| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/17/2009 04:05:36 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by FireBird:
I like all the SC we have now, but.... I'd really like to see Slippy on the SC. I think he would shake things up and Langdon would have to start paying attention again. |
I disagree. I think Slippy's decisions would be erroneous, arbitrary, outlandish and outrageous. In other words, it wouldn't change anything. |
Art, consider yourself pre-banished. FireBird, you are a scholar and a gentleman.
|
|
|
|
06/17/2009 04:08:35 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Art, consider yourself pre-banished. FireBird, you are a scholar and a gentleman. |
You can't pre-banish me, I'm self-exiled! |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 04:16:03 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by MattO:
But in reality until Langdon becomes more active in his own site, or gives over some power to someone who wants to grab it by the balls and lead it into the future its going to stagnate in the water it currently sits.
Matt |
Hey, I don't agree with Matt too often, but sometimes he hits the nail on the head. I'm afraid the golden age of DPC may be on the wane... |
Pffft, the golden age was back in the heady days of 04 and 05 |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 04:22:09 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by MattO:
But in reality until Langdon becomes more active in his own site, or gives over some power to someone who wants to grab it by the balls and lead it into the future its going to stagnate in the water it currently sits.
Matt |
Hey, I don't agree with Matt too often, but sometimes he hits the nail on the head. I'm afraid the golden age of DPC may be on the wane... |
Pffft, the golden age was back in the heady days of 04 and 05 |
03 was pretty good too :) |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 04:31:07 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Pffft, the golden age was back in the heady days of 04 and 05 |
Ahhh yes, 2005 - I remember my first threadjacking photo like it was yesterday. Conveniently related to the current discussion (but not the thread topic). |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 04:32:14 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Pffft, the golden age was back in the heady days of 04 and 05 |
Hey, well at least the front page tells me we have our 1000th challenge to look forward to! I'm pretty excited about that. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 04:34:51 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Simms:
Pffft, the golden age was back in the heady days of 04 and 05 |
Hey, well at least the front page tells me we have our 1000th challenge to look forward to! I'm pretty excited about that. |
Don't forget that Portfolio uploading has been restored. Whew! That's a relief. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 05:19:06 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Simms:
Pffft, the golden age was back in the heady days of 04 and 05 |
Hey, well at least the front page tells me we have our 1000th challenge to look forward to! I'm pretty excited about that. |
Cool, I bet all the SC members will be entering that one to show their commitment. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 05:51:20 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Simms:
Pffft, the golden age was back in the heady days of 04 and 05 |
Hey, well at least the front page tells me we have our 1000th challenge to look forward to! I'm pretty excited about that. |
Cool, I bet all the SC members will be entering that one to show their commitment. |
If you give me a moment, I'll predict how many did will... |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:05:36 PM · #60 |
| Why is this in 'Rant' now?! |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:08:35 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Why is this in 'Rant' now?! |
SC#1 "I know, we'll let the natives blow off a little steam then its back to normal.."
SC#2 "Nice one - so, you entering a challenge this week then, you know, to prove them wrong?"
SC#1 "Nah, gave up photography years ago.." |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:08:43 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Why is this in 'Rant' now?! |
Probably because people are ranting about SC..lol!
|
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:23:12 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by Simms:
the SC ... rarely enter pictures so they dont understand how fraustrating it can be with some of the restrictions they pass. |
Methinks thou paintest with the brush too broad ...
Challenges Entered: 641
Avg Vote Cast: 6.2713
Avg Vote Received: 4.6388
My entry for Light on White IV didn't get any "special treatment" AFAIK, and was rather frustrating (to use the mildest applicable euphemism) ... |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:24:54 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Why is this in 'Rant' now?! |
Perhaps because the previous two pages of posts have nothing whatever to do with the stated topic of the thread. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:33:04 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
BUT:
the biggest impediment to having deep conversations about the direction of the site is that the threads are invariably taken over by one or two people who are going to argue, steadfastly, no matter what. case in point. once the conversation devolves into a he-said/she-said argument, it's lost all usefulness.
so, i move that we have more open conversations about where DPC is and where it should go, but i will only support this motion if the community helps keep the conversation on track.
|
Going back to your earlier post, the thing is, people do request features such as DPL, larger image dimensions, larger filesizes etc, but there are always SC members who will argue it down point blank just for the sake of arguing. I cant think of once someone has suggested something and the SC have said.. "OK, great idea, I think we can make it work, lets run it past Drew & Langdon".
The utter refusal then leads to frustration on the part of the site members and yes the thread will go off topic because we really feel that most of the time the SC just don't listen. What happened to the expert editing challenges? I loved entering and voting on those.. I am sure some people didnt like them, but some people did.
Again, regarding this thread, I have raised what I think is a pretty valid point about certain SC memebers who do not seem to be inclined to take photos anymore.. Granted maybe it was a threadjack, but one of the SC, instead of listening to the points being made, just move the thread in RANT, which just shows that we are not being taken seriously and is in actual fact pretty insulting.
I would love to have a SC made up of people who are passionate about taking photographs. Sadly I dont think we have that, I feel that it is 40% made up of people who USED to like taking photos. For example, Scalvert & GeneralE are a shining example of what SC members should be made of.. Creative, passionate about the art, knowledgeable & understanding (most of the time) to the members needs. On the opposite end of the scale we have a few who just really dont seem to care anymore, who make no effort to enter challenges (not even the 1000th challenge which I find pretty arrogant) maybe they were well known in the `golden years` of DPC, but sadly that time is passing and I think we need some newer fresher members on the SC and Langdon needs to have the balls to drop those who really have outstayed their welcome.. maybe they will have the decency to admit it themselves. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:33:54 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Simms:
the SC ... rarely enter pictures so they dont understand how fraustrating it can be with some of the restrictions they pass. |
Methinks thou paintest with the brush too broad ...
Challenges Entered: 641
Avg Vote Cast: 6.2713
Avg Vote Received: 4.6388
My entry for Light on White IV didn't get any "special treatment" AFAIK, and was rather frustrating (to use the mildest applicable euphemism) ... |
I know you enter a lot of challenges... would you mind me posting the challenge entry record for some of the other SC members? |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:41:39 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Originally posted by muckpond:
BUT:
the biggest impediment to having deep conversations about the direction of the site is that the threads are invariably taken over by one or two people who are going to argue, steadfastly, no matter what. case in point. once the conversation devolves into a he-said/she-said argument, it's lost all usefulness.
so, i move that we have more open conversations about where DPC is and where it should go, but i will only support this motion if the community helps keep the conversation on track.
|
Going back to your earlier post, the thing is, people do request features such as DPL, larger image dimensions, larger filesizes etc, but there are always SC members who will argue it down point blank just for the sake of arguing. I cant think of once someone has suggested something and the SC have said.. "OK, great idea, I think we can make it work, lets run it past Drew & Langdon".
The utter refusal then leads to frustration on the part of the site members and yes the thread will go off topic because we really feel that most of the time the SC just don't listen. What happened to the expert editing challenges? I loved entering and voting on those.. I am sure some people didnt like them, but some people did.
Again, regarding this thread, I have raised what I think is a pretty valid point about certain SC memebers who do not seem to be inclined to take photos anymore.. Granted maybe it was a threadjack, but one of the SC, instead of listening to the points being made, just move the thread in RANT, which just shows that we are not being taken seriously and is in actual fact pretty insulting.
I would love to have a SC made up of people who are passionate about taking photographs. Sadly I dont think we have that, I feel that it is 40% made up of people who USED to like taking photos. For example, Scalvert & GeneralE are a shining example of what SC members should be made of.. Creative, passionate about the art, knowledgeable & understanding (most of the time) to the members needs. On the opposite end of the scale we have a few who just really dont seem to care anymore, who make no effort to enter challenges (not even the 1000th challenge which I find pretty arrogant) maybe they were well known in the `golden years` of DPC, but sadly that time is passing and I think we need some newer fresher members on the SC and Langdon needs to have the balls to drop those who really have outstayed their welcome.. maybe they will have the decency to admit it themselves. |
You speak of arrogance, but then you have the gall to suggest that there is only one real criteria that SC should be judged by? What gives you the right, really, to even begin? What part of the work backstage are you privy to that makes you qualified to judge what an SC member *should* be?
What if an SC member is a paragon of virtue when it comes to moderation of the forums? Is strong and just and not afraid to make decisions when they need to, and is well versed in such matters? Because they haven't entered a challenge in a couple of years, well, shoot, that's it, bye bye?
What if they are a genius at figuring out post-processing and checking DQs and other related matters and help out in a capacity such as that? Should we lose that skill because oh, well, they're not passionate about DPC challenges?
I could go on.
It's ridiculous, and just because you have a criteria that you are passionate about, doesn't make it the only criteria that matters.
You really do sound like you're more just frustrated at things that have happened in the past, and you have this belief that if certain people only were SC it would make it all better. Problem is, you'd probably lose a lot of great back-stage work that these people do in order to get what you want in an attempt to have something that you probably wouldn't get anyway. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:44:03 PM · #68 |
| fwiw, i have moved this thread out of Rant, as i don't think it's actually a pretty productive conversation despite all of the usual threadjackers (lookin' at you, slip and ken). |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:44:05 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by Simms:
I know you enter a lot of challenges... would you mind me posting the challenge entry record for some of the other SC members? |
Seems like they should have the option of doing that themselves.
To what purpose would you be posting those stats? I fail to see how casting subtle aspersions and insinuations of impropriety on the part of a group of volunteers advances the purposes of the site as either a learning site, a contest site, or a community.
If you think someone's a jerk, a cheater, or just shouldn't be on the SC for some specific reason, please state your beef in clear language and stop with the scattershot slights, digs and insults -- personally I'm finding them quite tiresome. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:49:32 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by Simms:
I know you enter a lot of challenges... would you mind me posting the challenge entry record for some of the other SC members? |
our stats are plainly visible to anyone wants to see them, and i'm not going to shy away from mine.
what's NOT visible is the number of tickets handled, the number of DQ votes made, the number of forum threads read, the number of spammers banned, etc.
i think it's pretty arrogant for you to sit on your pedestal and cast aspersions against people who you know absolutely nothing about. i could give you myriad reasons why i don't have time (or gumption) in my personal life to shoot photos. but that's my personal life and none of your business.
if i didn't care about the site, i wouldn't be here right now. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:54:52 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Going back to your earlier post, the thing is, people do request features such as DPL, larger image dimensions, larger filesizes etc, but there are always SC members who will argue it down point blank just for the sake of arguing. I cant think of once someone has suggested something and the SC have said.. "OK, great idea, I think we can make it work, lets run it past Drew & Langdon". |
conversely, go back and look at all of the administrator announcement threads that have been posted with changes and updates and show me ONE where there isn't someone in the mix complaining about the change.
we're much more accepting of ideas of change to the site than you seem to think, believe you me. implementing those changes is often out of our hands.
case in point: we noticed a significant increase in spam threads. we took care of it the best we could with the tools at our disposal. langdon stepped in and built a couple of pages that are making it a lot easier for us to identify and prevent spam. until he did that, however, we could only do so much.
Originally posted by Simms:
For example, Scalvert & GeneralE are a shining example of what SC members should be made of.. Creative, passionate about the art, knowledgeable & understanding (most of the time) to the members needs. |
your opinion. without denigrating scalvert and the general's role on the SC, i think it's patently rude of you to think they're the "best" simply because they enter more challenges.
as i've explained, we all have our pet projects that we are working on and benefit the site as a whole. our hands are tied in a lot of ways, but we're doing what we can. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:56:12 PM · #72 |
I think Simms is bringing up some valid points. We know the active SC are overworked. DQ's and validations take a week or even longer at times. That should be a sign that we need some turnover as such work is the lifeblood of the site.
DPC has been built up to be an excellent forum and participation site on the web. If someone comes to get a photography answer about something they often get replies in minutes where other forums may be days. And if we think there is some dysfunction at times you should see some other forums (DPReview comes to mind). BUT, while there is a point where things can fly along on cruise control and everybody is willing to put their $25 into the coffer, that period does come to and end and either more work is required or the site decays(and your value for the $25 is greatly diminished). I believe we are at that tipping point. Either we man up and get the work done to polish things back up or DPC will just fade into oblivion. It's really up to Langdon though. He can ride it to the end and collect $25,000 a year until nobody pays because the site sucks, or he can try to keep this puppy going.
Message edited by author 2009-06-17 18:57:28. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 06:57:40 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
[quote=Simms] [quote=muckpond]
It's ridiculous, and just because you have a criteria that you are passionate about, doesn't make it the only criteria that matters.
You really do sound like you're more just frustrated at things that have happened in the past, and you have this belief that if certain people only were SC it would make it all better. Problem is, you'd probably lose a lot of great back-stage work that these people do in order to get what you want in an attempt to have something that you probably wouldn't get anyway. |
OK, so we just keep the same `government` (for want of a better word) in place because anyone new wouldn`t have a clue about how to run the country in the same way. Maybe they wouldn't, maybe they would look at it with a fresh set of eyes and see where the problems are and how they can be bought up to date.
Regarding the part in bold above, I am not quite sure what you are getting at with that comment.
All I ask is a passion for photography from the SC, and in a number of cases there just doesn`t seem to be that passion there anymore.
I agree, I am frustrated at things that have happened in the past, decisions that have restricted creativity in the name of "trying to even the playing field", but what annoys me is the fact knowing some of the decisions were made by people who probably haven`t even shot a creative photo for (in some cases) many years.
The thing is, I know from talking to people at GTGs, via email, via PM etc, that I am not the only one who thinks this way, they just don't voice it like I do. I know I am outspoken and I am quite happy to speak my mind, its gets me into trouble sometimes, but what the hell.
Look, I appreciate that the SC do this for nothing, they tell us often enough - yes I understand most of the time they are damned if they do and damned if they dont. I also understand that they have to make decisions sometimes that are not always popular.
I am sure all the `backstage` work isn't all that hard. Yes it is probably time consuming but as one of the SC mentioned earlier, all they get are a few extra buttons to tweak. They dont have to concern themselves (going by the comment earlier) with the actual physical IT side of things.
And lets face it, if its that much of a chore and so time-consuming then don't do it, drop the SC handle and let someone newer takeover.
Message edited by author 2009-06-17 19:00:30. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 07:03:12 PM · #74 |
it's fine if you feel that way, but you should really think about "passion for photography" as the sole criterion for new SC members. there have been plenty of passionate photographers on the SC that have found the work too mundane for their tastes.  gordon  kiwiness  mk  heida ursula
our role here is administrative. we're not arbitrators of taste, like at 1X.
what is it that you really think is wrong with the site? i'm honestly asking. because if it's stuff like wanting larger image sizes or changes of that ilk, your beef is not with the SC.
Message edited by author 2009-06-17 19:03:29. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 07:04:23 PM · #75 |
ps - of the list below, how many of them still post regularly? have they outgrown the site? something that i've been trying to figure out a way to avoid?
coincidence? |
|
