For Entertainment Purposes - Censorship

[Tom Diekwisch]

Quang-Tuan Luong = QT.

Jorge, your comment is really insightful. I just never would have thought that forum moderators were that intolerant. In general, all discusions are obviously helpful to the site, even if people disagree with one thing or another. They certainly boost contribution, and ultimately boost impact. Thus, I'd welcome all contributions, if I was them. But, obviously, I am not. However, after learning about just how narrow-minded PN administration is, I will certainly consider my involvement with the site. Thanks, Jorge.

[Mark Sawyer]

"What is QT?"

Q.-Tuan Luong, host and editor of this forum and the large format home page, and quite a respected large format photographer himself. My thanks also to QT for putting up with us. By my reckoning, this community is the most valuable photography resource online.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Well jj, at least I have never sent insulting e mails or pm to people....I would say you are ahead in that regard.

[Sean Ross]

I hate to post a response to this thread but feel it's only fair to give my side of the story. I think the stats speak for themselves.. apug is 3yrs old, over 8,000 registrations, and less than 5 users banned in 3 years. The one in this thread told me to go 'f' myself after a tirade of vulgar posts because I refused to allow his urinating avatar to be visibile all over the forums, he also had a history of pushing people's buttons, so find me any webmaster who will keep a member like this? And where are these big donors you mention who pull my puppet strings, I'd sure like to know.. The most any advertiser pays is $35 a month for a banner, so that is going to influence how I run the community? I don't think so. I'm lucky to break even when I factor in operating costs and labor, and I still work 50-60 hours a week at my non apug day job. "APUG bans you if you criticize Littman", APUG bans you if you flame members repeatedly and that's a known policy, and Frank wouldn't give the Littman thing a rest. Also Frank has not been "banned"..

[John_4185]

Sean, the dynamics are like this: first you antagonize one by censoring without notice; you just delete the posts as if nothing had occured. You give special dispensation to certain members, _and_ you ban people who are not vulgar who remain on-topic but simply consistently disagree with you. That creates a climate of antagonism that can escalate, and _you_ set it in motion and _you_ escalate the affair.

If you learn nothing, then watch this forum to see that it does not happen here because QT treats people with respect. Respect begets respect. The community self-moderates. Do you see how that works? Your list fosters fops and wags . You have perhaps four worthwhile posters, and they participate here, too. The rest is turning into a display of contortions as posters pat themselves on the back for not pissing you off and not being like the people you don't like.

[neil poulsen]

This thread could easily turn into a flame war. Please, let's not do that. Neil (Moderator)

[Will Strain]

It's the reality of a moderated forum. It's their sandbox, and their rules. I personally have never found the PN or APUG moderators to be heavy handed.

We have a choice, as always, to leave if we don't like the way things are done, be censored and banned when we push back against them, or to respect the way they've decided to run their forums.

Anyway, that's my $.02 - and is not meant to be a criticism, or a taking of sides. Just a statement about how I see the reality of the situation.

[Alec Jones]

Please don't leave out LEX over at the P/N film and printing forums, from mention. He banned me for life for criticising HIM, not a forum member, ONCE. Rather draconian I feel.

Won't go any further, Neil.

[John D Gerndt]

I would like to say that I am proud to be a part of THIS forum. It is one very rare instance of people contributing to each other's knowledge in the best way. In the atmosphere described above I believe it incumbent upon all contributors to give the editor a break and stay away from flammable topics or at least approach them with greatest appropriate caution.

A great pile of facts that are not contributing to making better photographs and instead cause rancor to flourish are misplaced here. I, for one, am not here to change the world or even anybody’s opinion. I have nothing to prove. I hope to contribute and to say thanks to others who contribute too and I do thank you all. That would include the editor who works a (usually) thankless task.

Cheers,

[Don Miller]

I like forums where people are man (and woman) enough to use their real names...... I am miles ahead in LF of where I would be without the contributions of many of you, especially QT and Kerry.

I do run a photography forum, but I've banned everyone. I like the peace and quiet.