| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/19/2008 01:03:10 PM · #226 |
Originally posted by Louis:
The fact that we now have a noun for this phenomenon - Forum Storm - indicates that this is not a new problem ... |
Nor is it exclusive to comments rec'd. Anybody remember Rose? :-) |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:04:56 PM · #227 |
| Out you go! You mentioned she who shall not be named! |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:06:07 PM · #228 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
any comment referring to the appearance model or models should be removed if there's the slightest hint of it being offensive. |
I wouldn't argue with that. |
That's not the message I'm hearing from the rest of the SC however. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:06:35 PM · #229 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by Louis:
The fact that we now have a noun for this phenomenon - Forum Storm - indicates that this is not a new problem ... |
Nor is it exclusive to comments rec'd. Anybody remember Rose? :-) |
Orbs. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:06:42 PM · #230 |
This is dizzying.
I think the ability to delete comments would impact both the quantity and the nature of the comments made. Wanting their comment to "stick," people would refrain from being constructive and honest. Everything would be sugar-coated. Sure, positive comments are great but only if they're honest comments.
Imagine if eBay gave you this ability? Everyone would have 100% feedback.
I think it got consumed in the flames, but I suggested in the other thread hiding from all but members (and the photographer) comments on photos flagged as having adult content. Then the photographer could choose what to share with the model. And maybe people with bad intentions ("nice tits!" "your model's a porker," whatever) would be less trigger-happy knowing their graffiti won't be there for the world to see (even if briefly).
Just a thought.
PS: "Is he urinating?" Perfectly valid comment. That's what the viewer saw and it's what he thought. There's no namecalling and I can't think of any good euphemism ("relieving himself?"). Of course, it's not something I would say...
Message edited by author 2008-02-19 13:07:13. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:20:17 PM · #231 |
Another option is a checkbox to disable commenting completely.
Message edited by author 2008-02-19 13:20:30.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:25:01 PM · #232 |
If you disagree with a comment on your photo, simply reply to it there in the discussion thread. Folks who read that discussion are well able to figure out which party deserves their disdain, and I'm pretty sure it won't be any models.
And, again, someone's honest reaction to your photo is not an insult of you or your model. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:25:59 PM · #233 |
Whatever.
The comminity has preverted this issue to the extreme ... it has totally become ether take the comments or shut off the commenting completely ...
I have said that that is not what my position is any any way shape or form.
Going to Dead Horse National Park with my whip.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:43:14 PM · #234 |
Question? What do we do if --
Photog recieves comment -- "This shot is very unflattering to the model. It makes her look heavy (or thin) and probably isn't the best pose.
Photo utilizes "zap" button -- Comment gone. :)
Commenter gets offended.
Where will it stop? |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:49:59 PM · #235 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Question? What do we do if --
Photog recieves comment -- "This shot is very unflattering to the model. It makes her look heavy (or thin) and probably isn't the best pose.
Photo utilizes "zap" button -- Comment gone. :)
Commenter gets offended.
Where will it stop? |
Hey BTW Check your PM
It is very much an imperfect solution to a problem that has several real facets
In you example...that is a valid comment (To me at least) It is on point and direct ...
Some would be offended. Going to the SC only really inflames the situation and really causes the commenter to get wound up because THE SC is involved.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:52:59 PM · #236 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Question? What do we do if --
Photog recieves comment -- "This shot is very unflattering to the model. It makes her look heavy (or thin) and probably isn't the best pose.
Photo utilizes "zap" button -- Comment gone. :)
Commenter gets offended.
Where will it stop? |
What does it matter? Where does it stop now? People get offended at everything, you and I included. Seen another way, the forums are rich with people in a huff going off on everything from their misunderstood challenge entry to their undeserved DQ, and members are rushing away from the site with their portfolios flying after them on a seemingly regular basis. I'm not sure asking where this kind of behaviour will end is meaningful, considering that it has always been this way, and will always be this way.
In short, adding to site functionality for members is, in my view, never bad, and will never change the modus operandi of the site. People will use this new functionality for reasons other than its intended purpose. Other people will use it for what it is meant to be used. It won't spell the end of things. In my view. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:54:24 PM · #237 |
Originally posted by nomad469:
Some would be offended. Going to the SC only really inflames the situation and really causes the commenter to get wound up because THE SC is involved. |
And commenter stops commenting altogther. Well that fixes the problem, I guess. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:54:43 PM · #238 |
| But, Louis, if someone gets offended in the forums, and we hide it we are called censors. How is this any different? |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:56:20 PM · #239 |
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by nomad469:
Some would be offended. Going to the SC only really inflames the situation and really causes the commenter to get wound up because THE SC is involved. |
And commenter stops commenting altogther. Well that fixes the problem, I guess. |
Or the photographer stops posting altogether. That fixes the problem also ... right
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:58:46 PM · #240 |
Originally posted by karmat:
But, Louis, if someone gets offended in the forums, and we hide it we are called censors. How is this any different? |
Different from what? Is the issue that you're afraid of being perceived as censors? If so, my original request was for members to have control over comments, and that would solve that. All my answers are actually predicated on that request, so I think I've already addressed the concerns about the commenting system collapsing in that scenario (at least as far as my opinion goes). |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 01:59:13 PM · #241 |
Originally posted by nomad469:
Or the photographer stops posting altogether. That fixes the problem also ... right |
Exactly. You have to draw the line somewhere. I like it right where it is. You're not going to please everyone. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:04:13 PM · #242 |
Most of the discussion about the “Editorial control over comments / Delete Comment Button” has been made around TOS violations and subjective analysis of the comments. In my point of view, this is not a matter of moral values about the content of the comment, but a matter of photographer’s rights.
For sure, all Users should be encouraged to leave comments on others photographs with free speech in mind, but the Photographer should have the right to control everything about (and around) his work, and the last decision to let a comment co-exist with the photo should belong to the owner of the work - the Photographer.
PS: I’ve no problems with any of the received 2.216 comments on my photographs, and until today I only asked to delete one of the comments because it was empty. I’m just assuming that the actual situation it’s unfair, do not recognize the photographer’s rights and do not protect the true contributor of this site – The Photographer.
Message edited by author 2008-02-19 14:08:10. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:05:43 PM · #243 |
Originally posted by karmat:
But, Louis, if someone gets offended in the forums, and we hide it we are called censors. How is this any different? |
Then give control to the photographers. Take it away from a central authority. By definition, it can't be censorship then. As the SC is currently swamped with so many requests, it'll give you all more time to concentrate on more important things.
Message edited by author 2008-02-19 14:06:10.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:11:03 PM · #244 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Then give control to the photographers... it can't be censorship then. |
The photographer whose considered comment gets arbitrarily deleted may not agree. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:13:10 PM · #245 |
Originally posted by De Sousa:
... For sure, all Users should be encouraged to leave comments on others photographs with free speech in mind, but the Photographer should have the right to control everything about (and around) his work, and the last decision to let a comment co-exist with the photo should belong to the owner of the work - the Photographer. ... |
From Terms of Use
"4.5 ... You understand that by using the Website, you may be exposed to content that is offensive, indecent or objectionable. ..." |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:17:09 PM · #246 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by De Sousa:
... For sure, all Users should be encouraged to leave comments on others photographs with free speech in mind, but the Photographer should have the right to control everything about (and around) his work, and the last decision to let a comment co-exist with the photo should belong to the owner of the work - the Photographer. ... |
From Terms of Use
"4.5 ... You understand that by using the Website, you may be exposed to content that is offensive, indecent or objectionable. ..." |
I don't believe you're correctly representing the spirit of this section by including it in this discussion. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:27:24 PM · #247 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by De Sousa:
... For sure, all Users should be encouraged to leave comments on others photographs with free speech in mind, but the Photographer should have the right to control everything about (and around) his work, and the last decision to let a comment co-exist with the photo should belong to the owner of the work - the Photographer. ... |
From Terms of Use
"4.5 ... You understand that by using the Website, you may be exposed to content that is offensive, indecent or objectionable. ..." |
Man you sure do take things in interesting directions and it's no wonder that topics get so confused. Website content is NOT the issue. The initial thrust of all this was the right of a photog to defend themselves and/or their models from attack. We all agree that due to a very diverse crowd here, people will take comments differently. I don't think it's up to site council to determine whether or not the feelings are valid. Reporting a post to site council may be effective at times and acted upon but what if they don't agree. Does that make the feeling less valid. Like it or not, Leroy felt a need to act... for whatever reason. Who are we individually or as a group to tell him his feelings have no merit. Same goes for anyone. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:28:50 PM · #248 |
I know I am jumping in a bit late on this conversation, but I am curious if the following "compromise" has been suggested.
Currently we have a single box - This comment was helpful - which functions as listing for the commenter. What if we expand that listing to a scorecard and rate the value of the comment on a scale, much as we do for scoring images. Implementing a "Rate This Comment" system, say a 5-0 scale, along with a field on the the Preferences page to "Hide Comments rated 0 from image page" may solve the issue. Personally, I would like to know the value of my comments other than it just being "helpful".
Just a thought...
Flame on! |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:29:07 PM · #249 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Then give control to the photographers... it can't be censorship then. |
The photographer whose considered comment gets arbitrarily deleted may not agree. |
It isn't censorship. It might be something else, but it isn't censorship, ungratefulness perhaps. Petty, maybe.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:31:33 PM · #250 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by De Sousa:
... For sure, all Users should be encouraged to leave comments on others photographs with free speech in mind, but the Photographer should have the right to control everything about (and around) his work, and the last decision to let a comment co-exist with the photo should belong to the owner of the work - the Photographer. ... |
From Terms of Use
"4.5 ... You understand that by using the Website, you may be exposed to content that is offensive, indecent or objectionable. ..." |
I don't believe you're correctly representing the spirit of this section by including it in this discussion. |
Well doesn't it mean that users of this site should know that it's possible they could see/read things that they may object to? In other words that the content of this site cannot be controlled 100% by the owner of DPChallenge and as a user you need to be aware of potentially negative content showing up?
If comments can be deleted at will because a photographer doesn't like them, then why can't I request that offensive photos depicting drugs, sex, or violence be removed? After all, I might be offended by them. Oh, that's right it's user beware...I've agreed to the terms of this site and if I don't like it, well I shouldn't visit this site.
Perhaps a bit extreme, but in principal it's similar. Be warned that it's possible you could be exposed to offensive material out of the control of DPChallenge (read other users).
Hmmm...but what about other parts of the terms of use? There's stuff in there that mentions offensive photos (certain types - actual drug use, inappropriate nudity, etc...) can be removed by the site admins (read SC also). If we can trust the site to take care of objectionable content in regards to photos, why can't they be trusted to handle offensive comments on an as-needed basis as they do now?
Anyway. I brought up the terms of use because we all agreed to it before forking over our $25, or registering to DPChallenge. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/10/2025 03:32:04 PM EDT.
