| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/21/2008 09:55:06 AM · #26 |
People have whined and moaned, bitched and groaned at the SC since the site was formed. Suggested changes, complained about decisions, debated modifications. Some changes get made, some don't. Life goes on.
Nothing's changed. I suspect the opposite could be said, that if you don't like it, then perhaps this isn't the right site for you. It's been this way for the 5 years or so that the SC's been there (my memory is a bit fuzzy about when they were pulled together).
It's sort of like saying that those who participate in all the debates in congress or political discussion in the country should leave, as things are the way they are and you like it that way. Sounds more like Cuba.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:11:58 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by Louis:
I don't think you should be saying that, though. The reason is one of interpretation. What you view as shrill whining may be have been interpreted by you out of context, by not having read a rather lengthy discussion, not knowing about similar conversations in the past, etc. And what seems like haranguing to you may simply be someone's consistency in their position. |
actually, louis, it is by having read way, way too many of these threads.
Originally posted by Louis:
I think it's very discourteous to start suggesting to people who are vocal that they leave because their style of conversation is unappealing to you, if that's the case. |
it that was the case, i'd agree with you; but, as i have pointed out before, that is not the case. a reasonable person might not be able to tell the difference bewteen a tantrum and a passionate delivery at first, but, over time, a reasonable person can tell who needs a timeout from the playground.
Originally posted by Louis:
I'm not arguing in favour of tolerating overtly disruptive behaviour in the forums, of which I have seen very little (which is why your "just get out" suggestion is so puzzling and dismaying to me). |
you just haven't been watching long enough ;-)
Originally posted by Louis:
Well, maybe it is for you, but it's not for me. I've interpreted the issue differently and have an opposite opinion. I'd like to talk about it. Should I be asked to leave? |
where in this thread has anyone made any arguement that wanting to talk about a difference should be shown the door?
Originally posted by spaz:
As for going on about it, well, that's what some people do. I'm sure that you wouldn't have to look too far in Virginia to find people talking about the "War of Northern Aggression" and that was how long ago? |
we're still fighting it here in richmond. it's a way of life. all the same, there are those that are able to win allies in their fights for change, and there are those that do more harm than good for their causes with their behaviors.
Originally posted by spaz:
What's unreasonable and unnecessary to you, may be reasonable and necessary to others. |
one of the cornerstones of the laws that govern civil society is the concept of the reasonable man...what would a reasonable person do in a given situation.
if most people feel that the type of behavior that leroy engaged in is reasonable, then i'm the odd man out and it's time for me to go. however, if most people feel that his behavior was unreasonable, then i'm perfectly comfortable with my interpretation.
Originally posted by spaz:
When someone feels the conversation should be over, they are free to disengage and go about their business. Obviously, you and Skip are at that point. Others are not. What you perceive as shrill belaboring of the issue is simply part of an ongoing conversation to those still engaged. |
i'm by no means talking about shutting down conversations. what i'm talking about is reasonable behavior and affecting positive change. the entire premise of this thread was that if all one wants to do is whine, bitch, moan, complain about the site and its administration in such away that one's behavior becomes the focus rather than their cause, that they would be better served going somewhere else...
eta: i missed this one...
Originally posted by louis:
But essentially calling on the membership to drive out people you don't like with a populist post is, also, the wrong way to go about change, in my opinion. |
i NEVER called for anyone to drive anyone out! please re-read my original and subsequent posts. behavior is voluntary.
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 10:21:55. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:12:47 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Sounds more like Cuba. |
this site isn't a democracy ... your description is correct
(this is not an opinion on either side of any currently running debate, just an observation) |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:24:29 AM · #29 |
[thoughtful response to OP]
I came of age during the 60's. America was at war in Vietnam. Protestors (mostly but not entirely young men and women) were trying to change American Government's commitment to an unjust war and were unable to do so within the system. So some resorted to change from outside the system. Right or wrong, they loved their country and were passionate about creating change.
So Skip, pardon me if my first reaction to your original post was that it reminded me of the advice of the American establishment during the 60's, "America, Love It or Leave It!"
