An old tired Horse called the Lounge

[domenico Foschi]

Since the decision of the moderators, the Lounge has become a stale place where threads get started and then are bound to die abruptly very likely because they end up delving in the very issues that have been prohibited.

This sanitation in addition to being offensive to people who like to express their thoughts and feelings has made the Lounge now, more than ever, a grotesque distortion of what it was before.
I wonder if it has passed in the moderator's mind to just shoot the animal out of its misery and give it back its dignity.

[davidb]

The lounge is/was a black eye for this forum.

Are you so desperate to talk politics that this is the only place for you to do it?

[Frank Petronio]

Yeah.

It was fascinating to share opinions with people who share a common interest. There are no other forums where we could discuss these issues with people we know like this.

The little old ladies who got their undergarments in a wad over the lounge could simply ignore it. And the occasional stark raving mad asshole could get banned, just like the trolls who hawk sneakers and iPods elsewhere on this site.

It's all for naught anyway. The Fairness Doctrine will shut down dissent and the IRS will soon tax the for sale section retroactively, forcing the site's owners into bankruptcy.

[Juergen Sattler]

I honestly don't get it! There were only a handfull of you guys going at each other - how hard can it be to create your own little political chatroom? Why do you have to do this here?

[Frank Petronio]

And why do you feel the need to police it? Isn't that kind of strange?

[eddie]

Yawn!

[Greg Lockrey]

I honestly don't get it! There were only a handfull of you guys going at each other - how hard can it be to create your own little political chatroom? Why do you have to do this here?

We did over at Yahoo, but it ain't the same. It's sort of a pain to leave here go there and then come back. Believe it or not, some of my favorite people here were the ones I had "heated" discussions with. You can learn a lot about a person's character especially when you don't agree.

[EuGene Smith]

Though the environs were a bit lewd, crude, and rude at times, a visit here used to be a great sociological experience. Now all we can do is compare black and chrome cameras! :(

Eu

[Darryl Baird]

we should post the entire "Lounge" into this thread: post "Something Dead" (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=41957)

Fantasy post:"Black model versus Woody"
"my faux wood-grain Wista camera just got beat out by a sexy black model"

(oh, soooo easily taken out of context... any takers?:p )

while we are ridiculing the forum, we could at least have a wee bit of fun (Jabberwocky (http://www.jabberwocky.com/carroll/jabber/jabberwocky.html))

...and, why do people sense the need to tell others where they should talk, when the moderators have already nutured the rhetoric here? sheesh, get a life...

[Marko]

That's "neutered" not "nurtured", right? :D

[Darryl Baird]

damn spell checker, can't read my intent, thanks:cool:

That's "neutered" not "nurtured", right? :D

[domenico Foschi]

The lounge is/was a black eye for this forum.

Are you so desperate to talk politics that this is the only place for you to do it?


You see, David, the point is not whether I am desperate or not, as you say, to talk about politics.
The real point is that my very core rejects vehemently the possibility that a person has invested himself of the power to delete my thoughts expressed in writing.

It is about respect toward other people and respect toward an Universal ideal called Freedom.
It is not that I want to talk about politic, it is that if you outline some limits on which my ideas can be expressed you are limiting my freedom.
If the owner and the moderators of this forum care about this ideal that we all cherish, they should also consider the philosophical implications of their decision.

If you believe in an ideal as Universal, you should treat it as such.

When the decision to prohibit political issues was taken I posted my thoughts about it saying that it was an unfortunate decision but I still thought that this was a good forum.
My opinion has changed since then and I don't think that this is a good forum anymore.

Eddie, if you are bored, don't blame me.

[Darryl Baird]

why would someone proclaim this a "blackeye on the forum" and participate in the same... I'm trying to follow that logic, but I keep hitting a dead end and my forehead is sore from the violent collisions.... oh, I get it, that's what caused the black eyes:rolleyes:

please leave us bruised and defective people alone to wallow in our desperate attempts at human communication... we already know how unworthy we are, why rub it in?

[BradS]

I find myself in agreement with Frank on this point. I find the stifling of the free flow of opinions and ideas is repulsive - especially so in a community that is ostensibly the domain of so called "artists".

[GPS]

...
It is not that I want to talk about politic, it is that if you outline some limits on which my ideas can be expressed you are limiting my freedom.
If the owner and the moderators of this forum care about this ideal that we all cherish, they should also consider the philosophical implications of their decision.

If you believe in an ideal as Universal, you should treat it as such.

When the decision to prohibit political issues was taken I posted my thoughts about it saying that it was an unfortunate decision but I still thought that this was a good forum.
My opinion has changed since then and I don't think that this is a good forum anymore.
...

Absolutely! The moderators didn't realized, once again, the capital role of the human element of the forum. And it wasn't the first time. First it came the foolish idea to "calm down" the heads by threatening people who happened to disagree with someone else more often than allowed, say 7 times instead of 3 times. Never mind that they did so in all politeness and without any bad language, they stood corrected...
Then it came the new heavy handed moderating of the newest moderator who took his role in a religious manner for the salvation of humanity...
Then the brave, final decision about banning the poor souls who had the dirty idea to clash politically. Not that I could give a damn to all their discussions, as I very rarely visited the Lounge.
What the moderating gods didn't get is the human implication of their decisions.
As you say, the people will stop liking the forum because they feel limited, guarded by moderators Big brother policies and simply not free. As a result, already well visible, people will limit their interventions and resign later generally... After all, nobody participates, for some relevant length of time, because of feeling any duty to answer to newbies over their "which camera... is Siponar B sharper than Garonar T... questions. Without people, feeling comfortable and satisfied putting their ideas on the forum's market the forum will decay as an unusable skeleton of the "correct politics" of the moderators. Old timers started to leave now even more and the newbies with their queries won't last long.
The forum is in a strong decline in terms of the level of discussions while the police is happy that there is calm on streets... They just didn't get it.

[Marko]

You see, David, the point is not whether I am desperate or not, as you say, to talk about politics.
The real point is that my very core rejects vehemently the possibility that a person has invested himself of the power to delete my thoughts expressed in writing.

It is about respect toward other people and respect toward an Universal ideal called Freedom.

For me it's not so much about respect for others as it is about principle. Thoughts today, images tomorrow.

Those who gloat when the opposing view is forbidden should not squeal when their turn comes.

[Marko]

And speaking of images, how about images with politics as a topic? Are they verboten too, or do we have to apply for ausweiss?


:confused: :rolleyes:

[Darryl Baird]

And speaking of images, how about images with politics as a topic? Are they verboten too, or do we have to apply for ausweiss?


