Only one Solution to the Rules problem

06/05/2003 04:20:54 PM · #51

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

the thread that should have stayed locked and been forgotten last night but you opened it back up and continued the fighting...it should have stayed locked as should all the threads on the subject matter rather than starting a discussion that will eventually end up in an fight put it up for a vote....but stop waiting a few weeks and starting the arguement all over again. It happens every couple of weeks, usually after a DQ...follow the rules and stop trying to change them everytime someone gets a DQ! simple as that...the whole matter should be locked on all the threads and ended till either a poll is taken or as Terry suggested in one of these threads try it out with a monthly challenge!

All we are doing is fighting between two groups those for and those against and causing a lot of unnecessary grief if you have the power to lock a thread when you don't like where it is going lock all the threads on the matter! End the fighting that started with a suggestion that keeps appearing every few weeks by locking them all!

Wait a minute. in one breath you're saying that a thread was locked that shouldn't have been, then saying that you want the threads locked? I'm confused.

That and you never said what thread was locked because the person who locked it was losing a debate. I'd like to know that.

-Terry

06/05/2003 04:26:54 PM · #52

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

I'm sorry that you consider this to be a fight. I haven't made any posts to any of these threads that are beligerant. My original post had nothing to do with disqualifications either. My original post is what I would like to see happen on the site... It was just a suggestion and I posted it for feedback. It seems that there are a good number of people who like the idea and others who don't.

I posted the reason that I locked the thread... I suppose that you did not see that. It had nothing to do with the debate itself. It had to do with multiple threads running on the exact same issues. It's too much to keep up with it in more than one thread.

I do want to see rules changed. That's why I posted what I did. Is there anything wrong with me posting my opinion? If so, let me know and I will certainly stop.

timj351

Sony DSC-F707

06/05/2003 04:27:05 PM · #53

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

These are just lively debates and they don't have to get personal unless you make it that way. These forums are for discusions or debates of all kinds of subject matter. If it is bothering you so much than you don't have to participate. Sorry, but it really is as simple as that. Who says that debates on a subject have to be resolved emmediately? So what if it takes a while to explore the subject. I would rather be thorough than hastily decide on a course of action. Even if things stay they way they are, which, by the way, I would still accept, I think there was still a lot of good information to learn about. I don't see anything wrong with that.

T

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

06/05/2003 04:30:49 PM · #54

I agree with Tim... I think debate and discussion could hammer out an enhanced set of rules that would be favorable to everyone.

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

06/05/2003 04:32:53 PM · #55

Again, as I stated in one of the other multiple threads on this topic, I began in the anti-change camp, but I think I have defected to the other side. In all reality, the voters will decide ultimately anyway.

OSS -- enough, please. The thread was locked, and unlocked, and now htere is a thread about locked threads, so if you want to keep talking about the threads you feel were fairly/unfairly locked, please go to that one. The arguments you keep saying you see do not exist.

The way I see it, the site council is trying to come up with a satisfactory solution, but they keep being accused of all kinds of stuff besides this. AND they are willing ot listen to us wee grunts' opinions, unlike other sites I have been on. Thank you John, Club, Gordon and others for allowing us to argue like children. :-)

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

06/05/2003 04:35:19 PM · #56

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

The reason it gets brought up after a DQ, is because that _is_ the huge vote. Everyone got to vote and said 'this picture is obviously the best picture in the contest' Not the best digital art, or most obviously manipulated.

Then we find out that it breaks the arbitary rules that we currently have and this debate gets stirred up again.

Silly arguments based on fictitious premises, such as this money argument for editing software (even in the face of more than 17 free alternatives that have been proposed) just continues to avoid the issue.

If it wasn't the best picture possible, it wouldn't have won.

If we didn't have such an arbitary line drawn through standard editing tools, everyone would have an equally good chance to produce excellent final products.

We continue to DQ winning pictures that are fine examples of excellent photography (not digital art, not composites, not original paintings - photography) because of these already arbitary rules. A fair an equitable contest is not aimed at lowest common denominator equipment, which seems to be your argument, but should be about striving for the best possible results.

I'm sorry if this is seen as unfair to those unwilling to spend the time to learn how to get better or unable to spend the time due to other commitments. This is not a reason to limit everyone else, just because others cannot find the time or cannot be bothered to improve or simply choose not to improve. All of these are valid, personal decisions, but shouldn't really be used as an argument to restrain everyone else.

Message edited by author 2003-06-05 16:37:53.

06/05/2003 04:35:48 PM · #57

I would like to start a new thread with a proposal on some rules changes to get feedback based on what I have learned from these threads. I believe that we could possibly make something happen.... Would anyone be interested in seeing a revision to my original rules update post?

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

06/05/2003 04:37:51 PM · #58

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

I persoanlly think the last thing we need is another thread on this issue. It's already dominating the current threads page as it is.

-Terry

OneSweetSin

Nikon D3000

06/05/2003 04:37:59 PM · #59

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

Are you ever going to let things cool down or are you going to keep the issues going why don't you simply try a poll and stop the heated debate?

jab119

06/05/2003 04:39:13 PM · #60

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

yes I would like to see a little more detail on the new proposed changed to editing tools allowed....

now if we can just keep the new thread on target and no time travel comments, that would be great

James

sher

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

06/05/2003 04:40:10 PM · #61

i would, setz...please.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

06/05/2003 04:40:16 PM · #62

Only if you lock all the related threads with a pointer/link to the new one so that everything can be kept in one place.

06/05/2003 04:40:19 PM · #63

Keeping it on target may be difficult. I think what I would like to do is start a thread that discusses one single rule change at a time...

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM

06/05/2003 04:44:39 PM · #64

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

Keeping it on target may be difficult. I think what I would like to do is start a thread that discusses one single rule change at a time...

I disagree. With such fundamental changes to the challenge, it makes more sense to discuss the changes in context.

-Terry

autool

Canon EOS-20D

06/05/2003 04:45:48 PM · #65

What do Drew and Langdon think?

06/05/2003 04:46:38 PM · #66

Originally posted by autool:

What do Drew and Langdon think?

Haven't discussed it with them yet... we don't have anything to ask them for at this point.

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM

06/05/2003 04:47:17 PM · #67

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Keeping it on target may be difficult. I think what I would like to do is start a thread that discusses one single rule change at a time...

I disagree. With such fundamental changes to the challenge, it makes more sense to discuss the changes in context.

-Terry

i believe it would be too difficult to try to track conversation/debate on multiple changes in a single thread.

OneSweetSin

Nikon D3000

06/05/2003 04:47:34 PM · #68

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Terry I sent you a pm and I can't find which of the half dozen threads to tell you...lol is it just me or are there just tooooooo many theads on this?

StevePax

Canon PowerShot S50

06/05/2003 04:58:46 PM · #69

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Keeping it on target may be difficult. I think what I would like to do is start a thread that discusses one single rule change at a time...

I disagree. With such fundamental changes to the challenge, it makes more sense to discuss the changes in context.

-Terry

i believe it would be too difficult to try to track conversation/debate on multiple changes in a single thread.

List all your revised proposed changes, and mention that everyone should respond only once, with a yes or a no and a simple reason for each of the proposed changes. No personal attacks, no debates, just get a real feel of what people think.

autool

Canon EOS-20D

06/05/2003 04:59:31 PM · #70

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

Originally posted by autool:
What do Drew and Langdon think?

Haven't discussed it with them yet... we don't have anything to ask them for at this point.

Knowing that I deduct that they aren't too terribly concerned either way. I'll bet that they have read at least part of the thread/threads by now and are probably enjoying all of the interest, and wish the effort was being spent making comments on current challenges.

06/05/2003 05:08:51 PM · #71

i won't speculate what drew and langdon are thinking. If we hammer out a set of rules that we (a majority) in the forums approve of, then we can ask them what they think :)

timj351

Sony DSC-F707

06/05/2003 05:21:56 PM · #72

I think it is a good idea John. One issue at a time to see if we can word the new rules in such a way as to make it very clear. When we have something concrete then we can take it to Drew and Langdon to see if they feel it warrents a vote from the masses. Maybe they will just want to keep things the same but there is nothing wrong with seeing this through. The wording of the rules is very important so they should be carefully considered.

People keep coming on the forums and saying that this issue is going to far in some manner. I would like to politely state once again that this is a legitimate discussion and of importance to many people so if it bothers you than you don't need to participate. Start a new thread on another topic or enjoy taking some photos and we'll hammer this issue out ourselves. I'm sorry to sound harsh but, come on, this isn't trivial to everybody.

T

06/05/2003 05:32:05 PM · #73

I still don't think it makes sense to discuss pieces of any potential changes out of context. Keep in mind that with the last major rule revision, a draft of the entire challenge rules page was posted at once, and the discussion worked just fine.

-Terry

ScottK

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT