New Guidelines Posted

[Ralph Barker]

Folks, we have discussed the recent issues that have emerged about the relationship between politics and photography amongst the moderators and with QT. We've come to the conclusion that we should not have closed recent threads that were going political, but rather that we should have waited until the thread ventured into bitter disputes before deleting just those posts that did so. Many of you suggested as much and we listened and agreed.

Thus, we have revised the guidelines, in what is probably the most extensive revision of the clauses related to politics since they were first added. Some of you may have noticed that we have already been operating under these revised guidelines for the last week or two.

The main difference is that we are distinguishing between posts made with the sole or dominant intent of litigating partisan political or social issues, versus posts presenting and discussing photography, even photography made as part of advocating for those positions. It is a fuzzy line and we may miss one way or the other in any given case, as usual. But the closer the post content is to photography, the harder we will try to keep it. People who respectfully challenge our actions will get due consideration, as has happened in this case. Vitriol, less so. But the default is to let conversations run their course, not to act in anticipation of a train wreck that has not yet occurred, no matter how much our experience suggests that it is inevitable. These threads should continue to be posted in the appropriate image-sharing section (or, potentially in the On Photography sub-forum if discussing published work). We decided against starting a dedicated Photography and Politics sub-forum, as the desired focus in on the photography, not the politics or the socio-political ramifications.

We will continue to have one set of guidelines for decorum throughout the forum.

In the grand scheme of things, the new guidelines are little different from how they were, but we think they are organized more clearly, and we think they describe how the moderators will look at things more clearly.

In anticipation of monitoring (and enjoying) lively discussions, which we would rather be doing anyway as moderators, we would prefer to reduce the workload of managing the sales forums, which is less enjoyable. So, we are making a change in the three Buy-Sell sub-forums: Only the original poster (OP) may post in these sections. If you have a question, PM the OP. If you want to make an offer, PM the OP. If you want to suggest a correction to the listing, PM the OP. General discussions of, or questions about features and capabilities of equipment should be in the appropriate regular sub-forum (or in the Lounge if it is not large format). This makes the Buy-Sell sub-forums more like a classified-ad section in a newspaper, or something like Craigslist, which is what we intended it to be all along.

So, click on "Usage Guidelines" above, and read them. Do it now.

Thanks,

The Moderators (Oren, Rick, Ralph, QT)

[Ralph Barker]

Let's take this back to the top.

[Tim Meisburger]

I think that is an illegal bump!

Good work guys. We do appreciate all you do.

Best, Tim

[Ralph Barker]

"I think that is an illegal bump!" :D

Thanks, Tim.

[Jmarmck]

I am pleased to read that you are willing to adjust the site guidelines at the suggestions of the members. Nice work fellers.

[Peter De Smidt]

Good stuff!

[Tin Can]

And I was just getting up a head of steam...:)

Good news. Thanks all.

[cowanw]

You are to be commended.

[Corran]

Thanks guys for your considerations on the political stuff.

[David Karp]

Good call. Thanks.

[jnantz]

thanks !

===

i am sorry to ask this
but i am guessing others
might be wondering too ...
will the thread/s that was/were deleted
because of political content be re-animated
to run its/their course ? or will they be left as-is ...

[rdenney]

i am sorry to ask this
but i am guessing others
might be wondering too ...
will the thread/s that was/were deleted
because of political content be re-animated
to run its/their course ? or will they be left as-is ...

We are still working on that one. But sometimes it's just better to reboot those threads rather than trying to fix them.

While we discuss it, I would recommend that anyone who feels that a thread they started that is consistent with the guidelines but that was closed inconsistently with the current announcement should repost the thread.

But be easy on us. Lots of work travel for two of us this week.

Rick "on a coast-to-coast itinerary starting tomorrow" Denney

[bob carnie]

You are to be commended.

plus 1

[Henrim]

Kudos to the moderators! I'm not a frequent poster but I read this forum quite often and I was a bit worried where this all is going.

[goamules]

The new plan seems well thought out. Life always needs a little "gray area", as much as I advocated for a "black and white" solution. I do commend you moderators for being flexible and change oriented. So many situations in life have rules that no one can really remember the need for. "We've always done it that way..." is the type of comment that usually gets me going, and I'm glad we don't think like that here.

Another area that might be reconsidered is the way the For Sale items cannot be bumped, to come to the top of the section. That seems so black and white, and was set up to stop abusers, but the new system is really hard to get anything sold. A once a month or every 2 weeks bump should be allowed. Otherwise, your for sale item is pages deep within 2 weeks, and never seen. I guess I need to read how often I can repost a for sale, but that's pretty much "bumping", but a lot harder.

[Jody_S]

Thanks.

[Ralph Barker]

The new plan seems well thought out. Life always needs a little "gray area", as much as I advocated for a "black and white" solution. I do commend you moderators for being flexible and change oriented. So many situations in life have rules that no one can really remember the need for. "We've always done it that way..." is the type of comment that usually gets me going, and I'm glad we don't think like that here.

Another area that might be reconsidered is the way the For Sale items cannot be bumped, to come to the top of the section. That seems so black and white, and was set up to stop abusers, but the new system is really hard to get anything sold. A once a month or every 2 weeks bump should be allowed. Otherwise, your for sale item is pages deep within 2 weeks, and never seen. I guess I need to read how often I can repost a for sale, but that's pretty much "bumping", but a lot harder.

You can re-post an unsold item after 30 days, and close the original thread.

For the main forum displays, posts in the buy-sell sub-forums are ordered by the original post date. The forum software doesn't provide any further granularity - it's either original post date, or thread activity. Subsequent posts by the OP will, however, "bump" the thread in certain pre-configured searches that are activity oriented. Based on logs, however, it appears only a small percentage of members use those searches to view forum activity. So, for the most part, the original post date controls the display order for most viewers. How many posts appear on one page of display is controlled by each individual member's profile, and can be changed within their account settings. The default is 20, but that can be changed to whatever is convenient for the individual.

The changes we have made are intended to shift the administrative activity from the buy-sell fora, where the buy-sell tail was wagging the forum dog, back to the main discussion fora. Although the buy-sell fora are an important part of the overall forum, they are secondary to our primary mission - discussion of LF topics.

[rdenney]

Another area that might be reconsidered is the way the For Sale items cannot be bumped, to come to the top of the section. That seems so black and white, and was set up to stop abusers, but the new system is really hard to get anything sold. A once a month or every 2 weeks bump should be allowed. Otherwise, your for sale item is pages deep within 2 weeks, and never seen. I guess I need to read how often I can repost a for sale, but that's pretty much "bumping", but a lot harder.

Edit: I actually started typing this message before Ralph did, but I'll bet he didn't participate in two conference calls and answer half a dozen work emails while that reply window was open like I did. :)

It's 30 days before closing an old sales listing and posting a new listing.

Let's let the current changes soak in fully before reviewing whether we need changes.

Just for food for thought, though: If we have about 250 listings a month (I'm just estimating by scanning over the last month--Oren has been keeping more precise statistics), then a month's worth of listings will take ten pages. If all of them are bumped once in that period, then those same 250 listings will still take ten pages, but they will be ordered by date of latest bump rather than date of original posting. It's like an unruly press conference: 250 people in a small room shouting "Me! me! me!", all at the same time. I much prefer the classified-ad model. What our sales forum brings to the table is a friend-to-friend trust relationship, which is why prices can be lower (and why sellers don't mind the lower price--they have less risk).

I have routinely looked through far more than 250 listings in any given category in ebay, if I was just trolling for great deals. (Searching leads me to something specific I'm looking for, no matter when it was put on offer.) Looking through ten pages of thread titles takes no more time for any given number of items, and ten pages only takes a few minutes. But if I want to be visible for deal-trollers, I would pay very close attention to the title of my listing. That's what gets seen.

Rick "thinking out loud" Denney

[stawastawa]

thanks for the new updates.

re the For sale area, I agree one step at a time. There has been some good discussion about what might be done there so I hope you all have good notes.
I'd also suggest when those revisions go up to point out the 'search' feature for searching the for sale area.


(Searching leads me to something specific I'm looking for, no matter when it was put on offer.) Looking through ten pages of thread titles takes no more time for any given number of items, and ten pages only takes a few minutes.
Rick "thinking out loud" Denney

n

[Ralph Barker]

. . . Just for food for thought, though: If we have about 250 listings a month (I'm just estimating by scanning over the last month--Oren has been keeping more precise statistics), then a month's worth of listings will take ten pages. . . .
Rick "thinking out loud" Denney

And, if you changed your profile setting from the default of 20 messages per page to 250, there would be only 1 page to look through. ;)

[Taija71A]

And, if you changed your profile setting from the default of 20 messages per page to 250, there would be only 1 page to look through. ;)

General Settings:

Thread Display Options.
Number of Posts to Show Per Page: Show (*Use Forum Default or 5, 10, 20, 30, 50) Posts Per Page.
*Use this option to set the number of posts to show in a thread before splitting the display into multiple pages.
--
Am I perhaps missing something?

It was always my understanding... That the Maximum Number of Posts to Show Per Page was perhaps limited to 50.
Please advise and keep up the great work. Thank-you!

Best regards, -Tim.

[goamules]

And, if you changed your profile setting from the default of 20 messages per page to 250, there would be only 1 page to look through. ;)

It's not just me that needs to use that setting (which I set years ago) but everyone, all the buyers too. We should make it a rule that they all must do that, so the For Sale ads will be found more easily. Yeah.

[Ralph Barker]

General Settings:

Thread Display Options.
Number of Posts to Show Per Page: Show (*Use Forum Default or 5, 10, 20, 30, 50) Posts Per Page.
*Use this option to set the number of posts to show in a thread before splitting the display into multiple pages.
--
Am I perhaps missing something?

It was always my understanding... That the Maximum Number of Posts to Show Per Page was perhaps limited to 50.
Please advise and keep up the great work. Thank-you!

Best regards, -Tim.

Sorry for the confusion. It was a joke. The max is 50.

[Leigh]

Sorry for the confusion. It was a joke. The max is 50.
Might I suggest...

That's certainly a major candidate for change.

Here in the third Millennium with gigabit internet, 50 posts is an unreasonably small limit IMO.

= Leigh

[Ralph Barker]

Might I suggest...

That's certainly a major candidate for change.

Here in the third Millennium with gigabit internet, 50 posts is an unreasonably small limit IMO.

= Leigh

It's a limitation in the software, and we avoid doing custom programming because of other ramifications. The only downside with the limit is a little more exercise for our collective index finger. ;)

[Leigh]

Thanks, Ralph.

I suspected there was some such limit.

No, you don't want to do custom s/w changes. Bin there dun that too many times.

- Leigh