My ear is reasonably tuned to tone.Originally Posted by prendt
Rick "who doesn't always hear correctly, but who usually does" Denney
My ear is reasonably tuned to tone.
Rick "who doesn't always hear correctly, but who usually does" Denney
I pray (not in a religious way) that the TOS and guidelines fir this forum be updated to specify that mods above the forum law, above criticism, and above reproach until they voluntarily or involuntarily separate from moderation services.
I think you'll find all our current moderators agree with this. So, what happens when one vocal group goes one way and another vocal group goes another way? How does one determine which vocal group is representative? The number of registrants on this forum is vastly larger than the number of participants, which is similarly larger than the number of active participants. The mechanics of gathering consensus isn't trivial, and one thing is for sure: The polling tools in the forum will not do that, and would likely exclude viewpoints rather than capturing them.
Our current approach has been to gather up the comments seen in various places in the forum, and when they rise to the level of needing consideration, bring those up for moderator discussion. Based on what can be very extensive discussion, we propose a concept, test it for technical and semantic feasibility, and put it out for comment. Often, those comments are divided, with some positives and some negatives. We try to address the negatives, either with refinements or with explanations, but at the end of the day, any action will have committed detractors. We certainly give more weight to those contributors who most reflect the purpose of the forum, and that does build in some bias towards certain viewpoints, but any other process will have biases, too. We also test every change with the simple question: Does this solve a bigger problem than it creates? Of course, the answer to that is at best a prediction.
As to cherry-picking rule enforcement, we do not pick cherries. But we do not see everything, so our moderation is biased by things we see in our favorite topics, or based on complaints we receive from forum members, who each have their own biases. Those forums in which I participate that have sufficient moderation to review every post in every thread are far more tightly (and capriciously) moderated than this one. But it means that we don't see some things that would normally attract a moderator action, and if nobody complains, it may well go unaddressed. That is not cherry-picking, because we don't choose which threads to moderate on the basis of some underlying agenda, as the phrase "cherry-picking" implies.
Under the table dealing? Other than moderator discussions, there are none. We do interact with members who are related to a moderation activity, and we will continue to handle those conversations discreetly.
There is a fine line between open and transparent forum activity and uncontrolled rule of the loudest. We actually take a pretty soft hand in moderation compared to every other forum I follow, but we are committed to maintaining a place where people will not be shouted down.
Rick "who started this response two hours ago, but was interrupted by, you know, work" Denney
Not always, I agree. Not in this case, I add. Your servant, truly.
Allow me to shout a bit, he he....that the dead horse is getting more (unneeded) lashes, eh ? Space is allocated for all sorts of fortmats here...and even digital (Drew, I know you grind yer teeth on this).
Can we all....? Heh
Les
It's as clear as the detail in an 8x10 negative.
A polite explanation goes a longer way than overreacting. Your servant,truly.
Some of us do, some don't.
With things going as they are large format as we have known it is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. Before too long it will be limited to home-made emulsions in B&W, and to the color film and papers found in Drew's freezer.
Sandy
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
Oh, I think it went overboard again as it happens. My only concern is that there is forum called:
Forum Digital Hardware
Large format digital hardware (cameras, backs, scanners, printers, etc.)
So please add backs bigger than 4x5in to forum description. So neither myself or brand new user will not get confused with fact that that moderators ONLY allow 4x5 and bigger digital back discussion there. Simple and clear. Talking about real large things only!
It does not matter that such thing is not know to human society. As long at rule says digital backs of size 4x5 and bigger everybody will be fine.
Phase one and better light scan backs do not belong there either, cause imager size is smaller than 4x5.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks