Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 117

Thread: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

  1. #61
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    4,492

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    Quote Originally Posted by Old-N-Feeble View Post
    Frank/Leigh... repeating what I already wrote... I just stated that it "looks bad". I also stated that it happens on "every single forum". I respect and appreciate the mods here too... but I'll not pander to them any more than I would either of you or anyone else if I have something to say.
    With all due respect, there's a difference between pandering and accusing the mods, however indirectly, of playing two identities for nefarious purposes.

    We keep talking about truth. My experience is that truth is elusive, even with people who mean well. My experience is that even in the most community-oriented online groups, not everyone means well. And my experience is that identifying the difference, with the limited tools available in a forum, works out similarly to throwing accused witches into a lake--if they drown, then I guess they weren't witches after all.

    Even with the vast construct of the complicated feedback system provided by eBay, which has been used often as an example in this thread, conflict abounds. Nobody sane would volunteer to be an ombudsman--who wants to be in the middle of every argument, usually pleasing nobody and still having no investigative power necessary to learn actual truth?

    While I think it undermines community, I would rather have the for-sale forum with no comments allowed except from OPs than not have it at all. And maybe it could be done without increasing the burden on the mods, which I think is a requirement that must be fulfilled.

    One final bit of experience: It's quite common for people to volunteer ideas about how other people should do things. I have found myself in leadership roles in a variety of volunteer efforts for some reason I can't fathom, and have heard such advice endlessly. They mean well. But usually the people who are actually doing the work have already debated those topics thoroughly, and advice doesn't really help. I don't think it's pandering to the mods to avoid giving them "free" advice.

    Rick "kindergarteners are often better behaved than groups of mission-oriented adults" Denney

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    820

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    All good points, Rick. I need to become more aware of when I'm too tired to post. I often state things poorly these days. My last post tonight.

  3. #63

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,176

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    Rick -- the mods can run the forum any way they want. I guess it is their forum? Not sure who actually owns this forum. But one thing is for sure: now that I know that negative posts will (most likely) get deleted, I am going to be very careful about buying from anyone here who I do not already know is a good or bad risk to buy from. So, the damage is done for me. Last post on this topic for me.

  4. #64

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    Quote Originally Posted by rdenney View Post
    While I think it undermines community, I would rather have the for-sale forum with no comments allowed except from OPs than not have it at all. And maybe it could be done without increasing the burden on the mods, which I think is a requirement that must be fulfilled.
    FWIW, GetDPI has tried to discourage extraneous posts in the Buy/Sell section. Note that it's not just about "price monitoring":

    "Price Monitoring: If you're not the seller and think the price is wrong -- either too high or too low -- tell them via PM, not in public on the thread as it is poor etiquette. If your [sic] not a buyer or seller than you really have no business commenting on any of the items listed. Those discussions are best in the forum itself. "

    Many comments still leak through; there are so many threads that it's difficult for the moderators to keep up. So per your proviso, I don't know whether it's practical unless there's a software switch that can be set to restrict follow-up post privileges for threads in a designated forum to only the OP.

  5. #65

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,330

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    Quote Originally Posted by Old-N-Feeble View Post
    However, there seems to be... on every single forum... the intent to protect the seller more so than the buyer. Why is that? Is there backroom information we little guys are not privy to? Or is it simply a common practice which should be reconsidered?
    It rather seems to be the (neo-liberal) spirit of the time. Considering that the buyer commonly is the one who first has to fork out good cash in hope to receive some potentially underwhelming (or in extreme cases of fraud even non existent) item days to weeks later, even the current buyer protection on ebay seems to stem from some dark period before consumer protection laws. Nonetheless, just about every forum with a for-sale section seems to be proud at having less checks on sellers than ebay...

  6. #66
    Kirk Gittings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico
    Posts
    8,513

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    Am I being terrible by asking if moderators can moderate under one name and sell under another? I'm not accusing... but it "looks bad".
    Old n Feeble. You've been a member here since February and this is what we get from you? After 4 years at this largely thankless job.........So that question about the shutters I have for sale was what? Some kind of test? A ruse? Jesus. I have to say that I oftentimes wonder why I bother with this forum with the crap we have to take from people like you. And I have never wondered more than now why I bother.
    Thanks,
    Kirk

    "When did photography become a desk job?" Kirk Gittings 2009

    KIRK GITTINGS
    WEBSITE

    LIGHT+SPACE+STRUCTURE (blog)

  7. #67
    funkadelic
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    1,242

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirk Gittings View Post
    Old n Feeble. You've been a member here since February and this is what we get from you? After 4 years at this largely thankless job.........So that question about the shutters I have for sale was what? Some kind of test? A ruse? Jesus. I have to say that I oftentimes wonder why I bother with this forum with the crap we have to take from people like you. And I have never wondered more than now why I bother.
    "and that's why you get paid the big bucks!"

  8. #68
    multi format
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    2,891

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    what does use of this area is strictly at your own risk mean again ?

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    4,316

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    what does use of this area is strictly at your own risk mean again ?
    Shouldn't that apply equally to sellers?

    Someone who posts an item for sale is open to whatever comments anyone wishes to post about same.

    Protecting sellers but not buyers is simply not right.

    - Leigh

  10. #70

    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Posts
    2,393

    Re: New FS rule seems to claim its first victim

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirk Gittings View Post
    ...I oftentimes wonder why I bother with this forum with the crap we have to take...
    You bother because you know that, despite the crap, this is the "least evil" large format photography forum in existence. Also, you know how many non-crap-slinging members here deeply appreciate what the moderators do / put up with.

    You bother for the same reason you continue going to the polls, even having to hold your nose when voting. While not perfect, it's the best there is.

Similar Threads

  1. Bruce Barnbaum’s claim — 20 months later
    By Heroique in forum On Photography
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 4-Nov-2009, 11:06
  2. What's in the box? Another Efke victim...
    By muskedear in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 2-May-2007, 15:10
  3. The one third into the scene rule
    By Leonard Evens in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 27-Jul-2006, 06:52
  4. Another victim - AGFA in Chapter 11
    By Juergen Sattler in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 29-May-2005, 03:11

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •