Goodbye

[Heroique]

Yes, moderators should be compensated handsomely for not being able to ignore.

But maybe the ignore function is not the blessing it's supposed to be.

I tried it once, and I remember that each and every time an ignored person's post is being ignored, the forum software reminds you of this fact (i.e., "This message is hidden because [X] is on your ignore list."), and then gives you the option of un-ignoring him – thus making it impossible to really ignore their existence at all.

I mean, really, it's enough to make one gnash their teeth and heap ashes on the head – what's the point of ignoring someone if you're forced, over and over, to remember that you ignored them? (To add insult to injury, I recall that if someone else quotes your chosen "outcast," their quoted text becomes visible to you.)

I finally decided to un-ignore them (only two or three), and simply view them as actors in an entertaining theater of the absurd – as in Samuel Beckett. Laughter can alleviate the despair.

[Sigh]

Personally, my benefits here still greatly outweigh the costs, but the scales have, overall, dipped in the wrong direction over the years. Here's hoping that they'll swing back in the right direction again. Even if that means waiting for Godot.

[DannL]

I think I have left the forum on three different occasions since '06, only to return partial recharged. I doubt my replies here help the original poster of a specific thread. But more important are the ten-thousand interested parties who aren't members of this forum, who never sign in, but who search the internet for "accurate information" regarding photography. If it weren't for a certain few, these internet forums would be of little value. But there "is" a smattering of accurate information and value tips located within. Somebody is responsible for posting that information.

[Sal Santamaura]

I miss the old days as well. Sadly, I agree that the forum has changed for the worse.

I think it would be valuable to know specifically what changes are being referred to. An in-depth review of the archive, followed by examples, might be most instructive for anyone considered culpable in allegedly modifying the forum's character, as well as for you and the OP.

[Mark Sampson]

Well, Mr. Alpert, I personally will miss your contributions, and wish you would stay aboard. Best of luck, either way.

[karl french]

A lot of it has to do with a general attitude around the forum. It used to be the case that people came here to talk about large format photography in a fairly serious manner. For one, I think the "talk about anything" aspect of The Lounge spills over into the other forums and people forget we're here to talk about photography, large format in particular. So I would say there is a general lack of focus compared to 8-10 years ago.

In addition, the serial posting by people who can't seem to realize that every insignificant thought they have which may only be tangentially related to photography serves only to clutter the forums without being useful. People seemed to think a bit more about the usefulness of their responses in the past.

That and the so called "pissing contests" regularly engaged in by a number of posters have really changed the dynamic of the forums. There seemed to a congenial sharing of knowledge in the past without the need to dominate every other poster with your "expertise" and experience.

[Ari]

I think of the forum as a repository of information, knowledge, experience and, to a much lesser extent, opinion.
I know I sometimes ask questions that seem simple, or even obvious, but often I am thinking of future photographers who might need answers to these very same questions, at the risk of annoying some.

The forum seems a wonderful place, the questionable antics of a very few notwithstanding, and I've found much support and kindness here.
That said, it's always good to take a break every once in a while.

[Sal Santamaura]

A lot of it has to do with a general attitude around the forum. It used to be the case that people came here to talk about large format photography in a fairly serious manner. For one, I think the "talk about anything" aspect of The Lounge spills over into the other forums and people forget we're here to talk about photography, large format in particular. So I would say there is a general lack of focus compared to 8-10 years ago...

As I recall, before the Lounge was established, that kind of "talk about anything" behavior was endemic in regular threads. While there might be residual off-topic stuff in the non-Lounge categories now, I think the level is much lower than it was in "the good old days."

...In addition, the serial posting by people who can't seem to realize that every insignificant thought they have which may only be tangentially related to photography serves only to clutter the forums without being useful. People seemed to think a bit more about the usefulness of their responses in the past...

I agree that there are some posters in recent years who prattle incessantly. Part of this trend might be a result of voice recognition software that wasn't widely available years ago, but, in my opinion, it's more related to the "social media" attitude of society in general. Every time I've noted that Phillip Greenspun, who enabled Tuan to establish this forum on lusenet, stated he wanted it to be an archive of useful information, not a chat room, those who prefer using it like a chat room pooh pooh my posts. I just ignore them and carry on, trying to enrich the archive with useful information when in possession of some relevant knowledge.

...That and the so called "pissing contests" regularly engaged in by a number of posters have really changed the dynamic of the forums. There seemed to a congenial sharing of knowledge in the past without the need to dominate every other poster with your "expertise" and experience.

In this case I think you really need to do an in-depth review of the archive. Today's "pissing contests" are child's play compared to what went on during the early years. In my opinion, the biggest change we've experienced here -- a very positive one -- is introduction of rigorous moderation. Those who deservedly get slapped down don't like it, but loss of their disruptive voices (through deletions, banning or them just giving up and going elsewhere) is, in my opinion, a huge improvement. Lest anyone misinterpret, I'm not referring to the OP of this thread.

As for congenial sharing of knowledge, the problem is that someone reading a thread must figure out which posts are fact-based opinion and which are based on nothing. Introducing a statement with the phrase "in my experience" actually does the opposite of dominating; it instead implies that others' experience might lead to a different conclusion of equal validity. I think that's very polite and congenial. Of course, not every post or every situation warrants such a conditional introduction. Sometimes facts are just facts.

[Tim Meisburger]

I tend to view the "New Posts", which exposes one to the unfiltered stream, and then click on perhaps one in fifty. A better strategy might be to go tot the forum and just review topics of interest. There are a lot of sub-sections that contain largely serious discussion.

[Brian C. Miller]

I have decided to leave the forum, and I have asked the forum moderator to cancel my registration.

We'll miss you! But I wish you hadn't canceled your registration, because that means that nobody can search on your posts.

But maybe the ignore function is not the blessing it's supposed to be.

I've only ignored three people. Yes, the forum has its limits. It's software, written by mere mortals.

One of the (tropes | cliches | oh no, not that again) of photography is the homeless. I see them every day in downtown Seattle, they try to bum a dollar, and I usually decline. They live in their misery. I liken the forum software to a pair of glasses that will blot someone out for you. There's a big "you are ignoring this person" spot right there, with a cardboard sign to the left and a cup to the right. Of course, most homeless aren't as annoying as some people who really put effort into being annoying.

Even if that means waiting for Godot.

I got the feeling from that play that all of the main characters were suffering from some kind of dementia. They were stuck in a loop of what they perceived and remembered, and they no longer had the internal energy to straighten themselves out. Godot seemed to be someone they had manufactured for themselves to explain why they were there, to give themselves a tiny bit of purpose.

Now, how would you create a photograph, or series, representing Waiting for Godot?

[John Kasaian]

The best of light to you, good Sir! Thank you for all you've shared with us over the years.