:confused: :rolleyes:

ausweiss???
whoa, I had to look that up, (not easy to find references here in the USA), the historical references are all SS or Gestapo, but contemporary usage can simply mean a passport, right?

a troubling concept (not the images, but the permission) to say the least, mein got!

(4th of July parade, Granbury, Texas -- subject to individual interpretation)

[Mark Sloane]

Oh boy, I haven’t put myself in a vulnerable position since the lounge was for all intents and purposes closed but here goes!

I view this forum as a private home opened up to like minded people to learn, share and network around all things photographic. Through the effort, expense and kindness of the folks who own this site we have a wonderful resource.

Understanding that it is owned and not a public entity I would not apply the lofty ideals of freedom of speech to this specific domain.

If I was in your house and you asked me not to curse, I would not consider it an infringement on my rights. I might say to myself that it was old fashioned but I certainly wouldn’t tell you that you were taking away my most basic rights as an American citizen.

That said, it sure is lifeless around here………

I would like to make one more point. I did object to the mean spiritedness on the lounge especially when it was directed towards Americans serving in the military and/or our Veterans. I certainly would not want to infringe on someone’s rights but it did bother me.

[domenico Foschi]

http://i34.tinypic.com/v48p49.jpg


This shot was taken in Whittier, Ca.

It is a scene I shot in a farmers market. Its only intent is my fascination with the dichotomy characteristic of Human Beings in being individuals but also part of a collective.
The fact that the first man from the left is a Vietnam war veteran who has been feeling cheated by his government is purely coincidental.

[domenico Foschi]

We did over at Yahoo, but it ain't the same. It's sort of a pain to leave here go there and then come back. Believe it or not, some of my favorite people here were the ones I had "heated" discussions with. You can learn a lot about a person's character especially when you don't agree.

Yes, Greg is a Teddy Bear. :)

[Marko]

ausweiss???
whoa, I had to look that up, (not easy to find references here in the USA), the historical references are all SS or Gestapo, but contemporary usage can simply mean a passport, right?

a troubling concept (not the images, but the permission) to say the least, mein got!

(4th of July parade, Granbury, Texas -- subject to individual interpretation)

It's more like permit, but it can also mean an I.D. History does provide special context, though, doesn't it? ;)


P.S. I goofed - there's no double "s"... and both it and Got are nouns and should be capitalized :)

[domenico Foschi]

If I was in your house and you asked me not to curse, I would not consider it an infringement on my rights. I might say to myself that it was old fashioned but I certainly wouldn’t tell you that you were taking away my most basic rights as an American citizen.

Mark, have you read anywhere that I promote cursing?

If it's the cursing that you don't want act surgically and get rid of the elements who curse.
If you use an axe instead of a chisel, in the words of our new (meaning the USA) leader, it will be a coarse and unsophisticated remedy that will show its inherent flaws as our moderator's decision is doing now.

[m.bruehl]

You see, David, the point is not whether I am desperate or not, as you say, to talk about politics.
The real point is that my very core rejects vehemently the possibility that a person has invested himself of the power to delete my thoughts expressed in writing.

It is about respect toward other people and respect toward an Universal ideal called Freedom.
It is not that I want to talk about politic, it is that if you outline some limits on which my ideas can be expressed you are limiting my freedom.
If the owner and the moderators of this forum care about this ideal that we all cherish, they should also consider the philosophical implications of their decision.

If you believe in an ideal as Universal, you should treat it as such.

When the decision to prohibit political issues was taken I posted my thoughts about it saying that it was an unfortunate decision but I still thought that this was a good forum.
My opinion has changed since then and I don't think that this is a good forum anymore.

Dear Domenico,

I see you did your lessons in rhetorics well, and you are highly involved in philosophy.

I bet you understood well, what Mark wanted to say with the example of cursing. But as you couldn't argue against the whole - that in the house of somebody else, you have to show respect to the owner - you take it out of the context to attack it. Nice rhetorics, no argument. You still have to behave as a guest.

Same with the ideal of freedom: if you can't beat them at defined arguments, go to a common place nobody can deny, and argue back. Nice rethorics again, but that's it. You don't have to defend anybodies freedom here - It's a forum on LF, not human rights.

If you had the same respect for the people who do this forum, like you claim it for your own opinions, you would accept their decision and discuss political matters elsewhere. And you would stop whining about it.

As you seem to be intelligent and educated, and you still harp on about this, I can't deny I get the impression you only want to enforce your point.

If you talk about respect, but you don't take "no" for an answer, you have way to go.

Regards

[domenico Foschi]

First, thank you for the "Dear Domenico", but if you do not mean it spare it.
Your post exudes abundant sarcasm, a defect of character that I abhor in people and even more the venomous feel I get from it.

I would have ended this post at this stage, but for the sake of trying to explain further my position, here you go.

There is something very important that marks the difference between a house or household and this site.

What constitutes the very fabric of this forum is not only the html and on and so forth but more importantly its members.
Without its members this site would be an empty shell and that's why I think it is important to have respect for them.
This might not be a democracy but since, again, it is constituted by its members, it should be very close in being so.

[domenico Foschi]

And yes, I will take "no" for an answer but first I feel entitled to a fight.

[Mark Sloane]

Mark, have you read anywhere that I promote cursing?

If it's the cursing that you don't want act surgically and get rid of the elements who curse.
If you use an axe instead of a chisel, in the words of our new (meaning the USA) leader, it will be a coarse and unsophisticated remedy that will show its inherent flaws as our moderator's decision is doing now.

I was merely using cursing as an example. Pick any context you like.

However, I do agree with you about the axe vs chisel approach.

[Mark Sloane]

What constitutes the very fabric of this forum is not only the html and on and so forth but more importantly its members.
Without its members this site would be an empty shell and that's why I think it is important to have respect for them.
This might not be a democracy but since, again, it is constituted by its members, it should be very close in being so.

Well said.......

[Scott Schroeder]

did they outlaw porn to?
We could talk about that :)
Any one up for stroking that sinar shaft of Frank's.....
:-)
lighten up people....

[Darryl Baird]

I belong and have previously belonged to many lists, mostly 'moderated'... some are great resources (like here) and others are communities AND great resources. From time to time things get out of hand... (a byproduct of faceless communication) and arguments spill over into the whole forum/list. After a short while, if the problem persists, a moderator will contact the offending parties (guess how I know that...:D ), and warned. If the problem persists, the naughty folks get a variety of banishments, a few weeks, months, or permanent (the death penalty) depending on the severity of the infraction.

That system seems to work fine, there have been no rips in the fabric of time/space and we are still talking about the same topics as before. I think the decision to ban ALL politics and religion was an easy way out of moderating the wild-n-wooly Lounge in this incredible election cycle.
It's certainly put a cloud on the forum for me personally, and I almost never came into the lounge until the political season began because I didn't have a big interest to hang out ... but I got hooked. It's cruel world. I can't help but feel the forum is worse for the loss... I try to commit to the other forums, but I have less heart for it. And like Domenico, I just don't like places that deny speech on any principle. It certainly doesn't feel like any home I want to live in for very long.

[Darryl Baird]

did they outlaw porn to?
We could talk about that :)
Any one up for stroking that sinar shaft of Frank's.....
:-)
lighten up people....

man, talking about porn is like a dry shower or virtual sleep... not something you can talk about successfully;)

[Scott Schroeder]

yea, but it does wonders for an old tired horse !!!! ;)

[m.bruehl]

Domenico,

I am sorry you took the "dear" for offence. It is just what I learned to use to start a written communication with, and - you may think this is old-fashioned - I like to address the person I am talking/writing to. I didn't use it to pamper, I used it, because it's a common phrase to start with.

But it is O.K. you start about this, as it shows how hypersensitive you react to normal response. Same with sarcasm - this is your interpretation. As well as the conclusions you draw from it.

But this seems to be the general problem: to get back to normal level.

I respect your uncompromising fight for freedom of speach.

But do you really think this and here is the right platform to fight the final battle?

I see no dark armies here. But I know an example from literature, where a knight of immaculate character started to fight the giants - which in reality have been windmills ...

Last, not least: I would also prefer freedom of subjects. Single persons, that get a little bit too engaged, may be directly contacted by the mods. In case of further unreasonable acting be punished.

Regards

Michael

[Marko]

I think the decision to ban ALL politics and religion was an easy way out of moderating the wild-n-wooly Lounge in this incredible election cycle.
It's certainly put a cloud on the forum for me personally, and I almost never came into the lounge until the political season began because I didn't have a big interest to hang out ... but I got hooked. It's cruel world. I can't help but feel the forum is worse for the loss... I try to commit to the other forums, but I have less heart for it. And like Domenico, I just don't like places that deny speech on any principle. It certainly doesn't feel like any home I want to live in for very long.

That's the point. We are, of course, free to choose places we frequent, but I am not a big fan of bar-hoping, and if I have to pick a different place to have my drink after dinner or to throw my darts, I might as well find another place to do it all at. If I like the old place enough, I'll try to make it known to the owners before I leave. If they shrug it, so do I. Life is too short to mind someone else's business.

A few of us seem to be at the point of letting the owners know right now, that's all.

[domenico Foschi]

If I like the old place enough, I'll try to make it known to the owners before I leave. If they shrug it, so do I. Life is too short to mind someone else's business.

This is the reason why I started this thread, plus trying to see if there are more people who share my sentiments.
Pretty grim results for that....
I was hoping for an open debate with the "management" but nobody has come forth yet.
Is this the "shrug" you were talking about Marko?
We'll see.
I want to thank Michael Bruehl for helping me to find the right words, through his intervention, in order to explain my position in a more in depth manner.

[Colin Graham]

I was pretty disappointed with the decision as well, but didn't really feel it was my place to complain. I actually tried to stay away from here, thinking I'd maybe become too invested in the forum, and needed a life. But I live in a very small town (read: vacuum) and really missed the interaction, even if it's somewhat hamstrung and limited.

Now I'm not so sure. The place now seems altogether toothless. Clearly I still need a life. But I would like the opportunity to get to know the people that frequent this site, and with the the new regs, that's seems unlikely to happen. So I wonder what am I participating with, exactly.

[Deane Johnson]

I was hoping for an open debate with the "management" but nobody has come forth yet.

I didn't realize this was a democracy. I thought it was a privately owned enterprise wherein the owner makes the rules and they aren't debated. Am I wrong about this?

The decision was made by ownership to remove politics from the Lounge where 3 or 4 individuals made post after post after post to the point of nausea about their own particular political views.

Domenico, I have looked at your photographs and they are outstanding. Why do you want to tarnish the considerable respect you gain with your exceptional photographic work by espousing your political views in an arena where they are not welcomed?

[domenico Foschi]

Deane,
I suggest to read my post # 25 on how I can find room for a democratic slant in the LFPF.

Your last thought doesn't make any sense to me.
How can my thoughts about this matter have anything to do with my work?
My work stands alone and it is born from the same set of ideals that have inspired me to write in this forum today.

[Deane Johnson]

Deane,
Your last thought doesn't make any sense to me.
Does that by any chance mean the first two thoughts do make sense to you.:)

[Brian Bullen]

I too feel like the forum has changed, it just doesn't seem as lively as a few months ago. Did I like all of the political threads, not really but I avoided reading most of them. I do believe there could be a lounge like the old days before the "few" offenders took it to the extreme. A little moderation goes a long way.
Religion and politics are part of daily life, and for us so is large format, being able to discuss all of these on this forum adds to the sense of community. Bringing people closer together. There are a lot of excellent and knowledgeable photographers here with interesting personalities, restricting what they can say might push them out the door. The information on this site is invaluable and that information comes from the members.
I know this isn't a democracy and I don't expect it to be. However, I would like the forum to return to the mostly happy and good natured place it was before being taken over by the small group of lounge extremists.

[Darryl Baird]

I was pretty disappointed with the decision as well, but didn't really feel it was my place to complain. I actually tried to stay away from here, thinking I'd maybe become too invested in the forum, and needed a life. But I live in a very small town (read: vacuum) and really missed the interaction, even if it's somewhat hamstrung and limited.

Now I'm not so sure. The place now seems altogether toothless. Clearly I still need a life. But I would like the opportunity to get to know the people that frequent this site, and with the the new regs, that's seems unlikely to happen. So I wonder what am I participating with, exactly.

I too live in a vacuum (of my choosing), but felt I'd like to hang out with some photo-savvy adults. I'm around full-blown, shouting liberals and artists all day (a university), and there are few exchanges that get to the heart of the differences that divide and define each of us citizens of the world. When I come into the lounge I fully expect to be challenged, outraged, confused, saddened, mischievous, engaged, and (last and probably most important) alive. I've done enough photography (since 1969) to be slightly jaded and appreciate the vitality and guts many members exude... it's a balm to my senses to be around this level of passion.

I could always drop down a floor to visit colleagues in the school of management, but they have a unique and quantitative view of the current politics. I prefer to get my "opposition" from people who have traveled many of the same paths I have, but made different personal choices... that's the meat of the forum, and the lounge. I know and respect Frank P (more like envy!), Mark S (we had a few tussles, but then he likes to fish too), and finally I may remove Deane from my ignore list to read her contributions (it's a vehicle to keep my blood pressure in check;) ).

Strangely, many of the worst offenders of decorum from the liberal side, are absent in this discussion. Has the chill of censorship already taken its toll? The loyal conservatives have come back to engage... possibly a sign that we can still talk and find a purpose together here? Fist bumps all around! I'll buy the next round.

Bring back red blood, real voices, and sweaty, gritty passion... your future creativity may depend on it...

[Geary Lyons]

Deane,
I suggest to read my post # 25 on how I can find room for a democratic slant in the LFPF.

Your last thought doesn't make any sense to me.
How can my thoughts about this matter have anything to do with my work?
My work stands alone and it is born from the same set of ideals that have inspired me to write in this forum today.

Dominico,
You are being far too kind. Quite honestly none of the points made sense to me. But then the whole "sheep-to-slaughter" attitude befuddles me. I agree with you and your quest. I do not subscribe to the "owner" definition as a dictatorial perogative. I appreciate that resources are provided and/or donated, I just do not see that as justification to the espoused "My way or the highway!" that constantly get tossed up by the lemmings.

Seems, to me, that the forum has become even more a FS venue /classified and less a community to share thoughts and ideas. Perhaps just my bias tainting my perceptions!

Cheers,
Geary

[domenico Foschi]

I knew that what I wrote might have led to some misunderstanding.
Yes, it does makes sense and let me expand on that.

My work has nothing to do with my thoughts on this matter and if you had read all my posts you might have seen that I don't care to talk about politics, to me is the censorship issue that hits home deeply, because limits a person's mind to be expressed.

My work is born from that same source that deems the basics universal values the most important parameters by which life should be lived and, at the same time, my images being from a language other than words stand by themselves.

Please, if you are thinking to rebuke to this post, know that I have no intention to engage in a back and forth with you.
Actually, from now on I will be a spectator in this thread. I will be looking forward to read other people's input.

[Mark Sloane]

Bring back red blood, real voices, and sweaty, gritty passion... your future creativity may depend on it...

I concur and I might even take you fishing?

[Marko]

I was hoping for an open debate with the "management" but nobody has come forth yet.
Is this the "shrug" you were talking about Marko?

It is.

I chose to join to this "privately owned" community a few years ago because I liked the concept and the rules that existed at that time, as well as the audience they attracted. Now that the rules changed in a way that leaves me less than thrilled - make that much less -, I have no qualms articulating my opinion in an honest attempt to talk to the management before I do decide to go elsewhere.

If the management doesn't care to dignify long time bona fide members any reply at all, that is fine too, that's a very clear reply in itself and a good indicator of the direction the community is taking.

[Darryl Baird]

I concur and I might even take you fishing?

oh man, that's a definite maybe.. seriously, when I talk to friends (I have a few, really) who tend to make time in their life to fish, the excitement they bring to the table is palpable. I think (I heard if from several plumbers named Joe... just kidding, they actually laid ceramic tile, but the idea is the same and so is the humor ;) ) that Michigan is great for fishing... I'm soooooo envious. Montana, Michigan, Oregon, ???? I've got to get a rod and go fishing ...full disclosure -- I have never been fly fishing. :(

[Mark Sloane]

oh man, that's a definite maybe.. seriously, when I talk to friends (I have a few, really) who tend to make time in their life to fish, the excitement they bring to the table is palpable. I think (I heard if from several plumbers named Joe... just kidding, they actually laid ceramic tile, but the idea is the same and so is the humor ;) ) that Michigan is great for fishing... I'm soooooo envious. Montana, Michigan, Oregon, ???? I've got to get a rod and go fishing ...full disclosure -- I have never been fly fishing. :(

I take people fly fishing for the first time every summer and they always have fun and catch trout!

If you ever come to CA you have a free guide (me) for two days in Northern CA in the shadow of Mt. Shasta!

But keep it to yourself otherwise I might end up spending two days with Kev on the river. We'd never catch any fish because we would never stop arguing!

[Greg Lockrey]

oh man, that's a definite maybe.. seriously, when I talk to friends (I have a few, really) who tend to make time in their life to fish, the excitement they bring to the table is palpable. I think (I heard if from several plumbers named Joe... just kidding, they actually laid ceramic tile, but the idea is the same and so is the humor ;) ) that Michigan is great for fishing... I'm soooooo envious. Montana, Michigan, Oregon, ???? I've got to get a rod and go fishing ...full disclosure -- I have never been fly fishing. :(

Never been flyfishing and you live in Michigan where there are some of the best flyfishing streams in the world? Man, this is almost blasphemous. (Opps! :eek: this can be construed as religion.)

[Jim Graves]

O.K., here's one of the Liberals (with a capital L) chiming in ... no one has suggested that this is not a private forum ... no one has suggested that this is not a Large Format forum ... THAT IS NOT THE POINT!!!! Let me say that one more time ... THAT IS NOT THE POINT (excuse the yelling.)

What is the point, is that this is a community of Large Format photographers (hopefully artists) that is promoted to discuss areas of interest. This Forum is successful only because of the interest and contributions of the members and will cease to exist if the members lose interest (no, this is not the owner's home.)

Until a short time ago, this forum included an unmoderated area for the discussion of whatever was topical or of general interest (The Lounge.) It was well attended and generated a lot of interest and controversy. I, for one, always read it but seldom posted. No one was required to read it or participate in it. If was objectionable to any user for ANY reason, they could simply ignore it.

The Forum has been removed by "The Moderator Team." The reason given: "[O]ur experiment with an unmoderated, any-topic-goes Lounge has largely failed. After a lot of discussion among the moderators, we've concluded that it is in the best long-term interest of the forum to 'outlaw' discussions of politics and religion, either as thread starters or within posts/responses, anywhere on the forum, including the Lounge."

There was never any explanation of how or why it "failed." In fact, it's an easy argument that it was only canceled because it did not fail ... it generated exactly what you would expect from an unmoderated general topic forum ... what did they expect? The owner of the forum and the moderators have failed to provide an explanation ... do they have any obligation to do so ... no ... do they appear the lesser for their failure ... yes.

In fact, the Lounge was topical, interesting, controversial, maddening, insulting, fun, etc., etc., etc. Which, I would submit, is precisely what you would want in a forum. Not only that, but because everybody pretty much knows everybody else on this forum, it was basically self-policing.

What is SO rankling to many of us is that a few who, for some reason, are uncomfortable with the self-expression of others, are allowed to set a community standard that denies an important and enjoyable outlet to the rest of us ... even though they are truly unaffected by it. And, when it appears that that few includes the owner and moderators of a forum that is important to us, it is worrisome.

In all, it is too bad and a loss for all of us ... even for those who do not agree ... because there may come a time when they will have issues that they feel need airing and they will have no comfortable place to air them among colleagues.

[Joseph O'Neil]

Maybe it's the libertarian in me, but I always treated speech I didn't like as well, just walk away form it. If there was something I didn't like in the forum, I just ignored it. Just like soap operas on TV, I cannot stand them, so I never turn them on.

personally I like the idea of a free-for all, but then personally, I hold no particular love for either conservatism or liberalism, so I was little or never insulted by most of what I read.

The world is changing fast, and it not only will, but does affect LF photography. As the world moves more digital, I see more and more value in LF of any size, shape, etc. I don't see how we can discuss that philosphically without occasionally moving into politics or religion at some point in time.

Warning - Ego mode = ON: For example, I will be in the local arts magazine (December issue) as "photographer of the month" and a big part of the reason was my large format camera work. Interestingly some of my best architectual pictures are of churches. :) Ego mode = Off. :)

The only "religion" debate I wish would die a quick death is the digital vs film one that keeps coming up. We all know digital is the spawn of the great evil one. Personally after shooting 10,000+ images with my DSLR since February, I have repented and "seen the light." My penance has been to buy a used 8x10 and move up from 4x5. The road will be long and hard, but I shall prevail on the side of wisdom, rightousness and justice in the long run.

:D

[EuGene Smith]

. . . the Jabberwockys are slain, the Klan models their latest crimson robes, the fly fishermen network, the freedom of speech debate continues, the "straw bosses" hide in the wings, and the dying horse still manages a weak snort now and then . . . guess I still gotta go back up the street to the old watering hole on occasion, if for no other reason than just to check the patient's vital signs. Give 'em heck!

Smiff

[domenico Foschi]

Ralph, you can save the energies to delete me because I won't be participating anymore in this forum.
I wish all the members much growth with the wonderful medium we use.

All the best,
Domenico

[EuGene Smith]

Golly!!! :eek:

[Ralph Barker]

The LFPF was never intended to be an all-inclusive venue, but one that focused tightly on topics related to large-format photography. Just like Chinese restaurants tend to serve only Chinese food, we serve only large format photography. We operate on donated resources and moderators are volunteers with time limitations.

The Lounge was intended to provide an area in which non-LF, but still photo-related, topics could be discussed without "contaminating" the core sub-forums. Unfortunately, political and religious discussions got out of hand, hence our decision to limit the topics here to those originally intended. As mentioned in the announcement of this change, that decision was made after considerable discussion among the moderators.

Although we tend to be far more relaxed about our moderation policies than many photography forums, we do make a concerted effort to establish clear guidelines that can be easily followed by everyone, moderated in an even-handed manner and with some wiggle room for rationality. We also make a concerted effort to listen to the preferences of the members, but make decisions on the basis of benefit to the majority within the framework of the forum's primary objectives.

The tight focus on large-format photography has allowed this forum to continue to be relevant to LF photographers over the years, while other, more diffused forums have come and gone, or have morphed into for-profit operations with commercial undertones.

Those who insist on having an all-inclusive, anything-goes environment may be better served elsewhere.

[Michael T. Murphy]

Quote:

"We must cease dividing our life into compartments. Our life is divided into periods of work, vacation, and recreation. We have seperated businesss life, love life, and spirituial life from the time set aside for the body with sports, exercise and enjoyment.

The society around us reflects and exagerrates this same compartmentalization. We have churches that house the sacred and commerce districts for the secular and profane; we have split off education from family life; the interests of business and profit making are divorced from those of the earth and its environment on which they depend.

The habit of dividing up life is so strong that it fragments our vision everywhere we look."

- Jack Kornfield


I had to try to remember this url last week. I haven't been around for 1+ month. Not much of interest here anymore.

I never used to visit the Lounge. Then I got drawn in, for whatever reason. I tried to be level and respectful, as I would be in person.

I seriously thought about unsubscribing to LF after the collapse of the Lounge. Still not sure how much value this site will hold for me in the future.

We will see I guess? Not sure how much it matters to anyone ... After all, Rob Galbraith crashed his wonderful site through much the same type of heavy-handed action. It was a shame, but we all survived and moved on.

Same thing with PDN just about 1 month ago. RIP.

[Deane Johnson]

It seems to me that people who are here only for political discussion in the lounge probably shouldn't be here in the first place.

[Michael Kadillak]

Losing one person that cannot come to grips with the moderators rules is a small price to pay for the many that will come, stay and contribute when they realize that this venue maintains and monitors its professionalism.

To aspouse that a LF forum should lower the bar for political or religious discourses and the angst that inherently comes along is pretty foolish IMHO.

Use the extra time to kick your income up a couple of notches and grease the wheels of commerce. Lord knows we all need to do our share as our economy continues to struggle.

[Joseph O'Neil]

Hey, maybe we should have a new forum and call it "The Pit", modeled after Penn & Teller's TV show "BS". While I don;t agree with everything those guys say, I like their outspoken chutzpa. Some days, we need something like there here too. Otherwise you guys get all too boring. :)

Anyhow, the main rules will be "abandon all hope all ye who enter here" or something to that effect. :D Also there should be a warning (or promise) that you WILL be offended in "The Pit."

...yeah, okay, I hear you all ....I'll go crawl back under my rock...... :p

[Paul Metcalf]

Domenico-
I wish your photography genius would transcend this issue as we would all benefit from your continued participation in the other threads. I doubt any of your posts will be deleted therein. Please reconsider.

Paul

[Marko]

Losing one person that cannot come to grips with the moderators rules is a small price to pay for the many that will come, stay and contribute when they realize that this venue maintains and monitors its professionalism.

One person at a time and the time will show.

I wish the new rules succeed and make all the hyper-sensitive souls among us happy. If nothing else, then because I'd hate to see them come to whatever other place I decide to switch to and ruin it for me, again. ;)

Speaking for myself, this forum has lost most of the attraction it once had with killing The Lounge and the palpable slide toward apug-like rigidity. I will therefore limit my participation to reading only and occasional checking the For Sale section, at least for the time being.

[Michael T. Murphy]

Speaking for myself, this forum has lost most of the attraction it once had with killing The Lounge and the palpable slide toward apug-like rigidity.


True. There is no way I can seperate the spiritual, evolution, and my world view from my work. In the Lounge, or elsewhere on the board.

I am not complaining. In the end, who cares, right? LF is dead anyway. :cool:

[Brian Bullen]

It seems to me that people who are here only for political discussion in the lounge probably shouldn't be here in the first place.

Deane, you seem to be missing the point. I think most of the people here don't want to talk only about politics or religion. I think the real issue at hand is saying " you can ONLY talk about Large Format related topics. Putting limits on creative individuals is like pouring water on a fire and frankly it becomes a little boring and lifeless around here.
I don't really feel I need to post anymore about this issue because Ralph has already given the ultimatum.

[PenGun]

Philosophy ... an elaborate method used to hide from the truth.

Universal concepts. Transitory, the product of human thought. In no way universal.

Freedom. Meaningless to that which cannot be chained.

S uP horsey

[sanking]

Speaking only for myself, my opinion is exactly opposite. The lack of moderation in the political discussions in the lounge, which resulted in one or two persons constantly verbally abusing those with whom they disagreed, is one of the primary reasons I began limiting my discussions on the LF forum.

For what it is worth, I have always felt that the moderation on APUG was much better than that on the LF forum. From that perspective, I applaud the more pro-active position taken recently by the LF moderators.

Sandy King





Speaking for myself, this forum has lost most of the attraction it once had with killing The Lounge and the palpable slide toward apug-like rigidity. I will therefore limit my participation to reading only and occasional checking the For Sale section, at least for the time being.

[Marko]

Speaking only for myself, my opinion is exactly opposite. The lack of moderation in the political discussions in the lounge, which resulted in one or two persons constantly verbally abusing those with whom they disagreed, is one of the primary reasons I began limiting my discussions on the LF forum.

For what it is worth, I have always felt that the moderation on APUG was much better than that on the LF forum. From that perspective, I applaud the more pro-active position taken recently by the LF moderators.

Sandy King

Hey Sandy,

I agree with you about the need for judicious moderation.

But what I am talking about is blanket prohibition of even mentioning certain topics. That's what makes apug rigid and so unappealing while the lack of it is what made this board so attractive to me until recently.

But be that as it may, the deus ex machina has decreed what is to be and there's no need to argue about it any more. This is just to clarify what I said so there's no misunderstanding.

Take care,

Marko

[eddie]

YAWN! [rub eyes]

Originally Posted by Deane Johnson View Post
It seems to me that people who are here only for political discussion in the lounge probably shouldn't be here in the first place.

i agree with deane

are we still talking about this? MAN! get over it! it is a LF photography site! talk about LF photography already! i surely do not want to talk about Thai cooking here.....even in the lounge!

if certain folks can not get by without the lounge to have flame wars in, and they feel they must go.....all i have to say about that is:

[B]ADIOS

now i am going back to the forum and talk/read about LF stuff!

[Brian_A]

How can my thoughts about this matter have anything to do with my work?
My work stands alone and it is born from the same set of ideals that have inspired me to write in this forum today.

Yes, your work is nice. But that's before people get to know you. I know this shows the redneck in me, but I'll use a NASCAR analogy. If my favorite driver went over to Toyota, I'd dump his ass with a quickness. Or if he said some stuff I just really can't stand about politics or religion. Now when you make political views known, people can get very offended. Just like religion. People take that kind of stuff really seriously. Maybe, you think, "Oh, well, I can do without those people" but if you piss enough people off there goes your customer and/or fan base. Now am I saying that you have done this? No. I'm just clarifying his statement. (I'm not saying either way what I think about anyone personally because it's not worth arguing over.. And I'm sure they probably think the same about me.)

If everyone knew Ansel Adams or Ed Weston and thought they were complete pricks, do you think people would just sit there and buy their work for so much money? Doubtful.

I'm not trying to spin you up or piss you off. I'm just stating my opinion and not my opinion of you - just the situation.

[Frank Petronio]

But Ansel and Edward were hardly perfect or always nice. Their families sacrificed a lot so that they could realize their artistic goals.

[Brian_A]

But Ansel and Edward were hardly perfect or always nice. Their families sacrificed a lot so that they could realize their artistic goals.

I'm sure that's very true, but they didn't go really go public their political or religious views... Especially in an internet world where anyone can search your name and see what you think. Art and opinions of art is one thing, but when you throw in something as volatile as politics and religion that changes everything for a lot of people. Especially in such a heated election/political time.

[Colin Graham]

Hard to be an asshole when you've been dead for 50 years...?

But it sounds like you're really telling Domenico just to shut up and look pretty.

[sanking]

No, that is not what I would tell Domenico. I don't even know that he is all that pretty.

But I would tell him to respect the privacy of people who send him private emails and not publish them on forums. That is a fairly simple path to decent and honorable behavior in my book.

My recollection is that Ralph deleted one of his messages because it repeated private email correspondence?

Sandy King



Hard to be an asshole when you've been dead for 50 years...?

But it sounds like you're really telling Domenico just to shut up and look pretty.

[Colin Graham]

Where did you come from? I was referring to Brian's statement to Domenico.

[sanking]

Colin,

Today, 10:47. Message deleted between #51 and #52.

Sandy



Where did you come from? I was referring to Brian's statement to Domenico.

[Colin Graham]

And? I know I had a long day, but I'm going to need another hint. I mean I hear you but where are you? ;)

[sanking]

Today at 10:47 the moderator deleted a message by Domenico. Reason follows.

"This message has been deleted by Ralph Barker. Reason: inappropriate publication of private e-mail."

Hope that clears up where I am. Where are you?

Sandy King




And? I know I had a long day, but I'm going to need another hint. I mean I hear you but where are you? ;)

[Colin Graham]

You responded and quoted me as if we were discussing something. That is the extent of my confusion with you.

[Francesco Gallarotti]

Ralph, you can save the energies to delete me because I won't be participating anymore in this forum.
I wish all the members much growth with the wonderful medium we use.

All the best,
Domenico

Domenico,

if you still read this thread, let me tell you that you find me in total agreement with your ideas. Please don't take this message as me trying to convince you to come back... feel free to do whatever you think is better for you and if you think this place has become a waste of time for you, I totally understand that.
It's funny how when i first found this forum in my quest to find some info about LF photography, I didn't even realized that there was a lounge. Later on i heard of people complaining about the lounge and its people so one night I decided to come here and started reading.
To my big surprise, among some very animated discussions, I found interesting ideas, and got to know better some interesting people like you, while relaxing after a hard day at work... it was fun and when they decided to limit the number of possible topics I thought that this was going to be very bad for the community.
In a technical forum like this one there are always newbies, like me, and artists, like you. The only way to keep the artists around (which will hopefully trigger them to help the newbies and keep the atmosphere friendly and helpful) is to keep them entertained and I thought that closing the Lounge would have been the equivalent of closing down LFPF in the very long run... we'll see if I was right then... you are tonight proving to me that I was 100% right... no matter how sily, important, off-topic were the topics in the Lounge.

Just my 2 pennies...

Good night and good luck, Domenico, stammi bene... e grazie per avermi mostrato la tua bellissima arte... ciao

Francesco

[Jim Graves]

I still have not heard one cogent expression of any harm that came from an unmoderated Lounge.

[weasel]

I still have not heard one cogent expression of any harm that came from an unmoderated Lounge.

Amen.
I consider my self a curious person, which is a lot of the reason that photography has fascinated me and held my interest for nearly 40 years. I am curious visually; I want to see things, see how others see them, and I use a lens, silver and paper to try and express that.
But I can't separate that curiosity from wanting to know how others think, feel and experience life in other contexts as well. It helps me to put things in perspective, maybe try and understand things in ways I wouldn't otherwise.
That is of value to my photography, as it helps to keep my mind fresh, helps keeping me from making the same photographs for 40 years.

[cowanw]

Agree, I hope the Moderators can see their way clear to find a compromise approach.
Regards
Bill


I still have not heard one cogent expression of any harm that came from an unmoderated Lounge.

[Ron Marshall]

I still have not heard one cogent expression of any harm that came from an unmoderated Lounge.

Censorship is often more about intolerance for divergent ideas than intolerance for bad language.

[Michael T. Murphy]

If my favorite driver went over to Toyota, I'd dump his ass with a quickness.

Some of us get tired of pretending to always have the right politics. We would much prefer to be genuine - who we really are.

I remember the fast trackers telling me how I should play golf so taht I could suck up to upper level mgmt. No thanks, they get enough of my time and personality.

That does not mean being rude, or obnoxious, etc.

But, when Ford fired me 2 years ago - I went and bought two Hondas!! :D ;) :D

F' em. :eek:

[Wayne Lambert]

Both sides have presented and defended their positions well, but for the greater good of the site I think restrictions on discussion are not a good thing. At times I was surprised to see what was being discussed in the Lounge, topics not really germane to the site but not unexpected when a large group gets together, sort of like brawls at the edge of a carnival crowd. If the participants enjoy it, and it doesn't wreck the main event, why not? And it provides some interesting diversion for the rest of us.

What does worry me is how restrictions on political and religious discussion could affect artistic discussion on this site. As an example, Serrano's Piss Christ, sort of a photograph, generated massive public discussion of art vs. religion vs. politics. How could we discuss it here? There would be many shades of gray as to what would be appropriate and inappropriate discussion. I wouldn't want to be moderator in that case.

We've already seen one of the deleterious effects of restricted discussion. Good people leave. I was very sorry to see Domenico Foschi go. I very much appreciated and admired his visual and verbal contributions to this site. Perhaps the Owner and Moderators could rethink and revisit this whole issue.

[Frank Petronio]

It's a shame that we can't discuss the work of large format war photographer and journalist Simon Norfolk. Hell, Frederick Evans photos of cathedrals have to do with the spiritual and religious, I guess discussion of them, beyond the technical aspects of the images, should be banned as well.

Ehh, I like Ralph and Kirk but once you taste the absolute power of the Gods, it is hard to relinquish your grasp.... I imagine that by having something to police it gives them a purpose and something fun to do.

I can understand their shutting down the lounge to the jerks who pop up only to argue, but by stopping the political discussions altogether they really 'throw the baby out with the bathwater."

I suspect it the forum will become less of a social ground and the future discussions will continue to be ever more gear- and newbie-related.

Perhaps I should be looking for censorship classes at the Community College? It seems like it should be a skill in high demand given current events.

[Mark Sloane]

There have been many well thought out posts presenting excellent arguments in favor of returning to the old forum rules.

Let's imagine for a moment that this support is having an impact on the moderators and they are beginning to come around but they need to be a little a little more comfortable that the Lounge will promote and not detract from the purpose of the forum.

In order to make them more comfortable, are there any self imposed restrictions you would recommend?

I ask because I certainly got spun up a couple of times and may have crossed a line. I don't really know if I did and would like to know. I remember a thread about terrorists that may be an example of a poster, me, of going too far. Did I contribute to having the rules changed? I apologize to all the members if I did.

There was a poster who was so upset he said another poster should have his throat ripped out. Is that going too far? If so what limits, if any would we as a community apply?

I personally started to get tired of the lounge because of the rudeness and lack of courtesy for each other and I know a number of members said they were never coming back to the lounge for that very reason. Is it inappropriate to ask members to be courteous to each other? Argue strenuously, with passion, but please show some modicum of civility. Is that too restrictive?

There was a sense by a number of members that the lounge had become the hunting ground for a group of radicals that dominated the lounge and pounced on any unsuspecting member who wandered into the lounge. Can we as a community manage that scenario? Should we as a community manage that scenario or just let the lounge deteriorate into a single ideological forum for the right wing fanatics, or left wing fanatics, or just plain fanatics?

I honestly don’t know the answers to these questions. I could argue “yes” or “no” to each question. I personally would like to see a certain level of respect applied to all members but struggle with the idea of “imposing” my standards on anyone else.

[Juergen Sattler]

There have been many well thought out posts presenting excellent arguments in favor of returning to the old forum rules.

Let's imagine for a moment that this support is having an impact on the moderators and they are beginning to come around but they need to be a little a little more comfortable that the Lounge will promote and not detract from the purpose of the forum.

In order to make them more comfortable, are there any self imposed restrictions you would recommend?

I ask because I certainly got spun up a couple of times and may have crossed a line. I don't really know if I did and would like to know. I remember a thread about terrorists that may be an example of a poster, me, of going too far. Did I contribute to having the rules changed? I apologize to all the members if I did.

There was a poster who was so upset he said another poster should have his throat ripped out. Is that going too far? If so what limits, if any would we as a community apply?

I personally started to get tired of the lounge because of the rudeness and lack of courtesy for each other and I know a number of members said they were never coming back to the lounge for that very reason. Is it inappropriate to ask members to be courteous to each other? Argue strenuously, with passion, but please show some modicum of civility. Is that too restrictive?

There was a sense by a number of members that the lounge had become the hunting ground for a group of radicals that dominated the lounge and pounced on any unsuspecting member who wandered into the lounge. Can we as a community manage that scenario? Should we as a community manage that scenario or just let the lounge deteriorate into a single ideological forum for the right wing fanatics, or left wing fanatics, or just plain fanatics?

I honestly don’t know the answers to these questions. I could argue “yes” or “no” to each question. I personally would like to see a certain level of respect applied to all members but struggle with the idea of “imposing” my standards on anyone else.

