" *doesn't* immediately think of Ansel Adams.

Sorry, I reached for an image that was close at hand. Here are some others. I'll bet that 99.9% of forum members can pass the following test with flying colors.

Which ones are the Large Format photographers, and which ones are the psychotherapists ?

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/therapist1.jpg http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/lftog1.jpg

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/lftog2.jpg http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/therapist3.jpg

sanking
3-Dec-2012, 06:48
I disagree. A moderator's "world view" is irrelevant. The only view they need to have when performing their duties is of the forum rules.

Absolutely. The moderator's don't set the agenda for what kind of photography members practice or members take, or for their technical or aesthetic strategies in general, or for what is show and discussed on the forum. Voting on a moderator's "world view" makes about as much sense as making them sign a pledge to not oppress Australian sheepherders.

Sandy

John O'Connell
3-Dec-2012, 07:20
The problem with the ignore list is that sometimes the people on your ignore list become moderators. ;)

BrianShaw
3-Dec-2012, 07:25
I hope I passed Ken's test. I can't wait until the answers are posted! :o

vinny
3-Dec-2012, 07:32
I'll take the blonde on the bottom right.

Jody_S
3-Dec-2012, 08:00
I still wonder why this is neccesarry. I participate in a couple of other foras and this place is the only one regularly exposing such troubles, why? Are members here less polite? More narrowminded? Don't we know how to behave on an internet forum, like children who don't know when to back off and let it go?

Best regards

Ken might not be a psychologist, but I am ;) (*)

LF photographers are not representative of internet denizens in general, or even photographers. We're a bunch of cranky old farts. We're into LF partly because we demand perfection and absolute control and we are willing to go to extraordinary lengths to achieve those, and we're contrary as well because when everyone else jumped on the digital bandwagon, we said "Bah humbug!" On top of that, we've been doing this for so many years, for the most part, we think we know it all. That's sort of a 'perfect storm' for the type of behavior we often see here.

I would like to point out that the bad behavior on LFPF is quite different from classic Internet trolling, which is usually done by losers of any age who are bitter and angry that they're not achieving anything of note in their lives. Classic trolls know they're trolls and take pleasure in being disruptive (trolls for Jesus are even worse); moderators on other forums recognize those for what they are and it's usually quite straightforward to ban one. Those who break the rules here probably think they have something to contribute, but feel their contribution is so important that they're allowed to break the rules. Or in some cases, may have never bothered to read the rules in the first place. Er... I'm going to stop now.

* actually, no.

soeren
3-Dec-2012, 08:19
Sorry, I reached for an image that was close at hand. Here are some others. I'll bet that 99.9% of forum members can pass the following test with flying colors.

Which ones are the Large Format photographers, and which ones are the psychotherapists ?



This is a trick question, right?
1. Is a jobinterview
2. Is a largeformat photographer seing a psychotherapist.
3. I dont know
4. A guy taking drawing lessons.
What did I win? :)

Bill_1856
3-Dec-2012, 08:44
Repeating unanswered question:
What camera is AA shown using in post #16?
thank you.

BrianShaw
3-Dec-2012, 08:47
Looks like a baby speed graphic to me. Pre-Anniversary model.

BrianShaw
3-Dec-2012, 08:48
... and a Weston III meter.

IanG
3-Dec-2012, 09:56
Looks like a baby speed graphic to me. Pre-Anniversary model.

Highly unlikely, probably an early Linhof, or a Zeiss, it's a German camera.

Ian

Ralph Barker
3-Dec-2012, 10:13
For the record, I'd like to point out a few things.

1. This forum has been in existence, in one form or another, since about 1992. Originally, the forum was part of Lusenet, an early Internet communications experiment started by a college professor. When that site decided to go "commercial" we were "off the air" for a while, as they say, but restarted with our own software and our own domain. That worked OK for a while, but the software didn't provide any effective means of dealing with problem participants. That fact prompted our changeover to using the vBulletin software in 2005.

2. Personally, I've been a moderator here since about 2002, but for the last couple of years decided to limit my activity to mostly helping with technical issues, e-mail inquiries, and the like. That decision was prompted, in part, by a growing lack of tolerance for borderline behavior.

3. The guidelines written in 2005 embodied the principals upon which the forum was run from the beginning - open, but cordial, communication regarding large format photography issues, with no "commercial" content. The guidelines have been tweaked a few times, but remain largely the same as they have always been.

4. Within the registration process there is a check box where the registrant indicates that they have read the guidelines and agree to comply with those guidelines. Thus, every member is expected to have read them, and is expected to follow them. (Certainly, they wouldn't have lied to us about that, would they?)

5. Over the years, we have gone through several periods in which we have been prompted to tighten enforcement of the guidelines, so as not to allow the site to sink into a quagmire of uncivil behavior. In all cases, that tightening was forced by a minority of members who felt the rules didn't apply to them. Not so, since they agreed to comply with the guidelines when they registered.

6. While we listen to rational input from the membership, the forum has never been a democracy. It can't be. We make decisions based on what is best for the long-term health of the forum, not the whims of individuals. So far, that has worked fairly well.

7. The forum operates on contributed resources (server, storage, bandwidth), and is run by a small group of (unpaid) volunteers who have demonstrated a mindset consistent with the objectives of the forum. Since we also have other things to do, like making the occasional LF photograph, we prefer not to be house mothers to the ill-behaved.

You will now be returned to your irregularly-scheduled LF-related programming.

Sal Santamaura
3-Dec-2012, 10:49
...I've been a moderator here since about 2002, but for the last couple of years decided to limit my activity to mostly helping with technical issues, e-mail inquiries, and the like. That decision was prompted, in part, by a growing lack of tolerance for borderline behavior...I hope the stricter guideline enforcement will quell borderline behavior and bring your moderating activity level back up. I appreciate what you've done and hope you can tolerate doing even more of it.

Michael Graves
3-Dec-2012, 11:21
Sorry, I reached for an image that was close at hand. Here are some others. I'll bet that 99.9% of forum members can pass the following test with flying colors.

Which ones are the Large Format photographers, and which ones are the psychotherapists ?

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/therapist1.jpg http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/lftog1.jpg

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/lftog2.jpg http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/therapist3.jpg

The ones lying back in the chairs are Large Format Photographers. They are seeking help because they are depressed about the rising cost and dwindling availability of film and chemistry. The two individuals toting fancy cameras are psychotherapists. Who else could afford fancy stuff like that?

Did I get it right?

ROL
3-Dec-2012, 11:24
Thanks Ralph, for your clarification and service.

Although I've tried very hard to be tolerant of other poster's intolerance, and am not thin–skinned enough to actually ignore anybody (yet), I have found that point #3 is increasingly violated in both subtle forms and blatant undermining personal attacks, by persons with commercial interests whose axes are apparently not ground to a fine enough point, both in normal (non-commercial) forums here and elsewhere. While I appreciate that these posters are potentially providing niche services and products to an ever isolated market, it is an increasing source of frustration finding civilized ways, humorous or otherwise, to defend an opinion, or even experience, against the stridency of these interests, whose underlying motive may be construed as something other than altruistic.

Kirk Gittings
3-Dec-2012, 11:32
To be perfectly frank. I think what is confounding and grinding down Ken and I in particular is the fact that a small number of people cause 90% of the problems and never seem to actually change their behavior except for a very brief period following moderator action. This is soooooo "not fun" anymore that after 4 years I am seriously questioning whether I want to do it anymore.

Ken Lee
3-Dec-2012, 11:59
The ones lying back in the chairs are Large Format Photographers. They are seeking help because they are depressed about the rising cost and dwindling availability of film and chemistry. The two individuals toting fancy cameras are psychotherapists. Who else could afford fancy stuff like that?

Did I get it right?

Brilliant !

Sal Santamaura
3-Dec-2012, 12:03
...I think what is confounding and grinding down Ken and I in particular is the fact that a small number of people cause 90% of the problems and never seem to actually change their behavior except for a very brief period following moderator action. This is soooooo "not fun" anymore that after 4 years I am seriously questioning whether I want to do it anymore.I hope the new stricter guideline enforcement will get that small number of problem-causers permanently banned. Compared to the loss of you and Ken, their departures would be trivial.

Thanks for putting up with so much crap. May it subside rapidly now. Please stay.

Darin Boville
3-Dec-2012, 12:05
Absolutely. The moderator's don't set the agenda for what kind of photography members practice or members take, or for their technical or aesthetic strategies in general, or for what is show and discussed on the forum. Voting on a moderator's "world view" makes about as much sense as making them sign a pledge to not oppress Australian sheepherders.

Sandy

In any decision-making body it is healthier to have some diversity in one's perspective. You may *think* any person, simply following the rules, would reach the same conclusion but a moment's reflection will surely offer you an abundance of counter-examples.

As far as I understand, all of the mods--overworked and under-appreciated as they are--are landscape photographers more or less in the West Coast tradition. I guess if you are also a landscape photographer in the West Coast tradition you may not see a problem but others might.

--Darin

Kirk Gittings
3-Dec-2012, 12:13
While I don't agree with your premis, let me say that the genre that I shoot is a tiny fraction of the photography I appreciate. For example when in graduate school Robert Adams was my mentor and I teach at The School of the Art Institute of Chicago where the students (for better or worse) are all trying to do work at the cutting edge of photography. So the "architectural photography" that comes out of my class runs the gamete from traditional HABS/HAER documentation to totally wacked out light sculpture and everything in between-much of it unrecognizable as AP to traditional APs. I encourage and appreciate many different ways of conceptualizing photography.

Jody_S
3-Dec-2012, 12:18
The ones lying back in the chairs are Large Format Photographers. They are seeking help because they are depressed about the rising cost and dwindling availability of film and chemistry.

BUZZ! Wrong. No beards.

Lachlan 717
3-Dec-2012, 12:19
In any decision-making body it is healthier to have some diversity in one's perspective. You may *think* any person, simply following the rules, would reach the same conclusion but a moment's reflection will surely offer you an abundance of counter-examples.

As far as I understand, all of the mods--overworked and under-appreciated as they are--are landscape photographers more or less in the West Coast tradition. I guess if you are also a landscape photographer in the West Coast tradition you may not see a problem but others might.

--Darin

Why not put your money where your mouth is and start a new Forum that is the singular domain of non-West Coast, non-Landscape LF shooters?

If your theory is correct, you'll not only have a huge number of those like-minded individuals currently here follow you there, Pied Piper style, but you will also be able to moderate it yourself without the foibles of Ken, Kirk, Ralph et al.

Just be aware, though, that setting up your own Forum will take a whole lot more effort than staying here with those West Coast Landscapers.

patrickjames
3-Dec-2012, 12:31
I welcome this tightening of the rules. I delete probably 75% of the posts that I start to write because of the amount of negativity that may be directed at me personally. This doesn't affect me, it affects others that are looking for information that I, or people like me, have but are trepidatious about posting it. If the troublemakers are weeded out, maybe people like me will post more. If the negativity is reined in it will open the forum up to people participating in a more meaningful way with discussions instead of arguments.

The bad apples ruin the bushel so to speak.

Ken Lee
3-Dec-2012, 12:59
It's hard to see how one's aesthetic leanings or lineage could have anything to do with being able to moderate a forum based on guidelines that describe civil behavior.

As stated often enough, 99.9% of active forum members already understand and follow them, and as Ralph has pointed out, they filed an electronic form to that effect.

Heroique
3-Dec-2012, 13:14
I delete probably 75% of the posts that I start to write because of the amount of negativity that may be directed at me personally…

Patrick, I’d encourage you to post 100% of your helpful posts because they will always triumph over any discourteous replies that might follow. Discourteous replies, though they might provoke a wince, never stick to undeserving targets – even if they are a moderator’s hassle. No need to let them win, because they always lose.

