| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/13/2005 05:19:05 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
...when I came here a year ago the exact same discussions were taking place. And at that time, people were saying "it's just not the same anymore". |
See? It IS the same! |
Stability: Facing the same contradictions year after year.
--Steve Brown, c. 1978 |
|
|
|
09/13/2005 05:34:07 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by sher9204:
all this b*tching over a little blue, red or yellow GIF is just silly, IMO. |
It's not about gif's I would gladly delete mine from my profile if I could together with that worthless picture that earned it. I really would. It's a crap image that doesn't mean anything to me, and the gif doesn't add anything more to it.
And I'm not angry, envyous, or anything I have been called in this thread. As a matter of fact I don't even care too much. I just had some doubts about the honesty and the point of this entire contest and I thought maybe it can be discussed in a decent manner with arguments. Heck I didn't even started his thread. Anyways I was wrong, and the agressive manner some people respond to a debate like this, always and always the same people whenever this is brought up, and the fact that people who are named never show up to share theyr point of view, all this in a civilised manner, to me is more proof that I'm right.
What did I learned this week?
1. don't leave any comment on librodo's images if it is not an ass kissing adulative one it is not helpful.
2. this contest is not fair and even if it's just about a small gif, there is no point.
3. never ever, speak anything on this site that is negative. No matter how constructive and argumented you try to be there is a pack of people, always the same people, who comes and make you look like a heartless bastard. See the tread where a guy simply had doubts about he high contrast image and he thought maybe it is not HK enough. he just wanted to talk about it with the community, see what others think. Nobody said it's a bad picture all he wanned to debate if the contrast is high enough or not. He put his first post in a decent manner, a few others followed and shared theyr point of viw also civilized, even the owner of the photo said she wasn't sure it's HK enough, and then the hell came. The same old gang of defenders calling everyone who doesn't nod in front of the blue gif heartless and all kind of names one went as far as saying the initial poster should "purge" his acount and move on. All tgether with another gang who post funny icons and stupid jokes hijaking the thread.
4. there is no way a civilised debate with different points of view can be made here. I promisse to stop trying nor participate in one. From now one I will only participate in the "idiotic jokes" ones that seem to make some people so popular around here. Even the fact that this was posted in the Rant forum (not by me) is a proofe that people regard as rant anything that's not flowers and butterflys on this site.
5. people say they are here to learn, but that's such a hypocrizy and a lie. You can't learn with only people who like what you do. You can't learn without criticism. most comments I made recently where I suggested improovements in a civilized and constructive manner I belive, was not marked as helpful. Only those I liked and where I found nothing else to say.
6. this is a fun comunity where people come to have fun, nobodycares about photography competition, honesty, and such bullshit. Let's have fun people!!! Let's make colorful beautiful postcards so we don't ruin our fun. HAHA Somebody please make my post reacher with an idiotic icon.
Thanks.
let's lough.
Message edited by author 2005-09-13 17:43:06. |
|
|
|
09/13/2005 05:42:56 PM · #103 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
...when I came here a year ago the exact same discussions were taking place. And at that time, people were saying "it's just not the same anymore". |
See? It IS the same! |
Stability: Facing the same contradictions year after year.
--Steve Brown, c. 1978 |
And poor me thought it was living in the same house for more than 2 years.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2005 07:23:22 PM · #104 |
I have been very annoyed with much of what frumoaznicul has posted here for some time. It is nice to know that there are some here who desire more from this site! Why so many fight so hard to maintain the mediority that pervails here is astonishing. I for one expect more from this site and many of you so called photographers! You have chained yourself to obsurity and you revel in the wonder of it all......
|
|
|
|
09/14/2005 07:46:00 AM · #105 |
Originally posted by azoychka:
Why so many fight...
I for one expect more from this site and many of you so called photographers! |
lol do you listen to what you say or just babble on whatever comes to your mind???
|
|
|
|
09/14/2005 07:50:07 AM · #106 |
I'm too sleepy to answer at the moment let me wake up and I will see what comes to my mind so I can babble some more! :-)
|
|
|
|
09/14/2005 07:53:27 AM · #107 |
Originally posted by azoychka:
I'm too sleepy to answer at the moment let me wake up and I will see what comes to my mind so I can babble some more! :-) |
It wouldn't be a day ending in "y" if you didn't. lol
|
|
|
|
09/14/2005 08:27:53 AM · #108 |
Originally posted by azoychka:
I'm too sleepy to answer at the moment let me wake up and I will see what comes to my mind so I can babble some more! :-) |
Good qoute, can I use it on a few work colleagues when they hassle me in the mornings. |
|
|
|
09/14/2005 02:27:18 PM · #109 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by azoychka:
I'm too sleepy to answer at the moment let me wake up and I will see what comes to my mind so I can babble some more! :-) |
Good qoute, can I use it on a few work colleagues when they hassle me in the mornings. |
Oh yes please...............:-)
|
|
|
|
09/14/2005 10:56:59 PM · #110 |
I don't really know about Annah, Joey, or Librodo, but if bear_music is trying to gut the competition, it's really amazing how helpful he is in the individual photography threads....
2cent.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:11:11 AM · #111 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
I don't really know about Annah, Joey, or Librodo, but if bear_music is trying to gut the competition, it's really amazing how helpful he is in the individual photography threads....
2cent. |
HaHa! Is "gutting the competition" anything like "dressing out a deer"? THAT I know how to do, but I think my 5.3 average votes received shows I'm on the shy side in the other category. Thanks for the kind word.
R.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 07:34:15 AM · #112 |
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:
And I'm not angry, envyous, or anything I have been called in this thread. As a matter of fact I don't even care too much. I just had some doubts about the honesty and the point of this entire contest and I thought maybe it can be discussed in a decent manner with arguments.
|
Cristi,
I like your honesty in communication, and the high regard with which you treat photography.
I agree with you about some of the fluff in the forums: if the purpose of the website is to provide competition and learning, then the fluff serves no purpose. I agree with you that there is a risk that the fluff even undermines the competition slightly, where people who are popular because they are clever/funny etc are recognisable in the competition, and the scoring may be a little skewed as a consequence (though I think that the practical impact is probably very limited).
However, I think that the purpose of the website must be taken in the context of its users: it is not a "serious" competition where winning results in significant material gain. It is highly accessible and geared towards amateurs and very new entrants into the world of digital photography. As an entrance gate of sorts, it must be expected that there will be a hubbub from the surrounding crowd. Given the diversity of the crowd, that hubbub will not necessarily be focussed around photography. However, the hubbub, the fluff, may be attractive and interesting in itself. It assists in maintaining a community and a flow of entrants to the entrance gate. While not important in the field of photography, and perhaps slightly undermining the competition aspects of the site, it is important (I think) in maintaining a substantial user base so that the site and the competition can function.
Because the crowd is (intentionally) biased towards beginners, those people who are better and more experienced may well be held in higher esteem than would be the case in a more experienced crowd. I think that this is a facet of human nature. I am not sure how it could be otherwise.
Given the diversity of the user base, I am constantly gaining direct experience about world views in a manner that has not previously been accessible by me. I therefore appreciate the chance to talk off-topic about diverse subjects.
The flip side of diversity is the clash of world view. There is a movement in the West towards inclusivity and avoidance of criticism. I don't like it: I think that it promotes mediocrity at the expense of brilliance. Increasingly, people object to criticism and even healthy disagreement and debate as being divisive.
In order to avoid unnecessary (and fruitless) discussion with inclusivicists, the shortcut is to mollify your language as far as can be done without losing the point. Otherwise, given the number of opponents, you are unlikely to succeed in changing their view by your argument for your right to speak plainly.