What you're saying is essentially "DPC, Love It or Leave It!"
I would like to think that while no establishment is perfect, every great establishment ought to have the courage to change. DPC is a young community. Perhaps we just haven't yet invented the best mechanism to identify potential changes, weigh them thoughtfully with due respect for their value and potential unintended consequences, and decide which represent genuine improvement.
Maybe the first, most important change we should make, is to invent that mechanism.
[/thoughtful response]
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 15:02:17. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:35:16 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
What you're saying is essentially "DPC, Love It or Leave It!" |
No, he's saying "DPC, Play Nice or Leave It!" You don't have to love it, and you can certainly discuss improvements, but if you're going to use bad behavior to force your cause or whine that DPC isn't like some other site, then just go there.
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 10:36:56. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:36:08 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by strangeghost:
FWIW, I think there are a lot of people who just ride out these forum storms, ignore some threads, and wait for the whole thing to blow over so we can get back to enjoying the "coffeehouse" effect (nods to Brad). |
My sentiments exactly.
We are in a community merely as guests that need to abide by the reasonable rules made so all can enjoy it. We don't have the right to made demands, nor should allow a mob mentality to ruin it for those that just want to hang out and make the best of it. I rarely takes a hard line stand on things, and as much as I do believe in the right to free speech, I do feel those that want to be obnoxious and disruptive should be shown the door for a while. Being here is a privilege, not a right.
It sort of is like if someone doesn't like the rules living in France, then move to Germany, but don't try and change or demand that France conforms to you.
Shame the SC takes the heat for the thankless and time-consuming tasks they do FOR us.
Thanks Skip. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:36:37 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
I would like to think that while no establishment is perfect, every great establishment ought to have the courage to change. DPC is a young community. Perhaps we just haven't yet invented the best mechanism to identify potential changes, weigh them thoughtfully with due respect for their value and potential unintended consequences, and decide which represent genuine improvement.
Maybe the first, most important change we should make, is to invent that mechanism. |
??? Numerous changes to this website have taken place over the few years I've been a member. A laundry list of changes that have been made have been posted in various threads over time.
There is an avenue for making suggestions (Web Site Suggestions forum), and of course anyone is free to contact the owner of DPChallenge or SC at any time.
It's my opinion that the owners of DPChallenge (and SC) have been very patient and open-minded listeners on a continous basis. A small sample of queries to the user community can be found here ==> Polls/Surveys. This doesn't include the Q&A that takes place here on a daily basis. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:41:00 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by Skip:
Originally posted by spaz:
As for going on about it, well, that's what some people do. I'm sure that you wouldn't have to look too far in Virginia to find people talking about the "War of Northern Aggression" and that was how long ago? |
we're still fighting it here in richmond. it's a way of life. all the same, there are those that are able to win allies in their fights for change, and there are those that do more harm than good for their causes with their behaviors. |
But, those people who do go on, aren't thrown out of the state are they? Do people tell them to "Love it or leave it."?
Originally posted by Skip:
Originally posted by spaz:
What's unreasonable and unnecessary to you, may be reasonable and necessary to others. |
one of the cornerstones of the laws that govern civil society is the concept of the reasonable man...what would a reasonable person do in a given situation.
if most people feel that the type of behavior that leroy engaged in is reasonable, then i'm the odd man out and it's time for me to go. however, if most people feel that his behavior was unreasonable, then i'm perfectly comfortable with my interpretation. |
If you're referring to leroy, then I can agree with you that he did go too far in trying to get his point across. He's also been voted off the island so to speak. As far as I know, this is the first direct reference to leroy in this thread. I was referring to the behavior of the people posting in the "Editorial Control" thread that [user]Louis[/user] started.
Originally posted by Skip:
Originally posted by spaz:
When someone feels the conversation should be over, they are free to disengage and go about their business. Obviously, you and Skip are at that point. Others are not. What you perceive as shrill belaboring of the issue is simply part of an ongoing conversation to those still engaged. |
i'm by no means talking about shutting down conversations. what i'm talking about is reasonable behavior and affecting positive change. the entire premise of this thread was that if all one wants to do is whine, bitch, moan, complain about the site and its administration in such away that one's behavior becomes the focus rather than their cause, that they would be better served going somewhere else... |
I'm not talking about shutting down conversations, I'm talking about leaving the conversation when you're finished while respecting other people's right to continue, no matter how much you may feel it has run its course.
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 10:44:38. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:46:16 AM · #34 |
What I think Skip is saying, and it is what I am saying is if dpc doesn't fit you, and you don't like it here, there are other sites on the web that you will be happy at.
I'm not asking you to love dpc or leave it. I'm asking you to be happy because life is too short to keep banging your head against a wall over a website.
In the past, I have been a member at a couple of different "photographic communities." At one in particular, I was even a moderator. BUT, I didn't like the way the site was laid out, I didn't like the way the galleries were set up, I didn't like the way the contests were run. I could have stayed and argued and fought and needled some change. I simply chose not to stay. The site was good, but it wasn't worth it to me to keep fighting. There were other sites that "fit" me better.
DPC is what it is. Some things have changed, some will change in the future. Some things won't. It may be what you want and it may not be. What everyone has to do for themself, though, is evaluate if what is not changing is so important to me that it would cause discomfiture in my real life. If it is, then, my friend, my gentlest advice to you would be to go elsewhere. Again, NOT because I don't want your opinion. NOT because trying to change stuff is bad. NOT because we may disagree. But, simply because it is not worth being mad and unhappy about.
If you are truly not happy here, then yes, go somewhere else. It is not like leaving America (or England, or France, or India); it is just finding another photography site that fits you better.
Again, I'm not saying you should never suggest, or even argue for, change. That is fine. Letting your opinions be known, is FINE. (and actually encouraged). What is not fine is making yourself, and those around you in real life miserable over it.
I believe Skip is addressing a larger issue than editorial control over pictures, watermarking, NSFW posts, etc. Those are "individual" situations. He is addressing the "big picture" or overall site "attitude."
There are those that love everything about dpc, and enjoy being here except for [insert gripe here]. That is NOT who he is addressing, I don't think. (Even I have a gripe or two I could insert here )
He is addressing those who hate everything about dpc, except [insert pleasure here]. And yes, there are those here, as well. They are the ones that make us say, "why do you do this to yourself." It is kind of like someone I know who moans and bewails the fact that she is tired, underappreciated, and miserable because of a certain task she is doing. I ask her if she wants to do it? She says, "No, not really." My advice, then don't, because you only making yourself into a martyr.
Don't make yourself a dpc martyr. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:46:18 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I'm not talking about shutting down conversations, I'm talking about leaving the conversation when you're finished while respecting other people's right to continue, no matter how much you may feel it has run its course. |
Key word in bold. Conversations could/would continue indefinitely if only that concept was followed. I believe Skip is referring to the absence thereof. ;-) |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:48:20 AM · #36 |
Look... from where I sit 95% of the time the SC collectively do the right thing ... or what they see as right for the site in the long run. It is a hard job... they do pretty good at it ...
That being said when they are out of step on a issue... Sprited and even some times rancorous debate will ensue.
To a certain extent that is healthy. We are certainly not a homogeneous group. We are about as diverse as a group of humans can get and we will have disagreement ... and sometimes that disagreement will come down to US vs THEM. Different agandas...different goals...
Most of the SC understand that and after the dust settles we are all back in the same tent.
The love it or leave it attitude tends to turn honest well meaning debate and yes sometimes even well placed hissy fits into long term animosity. That is why that attitude is not really needed. IMHO
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:54:58 AM · #37 |
I think Skip and a few others see too much in black and white. It's easy to just say... if you don't like the site, just leave. If you don't agree with how it's being run, just leave. If you don't like what the SC council is doing, just leave. If you want to voice anything that sounds negative, just leave. Yes, telling people that YOU don't want to listen to, to just leave is the easy way to handle a situation. After all, there are more people out there finding DPC all the time, they will replace anyone that leaves... right?