Darin Boville
3-Dec-2012, 13:21
It's hard to see how one's aesthetic leanings or lineage could have anything to do with being able to moderate a forum based on guidelines that describe civil behavior.

Which proves my point :)

--Darin

Eric Rose
3-Dec-2012, 13:26
The ignore list is a wonderful thing. In addition to that I can't for the life of me see why some individuals on this forum have to make such a "case" about everything that smacks of censorship. This isn't a democracy, this is a privately owned forum. If you don't like the way it's moderated, take a hike!

jnanian
3-Dec-2012, 13:43
ken, kirk, ralph and tuan
thanks ! ...

----------
my aesthetic has nothing to do with west coast ( unless that refers to man ray ? )
i find it to be kind of funny that one's personal-artistic-aesthetic has anything to do with acting or not acting nice.

Greg Miller
3-Dec-2012, 13:54
Out of 2700 active members, there are probably only 2 or 3 who might be affected by the stricter guidelines.

Those are the high maintenance members who are frequently rude, insulting, political, and meddling.

My arithmetic may be wrong, but I believe they represent around 1/10 of 1%, and they (used to) take up 99% of moderators time. Moderators who are themselves Large Format photographers, not psychiatric nurses.

Last I checked this forum is self funded, and moderators don't get paid. Whatever you guys need to do to keep your lives simple is fine by me.

RichardSperry
3-Dec-2012, 13:57
Which proves my point :)

--Darin

I don't see the point. Effective forum moderators don't have to even be enthusiasts of photography. It's a completely different skill set.

You could take excellent forum moderators from a chess, 4x4 wheel drive, or Wiccan(for that matter) message board, transplant them here and they would be good forum moderators here or vice versa.

patrickjames
3-Dec-2012, 13:59
The ignore feature is nice, but people who are new to the forum or who are passing through could be put off by the negativity and animosity of some posts that a regular has blocked. It would be better to get rid of the negativity at it's source IMO.

For anyone trashing a moderator, have you ever moderated? It is a thankless (for the most part) job. Most of us ignore meaningless dribblings, but they have to read it all. I certainly wouldn't want to do it.

Greg Miller
3-Dec-2012, 14:08
I don't see the point. Effective forum moderators don't have to even be enthusiasts of photography. It's a completely different skill set.

You could take excellent forum moderators from a chess, 4x4 wheel drive, or Wiccan(for that matter) message board, transplant them here and they would be good forum moderators here or vice versa.

+1

Ken Lee
3-Dec-2012, 14:08
Which proves my point :)


Darin - I'm sorry, but I honestly don't understand.

Could you please illustrate your point with an example, or state it in a slightly different way ?

Bill_1856
3-Dec-2012, 14:28
You take the blond and I'll take the one in the turban....

IanG
3-Dec-2012, 16:10
Perhaps there's sometimes a need to break rules.

What about Sales where items are being sold at above the market price (I'm talking new prices here) ?

We aren't allowed to comment on the thread, do we report this to moderators or what ? In the case I have in mind I can buy and then sell the same item(s) for 20% of the price and still double my money.

What about the rather dodgy sale from a new member (no posts), when I pointed out the seller had been selling the same items a few years ago my comment was deleted. There was a very good reason why the items haven't sold. It warranted an honest explanation from the seller.

Ian

sanking
3-Dec-2012, 16:53
To be perfectly frank. I think what is confounding and grinding down Ken and I in particular is the fact that a small number of people cause 90% of the problems and never seem to actually change their behavior except for a very brief period following moderator action. This is soooooo "not fun" anymore that after 4 years I am seriously questioning whether I want to do it anymore.

I hope you and Ken don't quit. Just remember that well over 95% of the people on the forum really appreciate the work you moderators are doing.

As a survivor of the Pyro wars there is no doubt in my mind but that strict usage guidelines need to be enforced for the good of the community. I encourage you moderators to be ruthless in doing your job.

Sandy

Ken Lee
3-Dec-2012, 16:58
Perhaps there's sometimes a need to break rules.

What about Sales where items are being sold at above the market price (I'm talking new prices here) ?

We aren't allowed to comment on the thread, do we report this to moderators or what ? In the case I have in mind I can buy and then sell the same item(s) for 20% of the price and still double my money.

What about the rather dodgy sale from a new member (no posts), when I pointed out the seller had been selling the same items a few years ago my comment was deleted. There was a very good reason why the items haven't sold. It warranted an honest explanation from the seller.

Ian

The moderators do their best to distinguish between constructive suggestions on the one hand, and mean-spirited or meddlesome behavior on the other.

If there's any confusion, a quick scan of previous comments in this thread will clarify the intention of the moderators. We've expressed it several different times, and several different ways.

Darin Boville
3-Dec-2012, 16:59
You could take excellent forum moderators from a chess, 4x4 wheel drive, or Wiccan(for that matter) message board, transplant them here and they would be good forum moderators here or vice versa.

That sounds like what they used to say about CEOs and other executive types. "Pepsi, Apple. Doesn't matter what you are managing as long as you are a good manager."

--Darin

Sylvester Graham
3-Dec-2012, 17:02
Ken, as another post here pointed out, the LFF has more active members than ever before. Yet I believe there are the same number of moderators as when I first joined in 2004. Is it possible the root cause of all this stress is not so much bad behavior on the part of members as over-work on the part of the mods? After all, if the *rate* of posts needing moderating stays the same, as the forum grows you will nevertheless eventually be overwhelmed with more and more work. Maybe you need one or two more mods?

--Darin

My vote for more moderators. How many dozens of members are there with more than 1000 posts? If thats a good criteria. Im not going to spend too long crying over any changes to guidelines, or for that matter losing access to the forum. This is an Internet forum, after all, not reality. But those are, and were, some pretty broad guidelines that can be interpreted by the mood of the moderator.

Also, why not try and appoint some younger members, some females?

Greg Miller
3-Dec-2012, 17:30
That sounds like what they used to say about CEOs and other executive types. "Pepsi, Apple. Doesn't matter what you are managing as long as you are a good manager."

--Darin

I would think a better analogy would be the court system. Judges and juries apply set rules to all sorts of various situations they never heard of before. The court system isn't perfect but nobody seems to have come up with a better system so far.

Lachlan 717
3-Dec-2012, 17:36
Perhaps there's sometimes a need to break rules.

What about Sales where items are being sold at above the market price (I'm talking new prices here) ?

We aren't allowed to comment on the thread, do we report this to moderators or what ? In the case I have in mind I can buy and then sell the same item(s) for 20% of the price and still double my money.

What about the rather dodgy sale from a new member (no posts), when I pointed out the seller had been selling the same items a few years ago my comment was deleted. There was a very good reason why the items haven't sold. It warranted an honest explanation from the seller.

Ian

With all due respect, Ian, why do you feel the need to comment at all in these cases? Putting a price on goods that is too high should simply mean that the item won't sell. It's not breaking any of the forum guidelines. After all, the classifieds are clearly marked as being at users' risk.

What about for older items (i.e. no longer available new)? How do you determine if these are too high? It seems to me that, with the demise of so many new LF products, the majority of items sold here are no longer available new.

If someone's stupid enough to purchase without researching market values, isn't that their issue (just as it is the Seller's issue if they, like in your example, price the item well above worth, leaving it for sale ad ifinitum)?

Peter De Smidt
3-Dec-2012, 17:41
To be perfectly frank. I think what is confounding and grinding down Ken and I in particular is the fact that a small number of people cause 90% of the problems and never seem to actually change their behavior except for a very brief period following moderator action. This is soooooo "not fun" anymore that after 4 years I am seriously questioning whether I want to do it anymore.

Just ban them.

Darin Boville
3-Dec-2012, 17:44
Darin - I'm sorry, but I honestly don't understand.

Could you please illustrate your point with an example, or state it in a slightly different way ?

I'll offer one (long) example, a fairly straightforward one. There are many more.

The way I understand it this board is intended to have Large Format Photography at its core. Surrounding that are other related areas--darkroom printing, digital printing, lenses, and so on. You also have image sharing areas and a general "On Photography" area. As a catch-all we have the Lounge and by popular demand we have a Buy and Sell area.

That sounds at first like a simple, aesthetic-less breakdown of all possible discussions, at least all likely categories for such discussions. While all of the mods and the board owners are photographers in the West Coast tradition, that doesn't affect the functioning of the board. Or does it?

Well, where is the lighting forum at? For many photographers, lighting is right up there with breathing and yet here we have almost no discussion of lighting, no real discussion of lighting gear, and I'd be hard pressed even to remember when the last time I saw a piece of lighting gear go by on the classifieds. Odd?

Another category. Models. There no area for discussing this important area of the photographer's profession and art. Yet modeling has embraced the internet age with a passion.

Why are these categories missing--and not missed? I'd suggest that it is because this board really isn't about LF Photography at its core but about the West Coast photography aesthetic at its core. All of the mods, almost all of the people here are photographers shooting, more or less, in that mode. Landscape guys don't generally include a lighting kit when they go backpacking. So no need for alighting board--most members probably never even noticed its absence. With the exception of the creepy/puzzling "Nude in primeval forest" sub-genre, landscape photographers don't usually deal with models (or people at all, for that matter), so, again, never noticed it wasn't there.

Painting with a huge broad brush here with plenty of exceptions--I know--but I think the general direction of what I'm saying is accurate.

Then you look into categories like "On Photography" looking for a discussion of contemporary art...well, here are the names from the first page of titles: Edward Curtis, Willard Van Dyke, Edward Weston, O Winston Link, Gregory Crewdson, Ansel Adams, Brett Weston, Ed Burtynsky, Weston, Ansel Adams, Richard Misrach....that's a pretty narrow focus, largely pre-World War II.

Yet you go to an art museum or a top gallery and almost all you see for the past ten years are LF images, made by still living photographers.

So, again, the board is really serving a certain aesthetic, whether purposely or not, and excluding others, whether purposely or not. Whether you agree or whether that was obvious to you all along will depend on your "world view" (as I put it).

[And I've gone on far longer than I intended--I'll stop there, halfway to my goal! But I think you'll see where I'm going with this...]

--Darin

RichardSperry
3-Dec-2012, 17:48
That sounds like what they used to say about CEOs and other executive types. "Pepsi, Apple. Doesn't matter what you are managing as long as you are a good manager."

--Darin


No!, what I wrote sounds like what I wrote. And what I wrote is different.

Greg Miller
3-Dec-2012, 17:49
What does adding categories have to do with "Stricter Guildelines Enforcement Now In Effect"? If you want new categories, why not ask for them (in a different thread)?

Darin Boville
3-Dec-2012, 17:53
No!, what I wrote sounds like what I wrote. And what I wrote is different.

It's the same! :)

You: You could take excellent forum moderators from a chess, 4x4 wheel drive, or Wiccan(for that matter) message board, transplant them here and they would be good forum moderators here or vice versa.

Me: That sounds like what they used to say about CEOs and other executive types. "Pepsi, Apple. Doesn't matter what you are managing as long as you are a good manager."

--Darin

Kirk Gittings
3-Dec-2012, 17:56
aaanndd I'm still missing something. While that have much to do about the membership and their interests I don't see how that has much to do if anything with the moderation. A moderators job is what Ken described above. We aren't here to broaden peoples minds or aesthetic direction or to instruct. We share info like other members but that is not part of our job as a moderator.

RichardSperry
3-Dec-2012, 18:00
Darin,

Board moderators are not at all like CEOs of any company.

Have you ever been a board moderator?

A message board 'management' consists of the Owner, admins, and moderators. Mods are at the bottom. They don't get paid. They don't get to choose or design the board, though they may suggest those things to the owner and admins.

Mods are usually power users or power posters and are chosen as much for their ability to devote time to the board(for free) as for their other duties. It's not their job to put those categories into the software or manage any of that stuff.

They have access to a little admin forum that you and I can't see, and they will sometimes discuss posts or posters. But other than that, and the ability to edit posts, they are not that different than any other poster.

You are right in that good moderators are passionate about the subject or topics of the board, but that goes to time able to invest; rather than fairness, logic, and level headedness which are even more important.

RichardSperry
3-Dec-2012, 18:16
And they can sticky things.

They have that power too. Forgot.

Ken Lee
3-Dec-2012, 18:30
Darin - Thanks for taking the time to explain, and thanks for pointing out the inadequacies of the forum "coverage" so to speak.

Like Greg, I encourage you to start one or more threads requesting sections on Lighting, Models, and any other photographic topic that you recommend.

This thread announces stricter enforcement of the forum's Usage Guidelines (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/faq.php?faq=vb_faq#faq_gen_rules_faq_item). We're not proposing that they be changed, just making it known that because our time is limited, we are longer hesitant to... administer them.

Darin Boville
3-Dec-2012, 18:46
aaanndd I'm still missing something. While that have much to do about the membership and their interests I don't see how that has much to do if anything with the moderation. A moderators job is what Ken described above. We aren't here to broaden peoples minds or aesthetic direction or to instruct. We share info like other members but that is not part of our job as a moderator.

Hey Kirk,

O.K., I just thought of a shorter way to finish my somewhat long-winded thought (above). Here goes:

If you agree that the board really does have an aesthetic focus that, inadvertently or otherwise, encourages certain kinds of photography (and therefore, does not encourage or even discourages others), and if you agree that the mods and board owner are in the group that is favored, then it leads to the thought that stricter enforcement of the rules (not to mention the selection and emphasis of those same rules) preserves the status quo of the board. If there was a mod on the board (say, under thirty-fine and a practitioner of some other kind of LF photography) you'd not only have a higher likelihood of having a slight different board structure but also different rules, and enforcement of those rules.

In other words, if you are happy with the board as it is why not enforce the rules more strictly?

--Darin

Pitcherman
3-Dec-2012, 19:05
Firstly, I would like to echo the gratitude, already expressed by others, to the moderators of this forum. I know yours can seem a thankless task, so for the record, thank you.
It is my observation that some peoples' sole mission in life is to aggravate the living stink out of everyone they come in contact with and for some reason I can not explain are drawn like moths to a flame to discussions of the art and craft of photography. Unfortunately, there are people who like nothing better than to claim that they caused such a ruckus on this forum that the moderators were forced to shut it down. Sad, but true. This forum is too valuable a resource to allow that to happen.
The mods have a tough enough job trying to maintain order and civility without the added mission of trying to make everyone happy. Instead, they have provided a sandbox for us all to play in and make ourselves happy and to that end have given broad latitude to the members to self police. It is not right to blame the mods for upholding the guidelines as they are.
With all due respect Darin, if you want to talk about Rineke Dijkstra, or David Fokos, or Martin Schoeller, then lets talk about them–that is the purpose of the fourm. But any meaningful discussion of large format photographic art will necessarily look long and often to style and technique of the masters that have gone before. In essence, those guys you mentioned are the giants upon whose shoulders we all now stand.
All best,
Robert

rdenney
3-Dec-2012, 19:14
Nevermind my previous post, Darin--I responded before reading subsequent discussion which covered what I said.

My question for you is: Can you recall any act of moderation that reflects the age or aesthetic interests of the moderator?

My observation of those in their 20's and 30's is that they despise (and distrust) incessant political talk even more than those who are older.

My own observation of our mods is that they are somewhat libertarian (in the non-political sense), preferring to live and let live, and often quoting mutatis mutandis to themselves even if they don't know what it means, heh. That lets things build up to the point where some concentrated action is required. That happens, everyone gets excited for a little while, a new level is set for a while, and things settle back to their usual happy conversations.

One's position in a forum is like a bank account, where the currency is good will. Everyone will make the occasional withdrawal from their goodwill account, hopefully small in relation to the balance of good will on hand. It's the guys who get into a rut of going into the red or never making their credit card payments that end up getting a call from the collection agency. But the normal low-key enforcement gives people a chance to build up their balance. Occasionally, though, the bank has to call in a few loans.

Rick "who stretched that one a bit too far" Denney

IanG
4-Dec-2012, 02:00
With all due respect, Ian, why do you feel the need to comment at all in these cases? Putting a price on goods that is too high should simply mean that the item won't sell. It's not breaking any of the forum guidelines. After all, the classifieds are clearly marked as being at users' risk.

What about for older items (i.e. no longer available new)? How do you determine if these are too high? It seems to me that, with the demise of so many new LF products, the majority of items sold here are no longer available new.

If someone's stupid enough to purchase without researching market values, isn't that their issue (just as it is the Seller's issue if they, like in your example, price the item well above worth, leaving it for sale ad ifinitum)?


Lachlan, I pretty much agree with your comments, particularly as apart from the obvious range of prices you'd expect for age and condition there can also be big regional variations in different parts of the world.

I'm referring to the extremes, the item(s) I saw listed recently were second-hand, the prices higher than new prices in the UK (or the US) and ten times what I pay for the same items on a regular basis in near mint condition. I guess I should buy up all I can and pass them on here at a fairer price (so put my money where my mouth is :D)

There are issues now with LF equipment (in the UK) where one or two sellers dominate the market with highly inflated prices, that isn't happening here but it is affecting certain items being sold via ebay.co.uk and it catches out some people newly entering the LF field.

The For Sale/Wanted section here works well but there are these exteremes, we are in effect a captive market so there is a need for some light handed control.

Ian

Andrew Plume
4-Dec-2012, 03:36
............

now I'm personally really grateful for all that Ken and Kirk do on here, they being the mods (as far as I can tell) who post more regularly than the others, nothing other to say, full stop

andrew

E. von Hoegh
4-Dec-2012, 14:14
... and a Weston III meter.

Weston II. The three is silver. Although I think I read somewhere the UK made version of the III was black.

soeren
4-Dec-2012, 23:49
With all due respect, Ian, why do you feel the need to comment at all in these cases? Putting a price on goods that is too high should simply mean that the item won't sell. It's not breaking any of the forum guidelines. After all, the classifieds are clearly marked as being at users' risk.

What about for older items (i.e. no longer available new)? How do you determine if these are too high? It seems to me that, with the demise of so many new LF products, the majority of items sold here are no longer available new.

If someone's stupid enough to purchase without researching market values, isn't that their issue (just as it is the Seller's issue if they, like in your example, price the item well above worth, leaving it for sale ad ifinitum)?

Actually sites like this used to offer the knowledge to beginners when one is about to purchase something. We could scroll through ebay sales but prices there are all over the place so how should I know whats a good price? If an item is offered here I, in my naivity, would suspect the price is ok until told otherwise so I would really appriciate a second oppinion on items value from other LF'rs. I for one don't understand why its not ok to discuss value and usability of an item offered for sale in the sales thread as long as contributors are civil. But then again I took the easy way out and don't purchase through this site although often tempted.
best regards

Lachlan 717
5-Dec-2012, 00:04
Actually sites like this used to offer the knowledge to beginners when one is about to purchase something. We could scroll through ebay sales but prices there are all over the place so how should I know whats a good price? If an item is offered here I, in my naivity, would suspect the price is ok until told otherwise so I would really appriciate a second oppinion on items value from other LF'rs. I for one don't understand why its not ok to discuss value and usability of an item offered for sale in the sales thread as long as contributors are civil. But then again I took the easy way out and don't purchase through this site although often tempted.
best regards

Unfortunately, Søren, as much as I wish that this was how things would work, it isn't.

There is nothing to stop people with vested interests and/or vitriolic agendas tend to distort the truth and/or undermine the Seller's character for their own gains. These were the reasons the Moderators began to watch Classified section in (somewhat) recent times.

Nor is their any protection for those good Members if you take their advice on a price, and then find it cheap a week later and want to hold these Members responsible for the difference.

With these considerations in mind, the "…at your own risk…" caveat seems to work well with the Moderators' governance of the "...mean-spirited or meddlesome behaviour…" of certain Members.

Ralph Barker
5-Dec-2012, 06:18
Hey Kirk,

O.K., I just thought of a shorter way to finish my somewhat long-winded thought (above). Here goes:

If you agree that the board really does have an aesthetic focus that, inadvertently or otherwise, encourages certain kinds of photography (and therefore, does not encourage or even discourages others), and if you agree that the mods and board owner are in the group that is favored, then it leads to the thought that stricter enforcement of the rules (not to mention the selection and emphasis of those same rules) preserves the status quo of the board. If there was a mod on the board (say, under thirty-fine and a practitioner of some other kind of LF photography) you'd not only have a higher likelihood of having a slight different board structure but also different rules, and enforcement of those rules.

In other words, if you are happy with the board as it is why not enforce the rules more strictly?

--Darin

I don't think there is an "aesthetic focus" here that is promoted in any way by the moderators. As moderators, the only thing we care about, image-wise, is that images posted in the primary sub-forums are LF, as we define it. Whether we might personally "like" the style of an image or not simply doesn't matter in terms of moderation. There may, however, be a predominance of aesthetics that results from member posts. But, that has no effect on moderator action. We simply enforce the rules when wearing that hat.

The structure of the forum, that is the sub-forum categories, was designed as a minimalist means of organizing posts without overly fragmenting them. As such, they are a little broad, and perhaps a bit fuzzy. Having too many narrowly-defined categories becomes cumbersome and difficult to administer on the technical side.

BrianShaw
5-Dec-2012, 07:38
Weston II. The three is silver. Although I think I read somewhere the UK made version of the III was black.

Right you are. My mistake. I have quite a bit of difficulty telling my colors apart in B&W photos. Ha ha ha.

Oh... and "silver" was only silver-colored -- stainless steel. But you knew that already. :)

benrains
5-Dec-2012, 09:20
I definitely support the moderators to do whatever makes their lives easier, and to make the board a more useful resource to the majority of its users. I've never had an personal problems with anyone on here, but I have made use of the blocking feature to improve the signal to noise ratio at times :)

As for some of the comments about people dissatisfied with their being constraints on comments in the "for sale" section of the site, I don't see what the problem is. If someone has priced something too highly for your liking, or you feel has misrepresented the item, then don't buy it. If you want to negotiate for more favorable terms, do it in e-mail or in a PM. And as a buyer, especially as a newbie buyer, if you're unsure about something-- don't buy it until you either do your research or unless you're in a position to accept the risk of making a bad choice. And even if you do, I don't think there are many sellers on the forum who wouldn't take an item back if you weren't happy with it. True, you may be out the cost of the shipping involved, but if you're that much of a cheapskate then I'd say you've taken up the wrong hobby!

soeren
5-Dec-2012, 09:23
Unfortunately, Søren, as much as I wish that this was how things would work, it isn't.

There is nothing to stop people with vested interests and/or vitriolic agendas tend to distort the truth and/or undermine the Seller's character for their own gains. These were the reasons the Moderators began to watch Classified section in (somewhat) recent times.

Nor is their any protection for those good Members if you take their advice on a price, and then find it cheap a week later and want to hold these Members responsible for the difference.

With these considerations in mind, the "…at your own risk…" caveat seems to work well with the Moderators' governance of the "...mean-spirited or meddlesome behaviour…" of certain Members.

The "At your own risk" will always be a rule in effect no matter what and holding somebody giving friendly advise responsible must be an american issue :D not something often seen here in DK. Offcource you are responsible yourselv for your own acquisitions and what you pay but nevertheless it is nice to make those decissions base on as much info as possible. Also if a seller asks a fair price and the majority thinks so a single sour lemon shouldnt spoil that.
Best regards

Bill Burk
5-Dec-2012, 09:32
I have a hunch Darin was poking fun when he implied that adding another west-coast-esthetic moderator would throw the site into turmoil and bring on the decline of civilization.