NOt to put words in the moderators mouth, but who would monitor all that? This is a private forum with moderators who do this in their spare time - without receiving any renumeration for it. As long as this is a free forum for all (except the one person who puts up all his money for this) I really don't see how you could police bad behaviour on an ongoing basis.

[QT Luong]

It's a shame that we can't discuss the work of large format war photographer and journalist Simon Norfolk. Hell, Frederick Evans photos of cathedrals have to do with the spiritual and religious, I guess discussion of them, beyond the technical aspects of the images, should be banned as well.

No, all "rules" are subject to interpretation. If some political/religious topics are truly related to photography, and discussed as such in a civil way, I don't see that being a problem.

On the other hand, it is certain we will not accept posts that are purely political and totally unrelated to photography. Examples of those are questions whether we should nuke country X or most of the comments on the 2008 US election that overwhelmed the Lounge before it was closed to such topics.

Attempts to stir a political discussion under a thin disguise of a photographic topic may sound like a bit of harmless fun to you, but to others, they indicate an attempt to game the rule, and therefor a lack of respect for the forum and the work put on by the moderators. Such an attitude has contributed to the new rules being put in place.

As for the new rules, like the Lounge itself, they are an experiment. If you look at the archives, you will see that there has been already a lot of discussions and disagrements on whether the Lounge should be killed or not. Absent actual data, not much can be decided conclusively. We will try to reassess after a while to see if we are better off or worse with the new rules. In the while, I'd say attempts to influence this by stirring up the pot are counter-productive.

[Sal Santamaura]

...are there any self imposed restrictions you would recommend?...Yeah, kind of like that self-regulated freedom which worked so well in the financial markets. :)

[Eric James]

I think that it was wise to move the thread to the public forum.

[Bruce Watson]

The real point is that my very core rejects vehemently the possibility that a person has invested himself of the power to delete my thoughts expressed in writing.

It is about respect toward other people and respect toward an Universal ideal called Freedom. It is not that I want to talk about politic, it is that if you outline some limits on which my ideas can be expressed you are limiting my freedom.

No, you are wrong about that. That's not at all what is happening.

You have freedom of speech in your house. You also have the right to throw me out of your house if my speech offends you. Because it's your house and not the commons. If we meet in the commons and my speech offends you, you're just out of luck because neither of us has the right to control who is in the commons.

This forum is owned and operated by QT. It's his house. He has every right to assign moderators and moderate the speech that's posted in his house. And he has every right to throw people out who don't abide by the rules he sets in his house.

This is not an abridgment of your rights in any way. But you are right that this is about respect for other people's rights. He is not limiting your rights. He is exercising his. And you should respect his rights in his house.

[Brian Bullen]

We've already seen one of the deleterious effects of restricted discussion. Good people leave. I was very sorry to see Domenico Foschi go. I very much appreciated and admired his visual and verbal contributions to this site. Perhaps the Owner and Moderators could rethink and revisit this whole issue.

I am also sorry to see Domenico leave! A helpful, intelligent and creative artist that will be missed.

[Deane Johnson]

We've already seen one of the deleterious effects of restricted discussion. Good people leave. I was very sorry to see Domenico Foschi go. I very much appreciated and admired his visual and verbal contributions to this site. Perhaps the Owner and Moderators could rethink and revisit this whole issue.

He made his own choice. It appears that he felt if he couldn't use the forum for his political views, he would take his toys and go home. That's his choice.

QT and the moderators made the right choice. Those who don't feel the forum serves their needs are certainly free to go. Others will arrive to take their place. There is always a turn over of participants on forums.

[poco]

We will try to reassess after a while to see if we are better off or worse with the new rules. In the while, I'd say attempts to influence this by stirring up the pot are counter-productive.

Then have the balls to stop the discussion right away if you have no intention of taking member opinion into account. Save people the time and effort of posting their sincere concerns over the direction of this place if moderator convenience is going to be the only guiding hand on policy decisions.

[sanking]

I agree 100% with Deane, and Bruce Watson made some excellent points in his message.

This is a forum for the discussion of LF photography, and off-topic discussins of other photography related subjects are allowed in the lounge.

The recent discussions about politics created a lot of dissension and some persons quit posting here because of them. Now some appear to be leaving because religoius and political disucussions have been banned.

So be it, but if the LF forum loses it should do so on the basis of its basic mission, which is LF photography.

I would not be opposed to moderated discussions about any topic, but why should the moderators be asked to waste their time moderating topics which are not core to the mission of the LF forum? Are there not enough photography related topics about which we could argue?

Sandy King



He made his own choice. It appears that he felt if he couldn't use the forum for his political views, he would take his toys and go home. That's his choice.

QT and the moderators made the right choice. Those who don't feel the forum serves their needs are certainly free to go. Others will arrive to take their place. There is always a turn over of participants on forums.

[cobalt]

As much as I might agree with the spirit of the original poster's argument, I must concur with the position that this is Mr. Luong's house, as it were, and his right to determine what goes on in it should not be a topic for debate, unless of course, he decides to put the issue up for debate.

I found the lounge to be a double edged sword. I was impressed, and glad to know that there were some progressive thinkers in the lf photo community. On the other hand, I was appalled at what I perceived to be backward thinking, and this only confirmed my suspicions about much of the population which surrounds me.

The bad thing is, some of the most appalling thought expressed in the lounge actually came from sources that produce photographic art work that I truly respect and admire. I must confess that I find it difficult to separate the work from the artist; this is perhaps a flaw in my character, but it is what it is.

The bottom line is, I'd rather not know that some of the artists whose work I admire are people who harbor beliefs I find repugnant.

[Rick Moore]

This is not an abridgment of your rights in any way. But you are right that this is about respect for other people's rights. He is not limiting your rights. He is exercising his. And you should respect his rights in his house.

Well said!

[BrianShaw]

My hope is that the moderators will someday add "talking about the Lounge" to the list of banned topics! :D

[eddie]

My hope is that the moderators will someday add "talking about the Lounge" to the list of banned topics! :D

yup!

i have to say i a agree with bruce (well said), cobalt, sandy and deanne. they have said it better than i could.

good photographers will come to LF forums and they will leave. that is life.

the only part of what poco has said that i agree with is the moderators should lock this thread already.

[Brian Ellis]

"My opinion has changed since then and I don't think that this is a good forum anymore."

There are many many forums that I don't think are good. I don't participate in them.

[Sal Santamaura]

Then have the balls to stop the discussion right away...Wow, how extraordinarily gracious of you. Tuan is a much better person than I. Were this my forum, by now you'd be banned for life and all trace of your 130 posts purged from the database.