Matthew
Message edited by author 2005-09-15 07:40:34.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 08:00:06 AM · #113 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
However, I think that the purpose of the website must be taken in the context of its users: it is not a "serious" competition where winning results in significant material gain. It is highly accessible and geared towards amateurs and very new entrants into the world of digital photography. As an entrance gate of sorts, it must be expected that there will be a hubbub from the surrounding crowd. Given the diversity of the crowd, that hubbub will not necessarily be focussed around photography. However, the hubbub, the fluff, may be attractive and interesting in itself. It assists in maintaining a community and a flow of entrants to the entrance gate. While not important in the field of photography, and perhaps slightly undermining the competition aspects of the site, it is important (I think) in maintaining a substantial user base so that the site and the competition can function.
|
I agree with what you say, but when the competition is not "serious" the site and forums, are more more hubbub and fluff like you say, and you no longer can have a decent civilized discussion about an individual photo or photography in general, without a hand of people to become defensive in a verry agressive way, or behave like idiots with stupid icons and jokes and everything trashing a thread they don't like, what is the point for it, and why is this called a site about photography? Give me one thread where people criticized an image or more (that were not theyr own) in a civilized matter and it didn't end up to be an international war. Instead I can show you hundreeds of comments that were selectively not marked helpful just because they was not "wow's" instead they tried to suggest improovements or other constructive citicism. Like you say, learning without criticism and only adulation and "wow's" can only bing everyone to mediocrity. Wich is exactly the level of this site IMO. That's all I have left to say in this matter. I think what you say is almost the same with what i say, your just more skilled with english language, and I think that if a reality is wrong it shouldn't necesarily be accepted. SC people can make themselves useful by not alowing people to transform photograpgy critique threads into wars or idiotic jokes. Instead they participate in most of them.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 09:25:57 AM · #114 |
Putting this thread on ignore and cutting off my rants.....sick of the bitching.......
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 12:04:50 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:
I think what you say is almost the same with what i say, your just more skilled with english language, and I think that if a reality is wrong it shouldn't necesarily be accepted. |
I am also saying that we need to soften language and criticism, even where we perceive it to be true, out of respect for others, and out of a tolerance for different approaches towards this site and in life generally.
I think that there is a certain amount of fluff, some of it decorative, and it can be easily ignored. You do not have to participate in the fluff, in the same way as Rex (and others) do not have to participate in this thread. I think that it is a healthy thing to take as much from this site as you find helpful, but generally to leave behind/ignore that which you do not.
There are a number of serious discussions about photography - if you think that there are not, then start some. Ignore the fluff that gets posted to the thread. But I would recommend softening your approach a little bit, if only to avoid this kind of discussion. By that, I mean avoiding applying generalisms to people here (eg calling all users idiots, or demeaning users of icons etc as purveyors of idotic jokes) - it serves no purpose and will sometimes make it much harder for you to defend any principled stance that you choose to take.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 12:49:46 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
There are a number of serious discussions about photography - if you think that there are not, then start some. Ignore the fluff that gets posted to the thread. But I would recommend softening your approach a little bit, if only to avoid this kind of discussion. By that, I mean avoiding applying generalisms to people here (eg calling all users idiots, or demeaning users of icons etc as purveyors of idotic jokes) - it serves no purpose and will sometimes make it much harder for you to defend any principled stance that you choose to take. |
You are right, maybe my language is a bit unpolished, but belive me it is verry hard for me in english, I learned english in movies mostly and you know the language most of them use. Don't blame me, blame Hollywood :)) Now seriously where I live language like that is used with verry much ease, unless a verry bad curse is placed words like "idiotic", "retard" and such go unnoticed and people don't take offense so easily as I noticed most people do here. Maybe we are more straight forward or just less mannered/polished people I don't know. I think it's a cultural diference. I will try as much as possible to soften it as one has to adapt to the surrounding enviroment. :)) Thanks for the tip.
One thing where I disagree, is that there may be serious threads about photography but not one critique one that didn't end in a personal attacks war, or childish jokes. "Childish" I think that's softer than "idiotic". Seriously I would really like to be possible to critique constriucively any image on this site with different opinions, in peace, in a civilized manner, without every time a bounch of people to transform it into a personal attack war. But they all say they are beginners and are here to learn. Well in my opinion without critique you can't learn almost anything. Certainly not by taking a critique on your photo as a personal attack and defending it till death.
Ofcourse not everyone is like that, and there are people who can take comments and criticism, and people who can really talk about photography else I wouldn't waste my time here anymore since long ago, I just wish SC would be more involved in defending such threads from the jokers and the icons instead of participating. It's ok to have Fluff threads, sometimes i'm in mood for it and participate in those too. But when a few people try to debate a thing and the fluff people, or the agresive paranoid defenders come and hijack it I think it's a complete rudeness even for an unpolished Romanian such as myself, and SC should take action there instead of adding to the fluff as they often do. I think telling someone "you should purge your account and move on" just because someone had doubts the image that won the high contrast is really a high contrast image, and he wanted to know what other people think, is a much more attack and offence then me calling some icons "idiotic".
(note: I don't know the word "fluff" I'm just guessing it's meaning from your post so I might misused it) |
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:04:30 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:
(note: I don't know the word "fluff" I'm just guessing it's meaning from your post so I might misused it) |
"Fluff" = comment of no substance, empty words with little or no meaningful content. Fluff is like cotton candy; 99% air, 1% content.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:11:16 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:
(note: I don't know the word "fluff" I'm just guessing it's meaning from your post so I might misused it) |
"Fluff" = comment of no substance, empty words with little or no meaningful content. Fluff is like cotton candy; 99% air, 1% content.
Robt. |
Ok then I used it properly. Thanks :) |
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:12:43 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:
Now seriously where I live language like that is used with verry much ease, unless a verry bad curse is placed words like "idiotic", "retard" and such go unnoticed and people don't take offense so easily as I noticed most people do here. Maybe we are more straight forward or just less mannered/polished people I don't know. I think it's a cultural diference. |
It is true that there are some fairly extreme cultural differences among different peoples. Furthermore, the internet is a place where communication takes place in a "gestural vacuum", where there are no physical clues such as facial expressions and tone of voice to clue the reader/listener in on how a given comment is meant to be perceived. So people "in here" can very often react quite strongly to comments that the poster intended to be in "good fun".
Example: "Only an idiot or a fool would believe that the widget extends the gadget, and is an acceptable substitute for Canon's Fridget Mk II." ΓΆ€” this is a very contentious way of phrasing what might be better said as: "In my opinion, even IF the widget extends the gadget, it's still a poor substitute for Canon's Fridget MkII."
This avoids blanket characterizations/condemnations of those who happen to believe differently than you do.
Hope this helps :-)
Robt.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:14:09 PM · #120 |
Shit, if I could afford the Fridget I wouldn't have to buy all these gadget-extending widgets.
Grr. |
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:15:20 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Shit, if I could afford the Fridget I wouldn't have to buy all these gadget-extending widgets.
Grr. |
You're a blithering idiot to think that way :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:15:24 PM · #122 |
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:
...I just wish SC would be more involved in defending such threads from the jokers and the icons instead of participating. |
Some members think we're already too quick to edit or hide these threads, so it's a balancing act. Obvious threadjacking and personal attacks are promptly removed when called our attention. |
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:18:13 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Shit, if I could afford the Fridget I wouldn't have to buy all these gadget-extending widgets.
Grr. |
You're a blithering idiot to think that way :-)
R. |
Childish fluff. |
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:21:27 PM · #124 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by bear_music:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Shit, if I could afford the Fridget I wouldn't have to buy all these gadget-extending widgets.
Grr. |
You're a blithering idiot to think that way :-)
R. |
Childish fluff. |
You don't know me! You can't say that! Have you ever even LOOKED at a fridget? Until you have, stfu and don't butt in ok?
R.
(note to those who are unclear: this exchange is satirical in nature!)
R.
|
|
|
|
09/15/2005 01:24:05 PM · #125 |
| Just speaking for myself - you can call me childish, prankster, thread clown, thread crasher, jokester, jester, immature, comedian, comic, purveyor of wit, or some variation, but PLEASE don't ever refer to me as a "Fluffer" thank you. ;-) |
|