But I see a valid point in what he says; that it would balance things out to put a "wild eyed maverick" on the force. Someone with a few years ahead to invest and a vision for the future of LF. This kind of addition to the team could sway the content of conversations. The shift might be from (to make an inaccurate, trivial characterization for example only) preservation of traditional methods towards yet-unknown but interesting ways to incorporate LF in a future way of creating images.

Bill Burk
5-Dec-2012, 09:36
Weston II. The three is silver. Although I think I read somewhere the UK made version of the III was black.

Granted, Weston II... But how can this possibly be? There's no Zone System sticker on the meter.

BrianShaw
5-Dec-2012, 09:39
Perhaps that was in his pre-ZS days... when he was a "regular" photographer.

Sal Santamaura
5-Dec-2012, 10:23
...it would balance things out to put a "wild eyed maverick" on the force. Someone with a few years ahead to invest and a vision for the future of LF. This kind of addition to the team could sway the content of conversations...Again, moderators' official duties here have no effect on the content of conversations. They simply enforce the rules which, except for banning discussion of politics and religion as well as mandating that everything outside the lounge be large format related, have nothing to do with content.

Moderators' personal participation in threads is no different from posts by any other members. It has nothing to do with their moderation duties. Surely they deserve as much right to post opinions as the rest of us. Anything less would be punishing them for volunteering!

benrains
5-Dec-2012, 10:30
But I see a valid point in what he says; that it would balance things out to put a "wild eyed maverick" on the force. Someone with a few years ahead to invest and a vision for the future of LF. This kind of addition to the team could sway the content of conversations. The shift might be from (to make an inaccurate, trivial characterization for example only) preservation of traditional methods towards yet-unknown but interesting ways to incorporate LF in a future way of creating images.

Nothing is preventing anyone from doing this, or something like it, now though. The moderators don't dictate the aesthetics of the content of the site or control how people discuss the artform of large format photography (as long as they're doing it politely). If photographers are creating novel work, or using novel processes, and are doing it with large format cameras, I've never seen any indication they would be prevented from sharing that here by the moderators.

It's amusing and strange to me to find that some people here have this misguided view of the role of moderator being an enviable or powerful position. No offense intended to the moderators of LFPF, but being a moderator (and if any are also the system administrator) is about as glamorous as being a high-school hall monitor or a janitor. Basically, you keep the place running, you clean up the messes, and you keep the problem kids from screwing around--and sometimes you drag them off to detention when they're doing things they shouldn't be.

E. von Hoegh
5-Dec-2012, 10:30
Granted, Weston II... But how can this possibly be? There's no Zone System sticker on the meter.

The zone system stickers are a modification of the calculator dial used on Weston meters, have you ever looked at one of the old meters? I use a Weston III, one of the large reasons is the calculator dial.

Darin Boville
5-Dec-2012, 14:02
I have a hunch Darin was poking fun when he implied that adding another west-coast-esthetic moderator would throw the site into turmoil and bring on the decline of civilization.

But I see a valid point in what he says; that it would balance things out to put a "wild eyed maverick" on the force. Someone with a few years ahead to invest and a vision for the future of LF. This kind of addition to the team could sway the content of conversations. The shift might be from (to make an inaccurate, trivial characterization for example only) preservation of traditional methods towards yet-unknown but interesting ways to incorporate LF in a future way of creating images.

Bingo. Except that I would that some of those ways are "yet-unknown" but here right now.

I don't know how to respond to many people who suggest that mods and have no role in setting the tone, culture, and kinds of discussions that occur on a board. Whether overtly or not the rules, and the interpretation of those rules, shapes the culture. Maybe people missed the whole postmodernism thing? :)

--Darin

Kirk Gittings
5-Dec-2012, 14:20
It might be helpful if you gave some specific examples of how moderator action (that is action beyond just our own simple contributions to discussions like everyone else) has dictated, steered, influenced, manipulated (whatever word you want to use) discussions toward favoring the West Coast Large Format Landscape Photography aesthetic. Its not good enough to just throw out vague generalizations like this:


I don't know how to respond to many people who suggest that mods and have no role in setting the tone, culture, and kinds of discussions that occur on a board. Whether overtly or not the rules, and the interpretation of those rules, shapes the culture. Maybe people missed the whole postmodernism thing?

RichardSperry
5-Dec-2012, 15:18
Darin,

What is it that you want posted that is not being posted?

Kirk Gittings
5-Dec-2012, 16:11
I think (I think....) he is asking how you attract a more forward looking, contemporary, (probably younger), membership to this forum to broaden out the discussions and aesthetic ideologies. IMO This is not a moderator issue but an attitudinal issue (I say issue-not a problem) with the present membership. I know for myself, in my own little way, that I have received allot of push back when defending artists like Robert Adams, Cindy Sherman and Sugimoto. I actually expect that here. In other parts of my artistic life (like when I teach at SAIC) these artists are not even slightly controversial-they are even looked at as yesterday's news-but here sometimes you would think they are current and subversive.

Anyone who wants to challenge the pervasive aesthetic ideologies here (that are largely stuck in pre 1960's ideas about photographic aesthetics) is going to have to have a thick skin and actually have some interest in this site to stick it out through allot of contentious discussions. For many I suspect the return is not worth the effort. Really why would anyone bother arguing over this when all you need is a little technical info?

I frankly can't see what a moderator would do about this except give preferential treatment to forward thinking people? Not let people argue with them and drive them away? What? If we did anything like that we would not be doing our jobs.

You guys (you guys and us-the moderators as members) determine the nature and direction of discussions here by what threads you start and what comments you make. Even Darin own threads are like 99% about LF technical stuff.

r.e.
5-Dec-2012, 16:41
I think (I think....) he is asking how you attract a more forward looking, contemporary, (probably younger), membership to this forum to broaden out the discussions and aesthetic ideologies. IMO This is not a moderator issue but an attitudinal issue (I say issue-not a problem) with the present membership. I know for myself, in my own little way, that I have received allot of push back when defending artists like Robert Adams, Cindy Sherman and Sugimoto. I actually expect that here. In other parts of my artistic life (like when I teach at SAIC) these artists are not even slightly controversial-they are even looked at as yesterday's news-but here sometimes you would think they are current and subversive.

Anyone who wants to challenge the pervasive aesthetic ideologies here (that are largely stuck in pre 1960's ideas about photographic aesthetics) is going to have to have a thick skin and actually have some interest in this site to stick it out through allot of contentious discussions. For many I suspect the return is not worth the effort. Really why would anyone bother arguing over this when all you need is a little technical info?

I frankly can't see what a moderator would do about this except give preferential treatment to forward thinking people? Not let people argue with them and drive them away? What? If we did anything like that we would not be doing our jobs.

You guys (you guys and us-the moderators as members) determine the nature and direction of discussions here by what threads you start and what comments you make. Even Darin own threads are like 99% about LF technical stuff.

Most of the participants in this forum have a conservative view about photography and I don't believe that the moderators can do anything to change that. This has been a characteristic of the forum for most of its history, and I don't see it changing anytime soon. There was a time when there were spirited discussions about aesthetics, but the result was that many of the people who were interested in less conservative views left.

eddie
5-Dec-2012, 17:08
ha,

it seems that somehow the mods jobs got bigger in this thread alone....i have never seem so many posting by three of the mods as i have in just this thread.

i am surprised it has not been locked already....matter of fact i am surprised that right after the 1st post by ken the thread was not locked immediately. seemed to me nothing else was needed to be said.

the mods are too nice (most of the time)

but anyway, the mods work for free....so we can not fire them......but maybe we could sell them? :p too bad there are no auctions allowed on this site....i bet the only way we could get them sold would be at auction! bwha ha ha ha!

now lets see if this thread can get locked down already......109 posts too late!

Kirk Gittings
5-Dec-2012, 18:05
5 dollars and I'm yours.......

RichardSperry
5-Dec-2012, 18:08
Cindy Sherman shoots Hasselblad digital now, are thread about her even allowed? Don't know if she shot LF, at all.

Anyway, some of her middle career stuff, the sex doll stuff, is apparently still controversial. At the SF show this summer I overheard a father parent person tell his kid persons, "this room is safe, you can go in this one." This is in San Francisco, I reiterate.

Sal Santamaura
5-Dec-2012, 18:44
Most of the participants in this forum have a conservative view about photography and I don't believe that the moderators can do anything to change that...Nor should they try to change that -- in their role as moderators. When simply posting their opinions to threads, they are of course free to express any views about photography (within the rules) they wish. Just like all other members.

Kirk Gittings
5-Dec-2012, 18:48
Richard,

1)Of course if its in the lounge.

2) Thats not controversy. That is just a father protecting his kids from sexual stuff. Controversy is like Expressionism, or Cubism or DaDa or New Topographics in their early days. Anyway the sex doll stuff is just intellectually lazy-trying to hard to be shocking because she didn't have any real ideas to follow up her early work.

Bill Burk
5-Dec-2012, 19:37
Thanks Moderators, you do a great job here...

To give some of my own thoughts instead of trying to figure out other's thoughts... I was going to be cagey about site names but think that in this case being clear is more helpful than dropping hints...

I come here for sanctuary. APUG sometimes gets noisy. Photo.net is intolerably digital. Hang the rest of the Internet.

Sure I recall a lively discussion about art, where my work was praised without qualification (music, man, music). At one point that thread seemed to need moderation but the result from my perspective was an eye-opening awareness and respect for my fellow person's opinion.

What I mean when I see that future could take a different shape, you know how here it is OK to speak of hybrid workflow but at APUG it's not. That's a distinction shaped by rules and enforced by moderators. I take the analog approach so that I can freely talk on both sites without having to edit myself. But I totally appreciate the flexible attitude taken here.

eddie
5-Dec-2012, 20:17
5 dollars and I'm yours.......

Bought with a buy it now......for less than i was willing to bid!

charleymeyer
5-Dec-2012, 20:51
I believe the camera is a Zeiss Juwel, he owned a 5X7. Hang in there Ken!

Darin Boville
5-Dec-2012, 21:40
I think (I think....) he is asking how you attract a more forward looking, contemporary, (probably younger), membership to this forum to broaden out the discussions and aesthetic ideologies. IMO This is not a moderator issue but an attitudinal issue (I say issue-not a problem) with the present membership. I know for myself, in my own little way, that I have received allot of push back when defending artists like Robert Adams, Cindy Sherman and Sugimoto. I actually expect that here. In other parts of my artistic life (like when I teach at SAIC) these artists are not even slightly controversial-they are even looked at as yesterday's news-but here sometimes you would think they are current and subversive.

Anyone who wants to challenge the pervasive aesthetic ideologies here (that are largely stuck in pre 1960's ideas about photographic aesthetics) is going to have to have a thick skin and actually have some interest in this site to stick it out through allot of contentious discussions. For many I suspect the return is not worth the effort. Really why would anyone bother arguing over this when all you need is a little technical info?

I frankly can't see what a moderator would do about this except give preferential treatment to forward thinking people? Not let people argue with them and drive them away? What? If we did anything like that we would not be doing our jobs.

You guys (you guys and us-the moderators as members) determine the nature and direction of discussions here by what threads you start and what comments you make. Even Darin own threads are like 99% about LF technical stuff.

Kirk, you said it better than me!

--Darin

pdmoylan
5-Dec-2012, 21:44
What's missing in this discussion is the psychologist's analysis that we are all suffering from the not so gradual loss of a dying art. We have little to discuss but the subtle characteristics and value of ancient lenses, or harrass each other over non LF issues. Back in 2008 we were chanting the great renaissance of LF because those who couldn't previously have afforded great lenses and cameras were finding them at bargain prices. But we were buying into our desire to uphold what film and camera manufacturers were not. It's like losing a good friend to cancer and trying to remain enthusiastic.

This thread, IMHO, is simply the result of those offenders having too much time to discuss too little innovation and change within the limited parameters of LF, living in the past, the future looking bleeker each day. For better or for worse, we are losing the battle to sustain what we love.


Setting the aforementioned aside, as obtuse or unfeasible as the following my seem, it seems to me there are three ways to go on this:
1. Delay each posting until a moderator has chanced to "approve it" thereby eliminating any "violations"
2. Write software which automatically deletes postings which have incorporated any of a large vocabulary of specific terms such as religious, politcal words, explitives etc, or (sounds like a Chinese government plan of action)
3. Allow for self policing, i.e. members requesting that postings be deleted for reasons already established.

We should carefully consider embracing new technology such as MFDSLRs, digital backs etc as an addendum to what we are discussing in this forum. That way it can evolve rather than dying a slow (perhaps more abrudt) death.

Being a realist and a business person by trade, the writing is on the wall. Let's heed it.

PDM

Sal Santamaura
5-Dec-2012, 23:39
...it seems to me there are three ways to go on this:
1. Delay each posting until a moderator has chanced to "approve it" thereby eliminating any "violations"
2. Write software which automatically deletes postings which have incorporated any of a large vocabulary of specific terms such as religious, politcal words, explitives etc, or (sounds like a Chinese government plan of action)
3. Allow for self policing, i.e. members requesting that postings be deleted for reasons already established...I vote for 4, simply doing what Ken described in the OP of this thread. :)

pdmoylan
6-Dec-2012, 18:01
Back to Darin's and Kirk's point(in a nutshell), how do we stay RELEVANT and not boring? Technical discussions are usually cut and dry unless it is new, cutting edge etc. Personally I see no reason not to add MFDSLR discussion and those who use them (mostly pros), and beyond just the lounge section.

Some imaqes I saw recently in a well printed hardcover book where the image maker was using mostly Hasselblad H4D-60 were of the quality akin to LF. If we are all too conservative to include these new images and discussions around them, well I've already said it...

Ian David
6-Dec-2012, 18:58
Personally I see no reason not to add MFDSLR discussion and those who use them (mostly pros), and beyond just the lounge section.

But I thought the whole point of this forum was to discuss large format photography exclusively? (See forum title.)
Seems to me that every forum has a handful of regulars who want it to be their one-stop-shop - the place where they can log in and get all the social interaction they need, and discuss everything that interests them. Personally I hope this place retains its focus.

Jody_S
6-Dec-2012, 21:54
Having the forum focused on a particular type of camera that most photographers have thought obsolete for 50 years has it's charms. Weeds out the riff-raff who buy whatever those photo magazines are selling. Or at least it keeps them in the closet re. their latest acquisitions.

Sal Santamaura
6-Dec-2012, 22:00
Back to Darin's and Kirk's point(in a nutshell), how do we stay RELEVANT and not boring?...It seems fairly clear that those who frequent this forum but aren't complaining about its purpose find it relevant and not boring.


...Personally I see no reason not to add MFDSLR discussion and those who use them (mostly pros), and beyond just the lounge section...Although I find that suggestion absurd for the Large Format Photography Forum, if you feel compelled to make it, how about doing so in the manner indicated by earlier posts? In other words, start a thread in the Feedback category rather than being off topic in a News category thread on the entirely different subject of rules enforcement?

soeren
7-Dec-2012, 01:29
Maybe this is the deathfight of LFPF. The subject of LF photography is also covered on APUG and to some extent also on RFF. Many of us shoot more than just LF and may want to stay on the foras where most interests and used formats are covered. LF photography is a rather specialized niche, whether interests in this is declining or not I don't know but it could be LFPF should join forces with other foras e.g. f295 or alternative photography though I suspect a lot of us already participate in those as well.
Best regards

Brian C. Miller
7-Dec-2012, 02:50
Maybe this is the deathfight of LFPF.

No. This forum has far more relevant and sensible posts than the other photography forums. And the only subject is LF! APUG is a ghost town by comparison. (The only thing that LFPF lacks is a gallery feature. If LFPF had a feature where the user's posted pictures could be shown as a gallery, that would be neat! But I suppose that would be a special feature.)

Anyways.

This is the "age" of the Internet (what happened to the age of Aquarius?), where competition is just a forum launch away, any given day. And since nobody has created an alternate LF forum, then by default everybody agrees that LFPF is good enough as it is. Nobody is breaking a sweat to create an alternative, and I haven't seen any "I'm moving to X because of the moderators." (Actually, I usually see it based on the lack of moderation) The reason that Japan became a polite society is because there were a head-chopping bunch called "samurais." They considered it to be their duty to kill people who were rude. And today, although there are no longer any samurais, Japanese society puts an extreme premium on being polite. Here, the moderators have taken a firm stance about some pretty basic stuff, and that's just the way it is.

pdmoylan
7-Dec-2012, 02:55
Brian, A Gallery is a great idea to keep it all interesting. Is it possible?

Doremus Scudder
7-Dec-2012, 03:27
I like the narrow focus of this forum. That's why I visit and participate. Having the site dedicated to large format keeps it a small enough community to get to know most of the participants a bit from their postings and keeps the amount of information small enough to be digestible. Adding MF/DSLR would just bloat it unnecessarily. There are fora enough for those things. When I wish to discuss other topics than LF, I simply go to another forum.

Best,

Doremus

Preston
7-Dec-2012, 06:42
(The only thing that LFPF lacks is a gallery feature. If LFPF had a feature where the user's posted pictures could be shown as a gallery, that would be neat!...)

I think this is a great idea. There are two avenues that this could take: A simple gallery that would not allow for comments/critiques, or a gallery that would. Either way, I believe a gallery of some sort would be an asset.


Adding MF/DSLR would just bloat it unnecessarily. There are fora enough for those things. When I wish to discuss other topics than LF, I simply go to another forum.

I heartily agree.

--P

bob carnie
7-Dec-2012, 07:23
I agree , I just wish I knew how to get rid of the FS section.

I like the narrow focus of this forum. That's why I visit and participate. Having the site dedicated to large format keeps it a small enough community to get to know most of the participants a bit from their postings and keeps the amount of information small enough to be digestible. Adding MF/DSLR would just bloat it unnecessarily. There are fora enough for those things. When I wish to discuss other topics than LF, I simply go to another forum.

Best,

Doremus

BrianShaw
7-Dec-2012, 07:28
I agree too; I just wish that I knew how to get rid of the grumbling threads about perceived "problems" with the form... of which I know of none except a few grumpy old men.

BrianShaw
7-Dec-2012, 07:31
p.s. I like the FS section. If only people wouldn't post comments and the posting as limited to interactions between real sellers and real buyers, not the busy-bodies who want to intrude on someone elses personal business.

Brian Ellis
7-Dec-2012, 07:34
Strict rules are fine with me. The old LF newsgroup (can't remember the name) that once was an excellent forum eventually was basically destroyed as a useful site for LF discussion by a few immature idiots.

Peter Lewin
7-Dec-2012, 07:59
The only thing that LFPF lacks is a gallery feature. If LFPF had a feature where the user's posted pictures could be shown as a gallery, that would be neat! But I suppose that would be a special feature.
Site enhancements take server capacity and IT effort, so I will be slightly contrarian. While a gallery would be nice, I have been visiting the site URLs that many contributors include in their "signatures" and have found more wonderful images than I can absorb. So for me at least, the ability to link to contributor's own sites provides a free "gallery" equivalent. Of course, that approach only works for those contributors who do have an offsite repository.

Ralph Barker
7-Dec-2012, 07:59
Non-LF discussions - topics like MFDSLRs can be discussed in The Lounge, but not in the primary sub-forums. We have no desire to become a "one-stop shop" photography-wise.

Image Galleries - this version of vBulletin supports Albums, which can be created off of one's profile.

bob carnie
7-Dec-2012, 08:13
But how do you get rid of it , some days its three pages and I really would prefer not to see them.

p.s. I like the FS section. If only people wouldn't post comments and the posting as limited to interactions between real sellers and real buyers, not the busy-bodies who want to intrude on someone elses personal business.

eddie
7-Dec-2012, 08:54
I agree too; I just wish that I knew how to get rid of the grumbling threads about perceived "problems" with the form... of which I know of none except a few grumpy old men.

+1

eddie
7-Dec-2012, 08:58
But how do you get rid of it , some days its three pages and I really would prefer not to see them.

Why not just the forum sub menus and look what is new. I have never ever used the "Show new post" button or whatever it is called. I just click on lenses and accessories and look what is new.

I very seldom go to business or resources etc etc unless i c something interesting on the home page then i will click in. This way u never see sub forums u do not like.

bob carnie
7-Dec-2012, 08:59
I actually do use the Whats New button, I thought it was a great new addition.

Why not just the forum sub menus and look what is new. I have never ever used the "Show new post" button or whatever it is called. I just click on lenses and accessories and look what is new.

I very seldom go to business or resources etc etc unless i c something interesting on the home page then i will click in. This way u never see sub forums u do not like.

Greg Miller
7-Dec-2012, 09:02
Oh no! Another flame war brewing. I hate Show New Post! I love Show New Post. Your an idiot!... ;)

Peter Mounier
7-Dec-2012, 09:13
Shouldn't you have said "you're" an idiot?

Peter

eddie
7-Dec-2012, 09:18
I actually do use the Whats New button, I thought it was a great new addition.

Yeah. But it is showing forums u do not like. My way you never c the FS unless u click in.

Greg Miller
7-Dec-2012, 09:27
Shouldn't you have said "you're" an idiot?

Peter

No, I should have said "I'm an idiot"! ;)

(I'm usually quite careful about those things, but alas, as I get older I find that my fingers and my brain aren't as in synch as they used to be...)

sanking
7-Dec-2012, 10:16
But how do you get rid of it , some days its three pages and I really would prefer not to see them.

Bob,

Can you not just ignore the FS sales? That is what I do. The sense of community does not demand that we read and respond to every thread.

Geez, there seems to be no end to complaints from the grumpy old men!! Once you get on this train it rolls off into forever.

Sandy

BrianShaw
7-Dec-2012, 10:25
Ignoring the FS forum is possible if one is not interested.

But if one is interested, it is surely annoying to look at a thread that just updated only to find that some yokel just posted, "Hey, this is a great lens at a great price; I wonder why nobody bought it yet; I'd buy it but I have to pay for my girlfriends apartment because she just lost her job and I don't want her to move in with me or she might mistake that for sincere interest and want to get married, then I couldn't buy lots of cool gear unless I started sneaking and hiding it from her and I wouldn't want to do that becuase it isn't nice."

I'm OK with "PM sent" and "Bump", or any reasonalbe facsimiles thereof.

... and the longer I hang out here the grumpier I get. Why would that be?

Kodachrome25
7-Dec-2012, 10:57
Not sure if you have noticed, but we all only have 24 hours in one day, nothing more. And of that 24 hours, we have anywhere from less than half to a little more than half of it in terms of sunlight, depending on what latitude you live at.

I say this to remind you all, and mostly my self that if photography is important to you, then the direction, age bracket and ultimately the fate of this or *any* online forum is just not that important in the grand scheme of things.

When I chat with my buddies, fellow shooters, wife, family or even some long time clients, I am open and candid about things, often use my written talents to get the point across in a unique way, often using comical analogies like the one I posted on here over the weekend on what is TRULY a tired subject that had my wife cracking up...and got me banned for a few days...

Banned for not aiming at anyone in particular and using some wit to give my opinion in the matter. Fine, if we need to talk like we are in the Cub Scouts and can not be our selves then there will be less people like me on here contributing anything at all. There are a lot of well meaning and experienced people on here who take the time to share, that is the good part of the forum. But in terms of the year 2012, not the corny dialogue of the 30's and 40's, it is kind of the same people saying the same thing and when ever things get fun and edgy in a conversation, Judy Garland has to come in and say, "Well, nooo Toto, golly, we can't have that" and the bread of the conversation often goes stale.

So I am sure you will be fine without folks like me, other people who like to speak candidly, you were before, but just consider that a lot of people lurk and don't bother to post because this place can often come across as a AARP meeting where the rules are the rules and honestly, are subject to interpretation.

I will now go back to lurking, PM'ing, buying and selling but not posting, that is the way you all seem to want it so that is what you will get...

Good luck in going forward and remember, photographs will never happen if you are constantly trying to be the next Mozart at your computer's keyboard...

BrianShaw
7-Dec-2012, 11:01
Welcome back!

BrianShaw
7-Dec-2012, 11:02
... or "Good Bye", whichever is most appropriate.

Kodachrome25
7-Dec-2012, 11:06
... or "Good Bye", whichever is most appropriate.

Ahh, I am around on here, reading, searching like I am today. So PM me, call me, we can have a conversation like normal folks, I just don't see any point in posting in threads anymore, life is too short for this kind of thing..:-)

Ralph Barker
7-Dec-2012, 11:53
But how do you get rid of it , some days its three pages and I really would prefer not to see them.

Sounds like you are using the "Unified View". As I recall, the vBulletin contributor who wrote the add-in for the old version that allowed per-user configuration of what was included decided not to update the add-in for the latest version of vBulletin.

One alternative is to go back to using the real forum index, which lists the sub-forums separately.

IanG
7-Dec-2012, 13:30
I can honestly say I've posted and deliberately broken so called guidelines a few times in the past few days. Not one remotely controversial.

Here's a current scenario, Eddie (Gunks) posted and then sold an item in the For Sale/Wanted section, an unusual studio typw shutter, worthy of being kept on the forums archive (all sales etc threads are deleted after a priod of time - quite short). I reported my own posting on the thread asking what the moderators though should be done in a case like this, and a wall of silence.

In this particular case Eddie shot a video th show how the shutter worked in practice, of course I could star a new thread about this but on this and other forums there are far too many duplicate threads

This site's a repository of LF data and this one (the shutter) deserves to be there.

Ian

rdenney
7-Dec-2012, 13:45
Shouldn't you have said "you're" an idiot?

Peter

What are you, some kind of grammar nazi?

Rick "bringing this, one presumes, to a satisfactory conclusion :) " Denney

Peter Mounier
7-Dec-2012, 13:58
What are you, some kind of grammar nazi?

Rick "bringing this, one presumes, to a satisfactory conclusion :) " Denney

I don't think so. Greg's post was intended as humor, I believe. My retort was in the same vein, and I'm glad to see he took it that way. I was hesitant to post it, since that's exactly the sort of thing that actually can start a war if you don't have a sense of humor. I know from Greg's history here that he is actually pretty smart and his misspell was most likely an accident. I just thought it was funny to call someone an idiot while misspelling a word in that statement. I usually don't correct someone's grammar if they really are an idiot.

Peter "thank you Greg for being a good sport" Mounier

rdenney
7-Dec-2012, 13:59
I reported my own posting on the thread asking what the moderators though should be done in a case like this, and a wall of silence.

Ian, it's likely none of the mods was reading that thread. Every post has a button to report the post to the mods, which, of course, does not have to be used just for complaints.

You could also have asked Eddie (via PM) to post it in a regular forum so that his info would be preserved. Of course, the video is his, so the choice should be his.

Rick "thinking even the most active members don't read more than a fraction of the threads" Denney

sanking
7-Dec-2012, 14:02
I can honestly say I've posted and deliberately broken so called guidelines a few times in the past few days. Not one remotely contreversial.

Here's a current scenario, Eddie (Gunks) posted and then sold an item in the For Sale/Wanted section, an unusual studio typw shutter, worthy of being kept on the forums archive (all sales etc threads are deleted after a priod of time - quite short). I reported my own posting on the thread asking what the moderators though should be done in a case like this, and a wall of silence.

In this particular case Eddie shot a video th show how the shutter worked in practice, of course I could star a new thread about this but on this and other forums there are far too many duplicate threads

This site's a repository of LF data and this one (the shutter) deserves to be there.

Ian

So why not just start another thread on one of the main pages about unusual shutters and post a link to the video that Eddie used to advertise his shutter? That would preserve the information that you find of historical importance without wasting the time of the moderators about "interpretation" of the FS guidelines.

Sandy

Fred L
7-Dec-2012, 14:17
Maybe this is the deathfight of LFPF. The subject of LF photography is also covered on APUG and to some extent also on RFF...

Certainly not imo ;) While APUG does have a LF section, it doesn't seem to have the same level of discourse as one finds here. As for RFF and LF ? I have to chuckle at that one. RFF, while it does have some good discussions, appears to be very gear centric and anyone who visits it, knows of what I speak. It is a forum rangefinders for after all so I can't expect the same type of threads as LFPF. The s-n ratio does seem to be higher than here as well.

LFPF will always be THE site for me if I want to discuss or read about anything 4x5 and up and the work that members display here sets a high bar.

jnanian
7-Dec-2012, 14:48
Sounds like you are using the "Unified View". As I recall, the vBulletin contributor who wrote the add-in for the old version that allowed per-user configuration of what was included decided not to update the add-in for the latest version of vBulletin.

One alternative is to go back to using the real forum index, which lists the sub-forums separately.


i always hit unified view and i never see anything that is for sale unless
i go specifically to the for sale forum. maybe i am lucky ? :)

could it be possible to do an ignore forum add-on to the settngs ?
it might be helpful ... ( unless its not )

Eric James
7-Dec-2012, 14:53
...maybe i am lucky ? :) ...

Same here - I use the "Unified View" and neither the lounge nor the for sale threads show.

IanG
7-Dec-2012, 15:44
So why not just start another thread on one of the main pages about unusual shutters and post a link to the video that Eddie used to advertise his shutter? That would preserve the information that you find of historical importance without wasting the time of the moderators about "interpretation" of the FS guidelines.

Sandy

Yes, I'd agree that's probably the better option (and what I may well do) but I felt it was something that should be asked of the Moderators at thbis time as there's already an existing thread. I wanted and still want the moderators to address issues like this.

On another note Sandy you've jumped and made comments on one or two of my posts lately without reading properly and realising we are both actually commenting from similar perspectives. In the case I described here I asked the moderators some questions, they weren't public but they weren't remotely contreversial either but they do need addressing, and I had no reply.

It's about the moderators being more in tune with the broad spectrum of active members/posters, I'll admit to giving Kirk Gittings polite grief but there's a need for new moderators who are as committed as Kirk is, the other mods seem to be semi retired and are barely active and in truth it's too much for just one active moderator.

Ian

Ralph Barker
8-Dec-2012, 08:12
i always hit unified view and i never see anything that is for sale unless
i go specifically to the for sale forum. maybe i am lucky ? :)

could it be possible to do an ignore forum add-on to the settngs ?
it might be helpful ... ( unless its not )

I was wrong. The Unified View excludes it. Sorry for the confusion.

soeren
8-Dec-2012, 11:22
Certainly not imo ;) While APUG does have a LF section, it doesn't seem to have the same level of discourse as one finds here. As for RFF and LF ? I have to chuckle at that one. RFF, while it does have some good discussions, appears to be very gear centric and anyone who visits it, knows of what I speak. It is a forum rangefinders for after all so I can't expect the same type of threads as LFPF. The s-n ratio does seem to be higher than here as well.

LFPF will always be THE site for me if I want to discuss or read about anything 4x5 and up and the work that members display here sets a high bar.

Maybe this site has LF content of a higher quality than APUG and RFF but also on this site the equipment post are in majority the "cameras and accessories" Forum has over 133.000 posts which is somewhat more than number two forum in that respect. yes the for sales forum has over 140.000 posts but thats not discussions.
Best regards.

Kevin J. Kolosky
12-Dec-2012, 15:50
I believe in choice. If it were up to me I would allow somewhat more controversial and even adversary discourse than is currently allowed here. That is because a long life has taught me that there really is value in all voices being heard, even if one doesn't like to hear them. On the other hand I do so like this forum for the vast amount of knowledge contained herein, and even more for the ability to view other people's photographic work, the best value here.

The solution to the original issue is for a group of folks to start another large formal forum exactly like this one, but with somewhat more liberal and democratic rules. Those who wish peace and quiet can keep their loyalties here, and those who wish a more robust discourse can leave for greener pastures. Neither side would be forced to look at or accept what they don't wish to. Everyone might be happy, including the moderators.

There are a number of free and easy to use forum programs available for use now. Certainly there would be a cost for bandwith and administration, but that is no different than it is for this forum.

The point is that if a person loves large format photography he or she should have a forum home, and it shouldn't be dictated by one political point of view.

I am not speaking about a free for all where anything goes. Rather, I speak of, as I said, a forum where the rules, if many, are made by the members.

Kirk Gittings
12-Dec-2012, 15:58
The point is that if a person loves large format photography he or she should have a forum home, and it shouldn't be dictated by one political point of view.

Kevin, What is the "one" political point of view dictated here?

BrianShaw
12-Dec-2012, 16:13
Zone system?

IanG
12-Dec-2012, 16:25
What is the "one" political point of view dictated here?

Politics affects the prices we pay, the way goods are treated differently in various parts of the world. The unfairness of the dumping of items into the US market to get volume sales and the profit taking in other countries at very significantly higher prices.

Politics also affects what images are made, and seen, whether that's through government censorship or attitudes in a country.

Politics can be at the root of life or death in some circumstances for a photographer. (Frank Capa, W. Eugene Smith etc).

Politics can be seen in issue based photography, think of the New Topographic movement in the US and Environmental issues.

On another note what about Simon Roberts coverage of the last General Election campains the UK with a 5x4 camera, you couldn't find a more political subject.


There's McCarthyism here around the word Politics on this Forum that seems as bad as any American breathing the word Socialism as something the US should espouse, and yet here in the UK under Mrs Thatcher as Prime Minister, who was further to the right than Attila the Hun, we had (and still have) a welfare system.

A bit more toleration and freedom to post is needed not a Stalinist clampdown on free speech

Ian

PS Post saved in case dleted.

Kevin J. Kolosky
12-Dec-2012, 16:43
Kevin, What is the "one" political point of view dictated here?

Maybe the word "political" was not the correct word, although it sounded correct to me and is certainly subject to interpretation by those who contemplate its meaning.

My view is that the "point of view here", whether its political or not, is to avoid controversy at the cost of stifling viewpoints that may have both social and technical value.

I am not saying that is the wrong point of view. Certainly it is right for the current owners or rule makers of this forum, but only because of the fact that they, by their position, dictate the point of view. When one looks at history, no matter what political point of view one may have, one would have to agree that we just completed a truly monumental exercise in this country. Yes, part of it was the election of a leader who is going to administer the rules that we elected others to make. But the truly truly remarkable thing was our ability to say just about anything we wanted about anything. And yes, much of it got tiresome, and a lot of it made no sense, and some of it was downright idiotic. And some did cross a line. but on any day anyone could go out and have discourse with others about how our "forum" was run, and what we thought about the people running it and those that wanted to run it, and the rules we live by. Truly truly remarkable. Go to China or Afghanastan or some South American Countries and try to do that.

Why do we allow it. Because our forefathers knew there was value in all voices being heard, or at least in all voices making the choice as to which voices would be heard. Thats why they risked their lives against King George and his merry band of Englishmen. And by that same principle It is my opinion that a forum might be better for being run that way as well.

