Please show your 6x17 pictures

[Marko]

You make it sound like you can't change this. Where do we go and who do we talk to if we would like to reach a new consensus?

By the way, why was the thread moved from another forum to here, when the photos in the thread aren't allowed here?

If you read that message as carefully as it was written, you'll notice that it is not at all about whether they can change it nor whether we can reach a new consensus. What it actually says is that they are not going to change it and that consensus is for the owner and the moderators to reach, not the users.

They've been very consistent in this kind of inconsistency, be it about camera types, film formats, politics, trolling or what not, and they have every right to be - it is their board. We can talk about it all we want (or at least until they say it was enough) and if we still don't like it we are free to go away (as many have done).

Simple as that.

[CarstenW]

I am not about to go anywhere, but I do think that the rules could be improved in this area, or at least the enforcing. Moving a thread to where many images aren't allowed, and then removing those images just makes little sense.

[Jack Dahlgren]

I did not invent this definition. It was the operating definition when I joined this forum-long before I became a moderator and this remains the consensus of the moderators and and the owner.

Just following orders...

But I guess I can see the reasoning. If they let in photos shot on 6x17 roll film, then a flood of non-large format 6x17 people will swamp the forum and cause disorder. If there are indeed enough 6x17 shooters to cause a flood or even the occasional drop of dew, and oh, but I guess it isn't the film that is the problem as even 6x7 roll-film is OK. So it is those pesky shooters with no tilts and swings that are the problem - oh well except for those who have large format cameras without tilts and swings. So it must be the people without darkslides that we must be vigilant against!

Darkslides or die!

[Kirk Gittings]

You folks are welcome to put your complaints directly to the all the mods and owner. People do it all the time. But in all honesty we just reviewed this policy in February and we are not likely to review it again so soon. Those of you who think this is a moderation problem should know that we are alerted to these non-LF postings every time by numerous concerned members. Neither I nor anyone else goes looking for them. We don't have time.

I am reminded of a situation a couple of years ago. We were under considerable pressure to allow DSLR stitches in the core forums. There was a "consensus" of 20-30 people for that change too (we have about 2800 active members at any given time). We believe that the limited scope of this forum is what gives it character distinct from the ubiquitous photo forums out there. And for what doesn't fit the definition there is the Lounge. We instituted the Lounge just so we could provide a bigger umbrella without diluting out mission, which is LF film and View Cameras. I have never felt personally that there was any lack of discussion or feedback when posting in the Lounge. So I don't get the reluctance. A large portion of my work is MF and DSLR, but I don't see the need to post it within the core forums. If I have a show that is not LF, I post that announcement too in the Lounge.

Amy said said once, "the moderators are all that stands between this forum and total chaos (she said this shortly after Ted's death)". It is quite frankly a pretty thankless job. The rewards are having a place to come and discuss LF film and VC issues which is civil and knowledgeable. Despite our many imperfections, I think we are unsurpassed in that.

[IanG]

Another point missed by the "Tamperers" in this thread is the meaning of the word Moderate or Moderator.

Aside from this thread there's been some extremely clumsy Moderating by just one or two on this board in recent months, to be fair there's also other moderators who have the right attitude and approach.

But this 6x17 issue needs sorting out, if any 6x17 images are disallowed then all threads on smaller formats should be closed, along with any roll film LF threads.

It's the nonsensical approach that riles everyone.

It's extremely easy to justify why 6x17 and possibly 6x12 (& 6x15) should be treated as large format on this forum, without any ambiguity.

Do we stamp certain Moderators as being like Nazi's who claimed they just followed Hitlers orders, that's how they seem to see their role judging by behaviour. The only flaw is the owner of this site Q. Tuang Luong is not that kind of person.

Realism needs to prevail, 6x17 isn't that prevalent, so why doesn't the site embrace it totally, instead of saying if it this camera it's OK but that not.

Ian

[Marko]

I am reminded of a situation a couple of years ago. We were under considerable pressure to allow DSLR stitches in the core forums. There was a "consensus" of 20-30 people for that change too (we have about 2800 active members at any given time). We believe that the limited scope of this forum is what gives it character distinct from the ubiquitous photo forums out there. And for what doesn't fit the definition there is the Lounge. We instituted the Lounge just so we could provide a bigger umbrella without diluting out mission, which is LF film and View Cameras. I have never felt personally that there was any lack of discussion or feedback when posting in the Lounge. So I don't get the reluctance. A large portion of my work is MF and DSLR, but I don't see the need to post it within the core forums. If I have a show that is not LF, I post that announcement too in the Lounge.

Kirk,

With all due respect, I believe it is the sheer number of high quality participants that makes this forum what it is, character and all, rather than the scope.

I also believe that the issue at hand is not 6x17 (or 12 or 24 or whatever) but - forgive me for being blunt, there's simply no other way to say this - the highly capricious and inconsistent way in which it has been "moderated" lately. And it is not limited to this particular issue, there have been a number of topics handled in the similar manner - extremely clumsy, as IanG put it.

It would be a shame to keep needlessly losing good participants over something like that.

[Lachlan 717]

Kirk,

Seems an easy way to solve this: have one of the Moderators start a poll as to the "worth", "value" and/or "acceptance" of [a minimum] roll film size of 6x17cm, regardless of camera type.

Coming from a Moderator, it will be sanctioned, and the result both unequivocal and not open to further consideration.

Put a timeframe on response.

Clearly state that this is a once-only poll. The results will form the paradigm going forward, ad infinitum.

Whilst I cannot speak for others, I can clearly say that, if you do this and the majority vote against 6x17cm (whatever camera), then I will not raise this topic, nor respond to threads on it, again.

If you feel that you have a clear gauge on Subscribers' feelings about this topic, then this will be a no-brainer thing for you to do.

However, if you don't, then I'd see that you don't have the courage of your convictions on this one.

Not a criticism if it the latter; that's your prerogative as a Moderator. This Forum is not a democracy. But you'll leave me wondering why you're not open to checks and balances on your decrees...

[Kirk Gittings]

Sorry but this has nothing what so ever with the courage of my convictions. These are not just my convictions. They are the consensus of all the moderators and the owner. So I suggest you petition the owner and the moderators as a whole. That is how changes are made. It is super simple to do-send them an email. I personally put pretty much the same question to them all in February and after a thorough discussion we decided not to make a change. As far as I am concerned, for the foreseeable future, the question was settled in February.

[Lachlan 717]

Sorry but this has nothing what so ever with the courage of my convictions. These are not just my convictions. They are the consensus of all the moderators and the owner. So I suggest you petition the owner and the moderators as a whole. That is how changes are made. It is super simple to do-send them an email. I personally put pretty much the same question to them all in February and after a thorough discussion we decided not to make a change. As far as I am concerned, for the foreseeable future, the question was settled in February.

I would have thought the myriad negative responses to your decision would have been enough for you to realise that there was due cause to look into this.

Don't look over your shoulder, Kirk; you might see the elephant that's standing in the room with you…

[CarstenW]

Kirk did make the statement that he received numerous complaints from people who did not want to see the 617 camera photos in here, so as much I would prefer to say that LF is any negative/positive over a certain area, probably anything larger than 6x12, I cannot claim that the majority are with me, just the vocal members in this thread.