What Skip and some of the others fail to realize (or do and don't think it matters) is that many people that voice their dislike about something are the ones that DO care a lot about a site like this. After all, just leaving would be much simpler than hitting the brick wall over and over... and a lot less painful. Yes, there are those that just like to stir the pot and get a kick out of seeing threads that get locked or deleted or turn into a shouting match of differing opinions.
Any site that is as large as DPC is going to have a lot of different opinions of how things should be. Some of those opinions are going to be very strongly felt and voiced. It does seem to me that over the last year, that more and more people have been voicing those opinions. I guess if all of those that voiced their opinions would just leave, DPC would be a much quieter place. But would it be a better place? I don't think so, but then that's just my opinion.
It's very rarely all black or all white or even all gray. And I think what has been going on for awhile is about every shade of color there is.
Mike
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:57:19 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by MikeJ:
...
It's very rarely all black or all white or even all gray. And I think what has been going on for awhile is about every shade of color there is.
|
It's like a bag of Skittles in a blender. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 10:58:37 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
So Slippy, pardon me if my first reaction to your original post was that it reminded me of the advice of the American establishment during the 60's, "America, Love It or Leave It!"
What you're saying is essentially "DPC, Love It or Leave It!" |
Seems to me that what he's saying is more like "if you don't like the food at a restaurant, you might be better off eating somewhere else, rather than coming back for dinner over and over, then loudly complaining that you don't like the food".
DPC may have it's fanatics, but it's hardly a nationality. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:02:00 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
But, those people who do go on, aren't thrown out of the state are they? Do people tell them to "Love it or leave it."? |
no, of course they aren't thrown out of the state, nor have i advocated throwing anyone out. and yes, in effect, they are told to 'love it or leave it' when they are voted out of office or when no one shows up for the press conferences. it's not that they don't have valid messages, they just don't know how to behave or communicate. if you can't find some way to help mold your community into what you think is a better place, rather than shouting at the brickwalls, wouldn't it be easier to just go to that better place...
Originally posted by spaz:
I'm not talking about shutting down conversations, I'm talking about leaving the conversation when you're finished while respecting other people's right to continue, no matter how much you may feel it has run its course. |
which i agree with, as well.
--------
ditto karmat's synopsis as well as shannon's.
--------
Originally posted by mike:
I think Skip and a few others see too much in black and white. |
yes, mike, i see things in black and white, but i also appreciates shades of gray as well as color ;-)
however, i'm not talking about people who voice their differences. if you can't tell that you're a square peg trying to shove yourself in a round hole, just step back and reasonably figure out a solution...either go find a square hole, or get someone to shave off your corners for you. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:04:37 AM · #41 |
This the second post in 2 different threads that are calling him Slippy. He is Skip. Slippy is...well..hmm....not Skip.
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
So Slippy, pardon me if my first reaction to your original post was that it reminded me of the advice of the American establishment during the 60's, "America, Love It or Leave It!"
|
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 11:05:01. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:06:27 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by Skip:
Originally posted by Louis:
Well, maybe it is for you, but it's not for me. I've interpreted the issue differently and have an opposite opinion. I'd like to talk about it. Should I be asked to leave? |
where in this thread has anyone made any arguement that wanting to talk about a difference should be shown the door? |
The Consipiracy Theorist living inside me is hinting that some secretly wish those with strong opinions, irrespective of their style, would just shut up for a long time. :-)
Originally posted by Skip:
if most people feel that the type of behavior that leroy engaged in is reasonable, then i'm the odd man out and it's time for me to go. |
I didn't know your post was largely about that situation, and so speaking for myself, you'll notice that I specifically mentioned obvious disruptive behaviour as not needing to be tolerated. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:08:51 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by hopper:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Sounds more like Cuba. |
this site isn't a democracy ... your description is correct
(this is not an opinion on either side of any currently running debate, just an observation) |
Yeah - I know. So I don't know why people keep claiming the majority should get to rule :)
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:09:40 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by Chinabun:
This the second post in 2 different threads that are calling him Slippy. He is Skip. Slippy is...well..hmm....not Skip.
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
So Slippy, pardon me if my first reaction to your original post was that it reminded me of the advice of the American establishment during the 60's, "America, Love It or Leave It!"
|
|
Have you ever seen them together? hmmm.... ;) |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:11:17 AM · #45 |
Sorry to throw a spanner in the works but isn't this thread just perpetuating something that is already old news?
And just to be devil's advocate - improvement and progression are important parts of the development of ANY site or business. Nothing survives for very long if it stays still because it stagnates.
I'm all in favour of change (i.e. not the "take it or leave it" argument) but as Scalvert said, not in the way that Leroy (or anyone else for that matter) did it.
There are definitely improvements and evolution that DPC can and maybe should make, however there are long standing members here who will have very conservative views...and they will always bounce off of those newer members with more reactionary and maybe even progressive thinking (not necessarily better or right, just different).
What is important is how change is managed and I personally have faith that the SC/owners know when to accelerate and when to stay still. I have issues with troll/tactical voting but it's a take it or leave it situation - I'd like the SC to consider including some more rules in the scrubber to highlight repeat unreasonably low voters, but if it stays the same then the ball is in my court, not theirs.
N
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:11:44 AM · #46 |
In democracy, there are people controls the system, not runs the system. We, photographers running DPC, although SC's are making sure we follow the rules while running it. So, I think we either could call SC's "the police of DPC" or "Congressmen/women", or both. After all "Congressmen/women" makes and approves the law, and "Police (law enforcers)" make sure lows were followed by the public. Now, this case Langdon is the President who signs the laws...
Does this make sense at all? |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:12:22 AM · #47 |
| I have always wanted this site to be the best that it can be. I think SC does a very good job, but I don't think they are above constructive critisism. Just because some of us voice disagreement with this or that, doesn't mean we should be asked to leave. As much as I admire the OP, I think this post is not constructive. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:17:00 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
In democracy, there are people controls the system, not runs the system. We, photographers running DPC, although SC's are making sure we follow the rules while running it. So, I think we either could call SC's "the police of DPC" or "Congressmen/women", or both. After all "Congressmen/women" makes and approves the law, and "Police (law enforcers)" make sure lows were followed by the public. Now, this case Langdon is the President who signs the laws...
Does this make sense at all? |
Not really. It isn't a democracy. Nobody voted the congressmen/women in.
It's more like a dictatorship (benevolent or not) or maybe hopefully a meritocracy.
Initially the SC were supposed to be a body of the site users, who could present the views of the other users to the management and help arbitrate DQs.
Over time it got more and more of this enforcement role, which has tended to cast the SC into the role of 'them vs the rest of the users' which doesn't seem particularly health for them. Casting them as 'police' or law enforcers would further drive them in to that role.
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 11:17:41.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:17:03 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by ganders:
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
What you're saying is essentially "DPC, Love It or Leave It!" |
Seems to me that what he's saying is more like "if you don't like the food at a restaurant, you might be better off eating somewhere else, rather than coming back for dinner over and over, then loudly complaining that you don't like the food" |
Excellent analogy. We'd rather not see anyone go away unhappy, but we're not forcing you to stay either. If you want to change something, drop a note in the suggestion box. Maybe even mention it in public where others might agree, but DON'T jump up on a table and start screaming about how intolerable it is over and over again. DON'T spit on others' food. DON'T threaten legal action because your favorite dessert isn't on the menu. DON'T rant about how lousy the service is compared to the burger joint down the street. Even if we might agree with you, the rest of us are trying to enjoy our dinner. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 11:19:49 AM · #50 |
That restaurant analogy doesn't hold water for very long:
If the atmosphere in your restaurant changes so that your regular and new eaters don't like it there, despite interesting food, they'll leave in droves....or the only people left eating will be those who like their steaks cooked well done, or want to see photos of the food before ordering.
Take it or leave it is okay to a point, but you also have to consider why people are upset and if it is an isolated incident or a general malaise.
N
|
|