Greg Miller
12-Dec-2012, 16:48
I don't get it. Going back to post #1 in this thread, here is what is now being enforced - how is this in any way stifling viewpoints???? The goal as I see it is to maintain a level of civility. Say whatever you want. Juts be polite about it.

""Name calling, personal attacks, character assassination, coarse or inappropriate language, or enticing/baiting others to violate forum guidelines will not be tolerated here."

"Topics and discussions of politics and religion are not allowed, here [the Lounge] or elsewhere on the forum, and the forum's general behavioral standards apply here, too."

"Readers of "For Sale" posts should refrain from intruding on the thread by making negative comments about the item or the price being requested. Doing so is rude, and thus in violation of general forum guidelines." "

Kevin J. Kolosky
12-Dec-2012, 16:52
I don't get it. Going back to post #1 in this thread, here is what is now being enforced - how is this in any way stifling viewpoints???? The goal as I see it is to maintain a level of civility. Say whatever you want. Juts be polite about it.

""Name calling, personal attacks, character assassination, coarse or inappropriate language, or enticing/baiting others to violate forum guidelines will not be tolerated here."

"Topics and discussions of politics and religion are not allowed, here [the Lounge] or elsewhere on the forum, and the forum's general behavioral standards apply here, too."

"Readers of "For Sale" posts should refrain from intruding on the thread by making negative comments about the item or the price being requested. Doing so is rude, and thus in violation of general forum guidelines." "

The problem with those rules, as I see it, and of course each person will see it differently, is that they are rather subjective. Whether they have been violated has to be decided by a rather small band of moderators, using their standards for what those words mean rather than a more objective standard put in place by the entire forum.

Darin Boville
12-Dec-2012, 17:00
The problem with those rules, as I see it, and of course each person will see it differently, is that they are rather subjective. Whether they have been violated has to be decided by a rather small band of moderators, using their standards for what those words mean rather than a more objective standard put in place by the entire forum.

The comment that got Frank banned that started all of these discussions was of the tamest, most innocuous sort. A sort of veiled reference to the recent US elections. I had to read it twice, thinking I had missed the part that was about politics.

I get the clear impression here that the "moderator culture" here that lives in fear of the ghost of Jorge, or some other event in the past. Many of the rest of us are bewildered by the skittishness.

--Darin

mdm
12-Dec-2012, 17:17
I think the Frank banning was completely inconsequential, except that a lot of loud mouths (and you are large among them Darin) made such a big issue of it there was then no way for him to return with any dignity intact. Really, if it had gone unnoticed he would still be here, thats not the first time he has been banned. Personally I am pleased not to have to read all the Frank noise, I dont care about hand tools, scythes, tv's etc. Frank is incapable of using his own brain to make a decision, first he must ask the whole world for advice. The moderator culture is fine, who cares if it gets heavy handed at times, just accept it and continue making and sharing LF photographs. Pictures no matter how bad are unlikely to get anyone banned.

Kirk Gittings
12-Dec-2012, 17:23
The comment that got Frank banned that started all of these discussions was of the tamest, most innocuous sort. A sort of veiled reference to the recent US elections. I had to read it twice, thinking I had missed the part that was about politics.

I get the clear impression here that the "moderator culture" here that lives in fear of the ghost of Jorge, or some other event in the past. Many of the rest of us are bewildered by the skittishness.

--Darin

Darin, it wasn't just that post. Frank is blowing smoke with that claim. Frank was given a temporary ban, as he had been given temporary bans before for politics, as he had been given numerous warnings officially before for politics, as he had more political posts deleted than the rest of the forum combined. No one since I have been a moderator here was cut more slack than Frank, over and over and over and over again. He wanted to be banned as he has been banned from numerous online forums. To him it is a badge of some weird adolescent honor.

Greg Miller
12-Dec-2012, 17:27
The problem with those rules, as I see it, and of course each person will see it differently, is that they are rather subjective. Whether they have been violated has to be decided by a rather small band of moderators, using their standards for what those words mean rather than a more objective standard put in place by the entire forum.

All rules are have to be interpreted by humans and heir application is always application is subjective - we are human and our language is imprecise. Just look at all the interpretations of the US Constitution, and look at the changes in interpretation as the makeup of the Supreme Court changes. The judicial system was created as a check and balance of the laws created by the legislative branch and executed by the Executive branch.

Asking a larger group of moderators to collectively decide on each action within this forum would be slow, sloppy, and burdensome . This forum is great, I enjoy, it, but is is hardly worth quibbling about compared to all the stupid subjective things that go on in the real world that have an actual impact on my life. As someone else said, if anyone doesn't like how this forum is run (free to us BTW), then they are free to create their own forum and build a user base. If it is better, then I am sure people will come.

Kevin J. Kolosky
12-Dec-2012, 17:34
"As someone else said, if anyone doesn't like how this forum is run (free to us BTW), then they are free to create their own forum and build a user base. If it is better, then I am sure people will come."

That is what I said!

Kirk Gittings
12-Dec-2012, 17:40
Right now we have what? 6 moderators who come together to try and flesh out issues and problem members. It takes awhile because we are all volunteers and busy people with odd schedules. Only one is retired (but that doesn't mean he has lots of free time on his hands). I don't know the political views of a single moderator as it is never ever discussed. None of us are even close friends. I personally have only met two of the moderators briefly in person. We try and pick people who are level headed, polite and who have a history of following the rules. The one thing I think we have in common is a long term commitment to this forum and a commitment to civility. We oftentimes do not initially agree on issues but work them out through lengthy, oftentimes disjointed, discussion over weeks. If that promotes a culture so be it.

Kirk Gittings
12-Dec-2012, 17:45
"As someone else said, if anyone doesn't like how this forum is run (free to us BTW), then they are free to create their own forum and build a user base. If it is better, then I am sure people will come."

That is what I said!

You know many of the high profile people we have had to ban over the years have had their own forums previously (some LF oriented), Frank included. They were either hopeless failures or such a huge PITA that the person couldn't deal with the problems and shut them down. Interesting isn't it?

Greg Miller
12-Dec-2012, 17:51
"As someone else said, if anyone doesn't like how this forum is run (free to us BTW), then they are free to create their own forum and build a user base. If it is better, then I am sure people will come."

That is what I said!

I did not say it was.

Edit: I think it has been said at least twice in this thread alone (as well as others). But if it is that easy, then go do it.

rdenney
12-Dec-2012, 17:55
Fact is, the larger group of moderators did discuss this issue. It was debated and a consensus reached.

Talking about the effects of political systems on large-format photography is not what happened here, though that is the surely a way to make sound noble.

But it's hard for anyone to imagine how potshots at the president and his supporters--politics baiting--can attain that moral high ground. Or how it relates to any discussion of photographic values.

It's also possible to imagine (not that imagination is required) that one might really desire to debate partisan politics and is using the relationship of photography and politics as a cloak to hide that purpose.

But it's been tried, and bedlam was the result. The owner of the forum and those who help him were unable to maintain order, so that those who despise such talk (as in, the vast majority) could be free to talk about photography. It's easy to think that it could be contained and therefore avoided by those who wished, but in the event it did not work out that way.

Other controversies have run their course, and even economic systems have been debated, without interference, as long as people remained civil. The notion that these few rules prevent meaningful discussion is more an indictment on how narrow is some people's definition of meaningful. I've certainly never felt stifled. :) I do not believe the rules are as hard to understand and follow as people portray. Nearly all contributors never have a post removed, let alone get a timeout.

Rick "this does not have to be the place where politics are debated" Denney

Kevin J. Kolosky
12-Dec-2012, 18:01
You know many of the high profile people we have had to ban over the years have had their own forums previously (some LF oriented), Frank included. They were either hopeless failures or such a huge PITA that the person couldn't deal with the problems and shut them down. Interesting isn't it?

I think the point is being missed. I am not saying that you should not ban people under the current set of rules. If you are a moderator and you have committed to banning people under the current set of rules then that is what you should do.

What I am saying is that in my opinion the rules infringe on a more free social discourse that may have value, and that it may be more beneficial for the membership to select the rules. Therefore, that is why I suggested that those who want that choice should start a new forum and set up a more democratically orgainized structure.

Finally, I stated I like choice. It would be very difficult for me to leave this forum because of the content here. It would also be very difficult to ignore a new forum where the atomosphere was more relaxed. So I for one would be a member of both, and I would financially support the new forum in an attempt to preserve the right to speak ones mind without fear of being treated somewhat like a child - e.g. go to your room and close the door until you can conform.


"But it's hard for anyone to imagine how potshots at the president and his supporters--politics baiting--can attain that moral high ground. Or how it relates to any discussion of photographic values."

I agree because my intent was not to suggest that such behavior related to photographic values. I was rather suggesting that it related to values attained in free and open discourse which, although I may be mistaken, was the topic of this thread.

Kirk Gittings
12-Dec-2012, 18:11
Go for it and be sure to step up and be a moderator. You will have my sympathies.

Greg Miller
12-Dec-2012, 18:15
What I am saying is that in my opinion the rules infringe on a more free social discourse that may have value, and that it may be more beneficial for the membership to select the rules. Therefore, that is why I suggested that those who want that choice should start a new forum and set up a more democratically orgainized structure.

While I am highly in favor of democracies, they hardly ensure that everyone is happy with decisions. Look at most US presidential elections - they end up in a 51% to 49% margin. So 49% of the people are unhappy with the result of the election. Majority win does not equate to everyone being happy with the result. Virtually no decision where a group is involved ends up with everyone being happy.

I think this forum and these moderators are doing an incredibly good job. I believe that the vast majority if people who visit this forum are pretty satisfied. I greatly appreciate the people who fund this site, make it free to all of us, and the moderators who volunteer their time and all-in-all do a pretty darn good job and keeping everyone happy. I personally have not seen a single case of heavy handed-ness in enforcing the rules. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but if it does it is pretty rare given the thousands and thousands and thousands of posts that occur here. And I don't see where free social discourse is being discouraged in any significant way.

Kevin J. Kolosky
12-Dec-2012, 18:39
Go for it and be sure to step up and be a moderator. You will have my sympathies.

I don't have the technical knowledge or I would. It almost seems like you do not like the job of moderator. I doubt anyone would. That is another reason why I suggest a site where little to no moderation is required.

Brian Ellis
12-Dec-2012, 19:05
It's stunning that some people have problems with a policy designed to simply enforce the rules of the forum, most of which have been in place for quite a while. If you want to participate in the forum follow the rules. If you don't like the rules try to change them. If you can't change them and can't abide by them find another forum. It doesn't seem like something that should be very controversial.

Darin Boville
12-Dec-2012, 19:37
I think the Frank banning was completely inconsequential, except that a lot of loud mouths (and you are large among them Darin) .....The moderator culture is fine, who cares if it gets heavy handed at times, just accept it and continue making and sharing LF photographs. Pictures no matter how bad are unlikely to get anyone banned.

Of course, the irony here, mdm, is that your post--by calling me a "loud mouth"--clearly violates the forum rules that are quoted in the post immediately above mine.

Frank's a big boy and he made his own decision of the manner of his return. I played no role in it.

--Darin

Sal Santamaura
12-Dec-2012, 21:33
...The solution to the original issue is for a group of folks to start another large formal forum exactly like this one, but with somewhat more liberal and democratic rules...


...What I am saying is that in my opinion the rules infringe on a more free social discourse that may have value, and that it may be more beneficial for the membership to select the rules. Therefore, that is why I suggested that those who want that choice should start a new forum and set up a more democratically orgainized structure...


Go for it and be sure to step up and be a moderator. You will have my sympathies.


I don't have the technical knowledge or I would...Then do some research, obtain the technical knowledge needed, arrange a funding mechanism and go for it. I'd strongly encourage the moderators here to allow multiple threads/posts in the Announcements category so everyone else who longs for the anarchy your approach will inevitably devolve into has no trouble finding your new nirvana. May they blissfully enjoy it and stop interrupting the religion- and politics-free large format photography discussion here.

jnanian
12-Dec-2012, 21:54
That is another reason why I suggest a site where little to no moderation is required.

are there any forums with little or no moderation ?
sounds like a place i would never want to visit...

Len Middleton
12-Dec-2012, 23:34
Seeing that we are now up to 19 pages, I find the situation a little baffling and not certain whether I do not understand fully the situation, or maybe it is not me suffering from the lack of understanding... ;)

As part of my work, I visit a lot of different client sites and a number of different countries. At both the client sites and the different countries, I model my behavior as that of a good guest. In doing so, I abide by the house rules, whether they are requirements for personal protective equipment to be worn, or no alcohol to be consumed in the country (i.e. not just a dry county, we are talking dry countries). Similarly I avoid conversations about politics or religion (warning: football, or soccer as it is known in NA, borders on religion in South America), so not to cause discomfort for my hosts. I will likely cause them some discomfort in my findings and observations, but no sense in making it worse through discussions not in the scope of my work.

On this forum, I consider myself a member of the LF community here, BUT view myself as a guest of the founder and sponsor of this site. And as a guest, I feel obliged to conform to the house rules as defined and administered through his proxies, the moderators.

Is it, or does it need to be more complex than that... :confused:

mdm
13-Dec-2012, 00:41
My point is that making such a big deal about such a small matter made it impossible for him to return with out a major backing down by either him or the moderators. Someone had to eat humble pie for that to happen. So the effect of those long protest threads was to ban him. I am shure he is grateful to us all, there is more to life than LFPF.

Kevin J. Kolosky
13-Dec-2012, 05:07
Then do some research, obtain the technical knowledge needed, arrange a funding mechanism and go for it. I'd strongly encourage the moderators here to allow multiple threads/posts in the Announcements category so everyone else who longs for the anarchy your approach will inevitably devolve into has no trouble finding your new nirvana. May they blissfully enjoy it and stop interrupting the religion- and politics-free large format photography discussion here.

The conversation was with Kirk, not you. I said I would financially support what I was suggesting, which I feel is adequate. I would also be willing to financially support this site.

You think what you want to think and I respect that. I will think what I want to think, and I ask that you respect that.

bobwysiwyg
13-Dec-2012, 07:00
I don't have the technical knowledge or I would...

Though I 'm no suggesting this writer step up as it were, I selected this statement to illustrate that one need not be an "expert" on the subject matter at hand to be a good moderator.

Greg Davis
13-Dec-2012, 08:29
are there any forums with little or no moderation ?
sounds like a place i would never want to visit...

http://www.4chan.org, I suggest you put on a bulletproof vest and a helmet when visiting.

Sal Santamaura
13-Dec-2012, 08:59
The conversation was with Kirk, not you...If you ever do start your own forum, it will be important for you to understand some basic distinctions. Trading email or PM messages would have been a conversation between you and Kirk. Posting in a public thread is a public discussion, open to quoting and comment by other participants.


...I will think what I want to think, and I ask that you respect that.I respect your right to, within the rules and in a civil manner, post about what you think. In this case, I have no respect for what you think on the subject. I've posted my disagreement with what you think in a civil manner that's within the rules.

Ralph Barker
13-Dec-2012, 09:15
For those advocating that political and religious discussions be allowed here, a little LFPF history lesson may be in order. We tried that, and it didn't work. The Lounge was originally an experiment to see if discussions of these topics could be accomplished in a civil manner, without infringing on the primary LF sections of the forum. Not only did the discussions turn decidedly uncivil, but also the resulting animosities spilled over into the LF discussions. So, the experiment was ended, and the current rules forbidding those topics put in place. Had we not done so, the forum would have been shut down years ago and none of us would be posting anything here.

Preston
13-Dec-2012, 10:28
Ralph--

+1

In my humble opinion, there are plenty of places where one can discuss politics and religion, and LFPF is not one of them, fortunately. The decision to eliminate those kinds of discussions has, indeed, made this forum a better place.

I really appreciate the work the moderators do here, and I also appreciate the great advice I've received on technical matters, and the comments on my images.

Thanks, and Happy Holidays to all!

--P

Kevin J. Kolosky
13-Dec-2012, 10:51
If you ever do start your own forum, it will be important for you to understand some basic distinctions. Trading email or PM messages would have been a conversation between you and Kirk. Posting in a public thread is a public discussion, open to quoting and comment by other participants.

I will be sure and remember that when I see your posts.

Eric Rose
13-Dec-2012, 11:04
I don't understand all the back and forth this thread has generated. A greater mystery to me is why didn't the mods just make their pronouncement and then lock the thread. They make the rules, we follow them. It's like the army. Get over it.

Dan Fromm
13-Dec-2012, 11:20
are there any forums with little or no moderation ?
sounds like a place i would never want to visit...

That was the rec.photo.* groups on usenet that were. Remember them? No fun at all, and not very helpful either. Too much heat, too little light.

Dan Fromm
13-Dec-2012, 11:21
I don't understand all the back and forth this thread has generated. A greater mystery to me is why didn't the mods just make their pronouncement and then lock the thread. They make the rules, we follow them. It's like the army. Get over it.Funny, when I was in the army getting over had a very different sense ...

BrianShaw
13-Dec-2012, 11:28
That was the rec.photo.* groups on usenet that were. Remember them? No fun at all, and not very helpful either. Too much heat, too little light.

That memory gives me heartburn!

Darin Boville
13-Dec-2012, 11:38
For those advocating that political and religious discussions be allowed here...

I'm not aware of anyone seriously suggesting an unmoderated forum or anyone suggesting that political and religious discussions be given a free reign. The world is not a binary one. :)

--Darin

jnanian
13-Dec-2012, 11:53
That was the rec.photo.* groups on usenet that were. Remember them? No fun at all, and not very helpful either. Too much heat, too little light.

yeah i almost forgot about rec. ...
the 1990s were like the wild wild west.
you are right, not too helpful and a lot of hot air ...

i kind of miss jeeves, but at least he is vacationing
somewhere enjoying exotic drinks on an island ...

dan ... thanks for reminding me how far we have come !

john

Struan Gray
13-Dec-2012, 14:51
I loved rec.photo.whatever. Pretty well everything i know about photography I learned there. It was certainly the knowledge (especially about photo chemistry and lens optics) and helpfulness of the rec.photo.large-format crowd which got me started on the ladder to larger negatives.

I still think it's a pain in the backside* that Google doesn't turn up usenet postings unless you force it to.


Good luck to the new, improved moderating mandate. I can't help thinking of this old thing:

85379


*am I allowed to say 'backside' under the new dispensation? Or should that be *ss, or *rs* for British readers.

bobwysiwyg
13-Dec-2012, 15:37
I'm not aware of anyone seriously suggesting an unmoderated forum or anyone suggesting that political and religious discussions be given a free reign. The world is not a binary one. :)

--Darin

Five years ago, prior to the elections (U.S.) politics popped up fairly often on a forum (not photo related). Rather then have it scattered about, as one of the mods, I suggested as an experiment, we set up a board specifically for the purpose with tight rules. What a disaster!

We deleted it and political discussion or references have been forbidden ever since.

Ken Lee
13-Dec-2012, 15:40
Perhaps what the world needs is a web site for political and religious enthusiasts, where discussion of Large Format photography is strictly forbidden.

Imagine the kind of individuals that would attract !

Brian Ellis
13-Dec-2012, 15:55
yeah i almost forgot about rec. ...
the 1990s were like the wild wild west.
you are right, not too helpful and a lot of hot air ...

i kind of miss jeeves, but at least he is vacationing
somewhere enjoying exotic drinks on an island ...

dan ... thanks for reminding me how far we have come !

john

I don't know when you became involved with it but rec.photo.large-format (or whatever exactly it was called) used to be a tremendous resource for large format photography in the mid and late 1990s. It started going down hill for me when a bunch of wine afficionados started talking more about wine than photography. But for a long time it was a terrific resource.

BrianShaw
13-Dec-2012, 16:33
Perhaps what the world needs is a web site for political and religious enthusiasts, where discussion of Large Format photography is strictly forbidden.

Imagine the kind of individuals that would attract !

Great idea. How about taking over a woodworking forum. We can talk about using the cameras we build to actually take photographs. That would drive at least one person mad.

https://www.bridgecitytools.com/blog/2011/02/18/inspiration-is-everywhere-the-lure-of-designingmaking/#comment-1971

BradS
13-Dec-2012, 17:40
The problem, as I see it, is that there are the stated "rules" and there are the de facto rules. The de facto rules are manifest in the actions of the moderators. Further, at least one of the mods is extremely biased in his actions. He very consistently takes action against one type of person/post and always fails to act to moderate another class of people/posts. This particular moderator, fails to act even when the apparent oversight is brought to his attention. Often enough, he'll take further action to moderate the one who has pointed out the bias of the moderator. One could, I suppose, dismiss this easily enough were it balanced in some way by the other mods but, as far as I have observed, it is not. One result of this is that a group of people gets away with "uncivilized behavior" and others must either tread upon egg shells or be censored (and more).

Kirk Gittings
13-Dec-2012, 17:43
example?

BradS
13-Dec-2012, 18:01
example?

...<frustration>....yes..we need evidence. However, here are some thoughts why it is difficult to produce....

1) when a thread has been moderated, the evidence has been removed by the mods. Only those who were in the right place at the right time so to speak (those who read the stuff before it was deleted) know what was said. Thus, it is kinda hard for me to produce evidence when at least half of that evidence has been deleted.

2) if I name names and start kicking up shit, then I am guilty of violating the civility and name calling rule or whatever...and, I'm not one of the favored few who can be an ass or stir the shit pot and be consistently ignored by the mods. I feel like I'm pushing the boundary as it is. I generally keep to the "walk on egg shells" approach lately. Means, I don't contribute much...for fear that I might offend the thought police. Really, it just isn't worth it. Even those who raise legitimate questions about the application of the rules are censured.

3) an example exists just a few pages back in this thread. yes, I'll admit it is a minor example but, it is an example of exactly what I'm talking about.

Kirk Gittings
13-Dec-2012, 18:11
Sorry but that is so vague as to be worthless to me. I looked back through this thread and could find nothing that fits your description. PM me with the info if you don't want to post it here.

BradS
13-Dec-2012, 18:14
Sorry but that is so vague as to be worthless to me. I looked back through this thread and could find nothing that fits your description.

exactly my point.

Kirk Gittings
13-Dec-2012, 19:06
I tried.......

Kevin J. Kolosky
14-Dec-2012, 08:13
"The problem, as I see it, is that "

The problem is that in all facets of life people more and more want everyone else to take care of them from cradle to grave.
This has seeped into the forum life. Members seem incapapable of of the very simple act of ignoring what they do not want to read. Instead, they want to rely on someone else to monitor things for them so they don't have to whine if their sensibilities get injured.

marfa boomboom tx
14-Dec-2012, 08:35
Great idea. How about taking over a woodworking forum. We can talk about using the cameras we build to actually take photographs. That would drive at least one person mad.

https://www.bridgecitytools.com/blog/2011/02/18/inspiration-is-everywhere-the-lure-of-designingmaking/#comment-1971

Brian, thanks for link.

very interesting posts (didn't read the 1971 though)

in marfa, sculpture has become bricks for designers who never heard of dia.

Ken Lee
14-Dec-2012, 08:43
The moderators don't want to spend the time worrying about the 0.1 % of members who can't or won't abide by the guidelines.

The tiny fraction of members who can't grasp the intention of the guidelines - or object to them as a matter of principle - will be (and have recently been) escorted out.

This thread is now closed, for the same reason that it was created: to save moderator time. Now, back to... Large Format Photography.

Warning: If you start another thread on this topic, you will be banned.