Down with SC...Give Members Power!!!

01/09/2006 10:43:14 PM · #157

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

I'm probably going to regret this, but the original poster really does have a point here. I'm not going to get into the ins and outs of the various points, but I'd like to help swing the balance back a little. The SC do a great job on the whole, and they work hard for little reward. But sometimes they don't carry themselves well on the forums and the power can appear to go to their heads. I agree that DPChallenge should be much more democratic, and it's this fundamental disagreement of direction which fuels a lot of these conflicts. I know that many DPChallengers agree with this... many of them don't speak up on threads like this because they don't want to rock the boat or find themselves at the receiving end of ridicule such as that found in this thread. I find many of the forum threads here like a schoolground popularity contest, and it is not cool here to ever voice dissent. Well folks, it is healthy to want to change things for the better, and I hope that people carry on finding the courage to speak up when they feel things could be better in certain areas. When I've started similar threads, I've received many PMs supporting me but people really are afraid to find themselves flamed because they dare to suggest that something could change. If people don't like what the original poster has said, either come up with a reasonable measured response or leave him to it.

Bobster, the problem with your argument is that it is based on the suggestions of someone who actually has the site's best interest at heart. The OP obviously started this thread because he believes that the site has discriminated against him. He believes this because he doesn't get his own way. He has also admited that he doesn't know why he sticks around. He has also admited that during this discussion he doesn't have a clue as to what his point is. This is childish at best and intended to make waves. Perhaps even trolling behaviour. This is definately NOT the sort of person that I will take seriously when it involves the future of this site...

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

01/09/2006 10:45:52 PM · #158

Hmm... that's not quite what I saw. I saw someone who was becoming frustrated, but then we've all been there. The opening post asked for consistency amongst the SC, and I think this is a fair request.

Edit: and a democratically elected SC. I'm definitely for this.

Message edited by author 2006-01-09 22:47:50.

eschelar

Canon EOS-7D

01/09/2006 10:45:57 PM · #159

I'm gonna toss one out there to second Mr Alansfreed.

I am not an SC member but someone who frequents the forums. I have seen a lot of really great stuff posted by DPaull. Both pictures and words.

But I do see this post as being counterproductive from the start.

A lot of people learn early on in life (say before 30) that it if you want to get something done or make a change in a group, it's not best to just attack.

There are some really simple things that you are overlooking Dave.

Most of them have been pointed out already, so sorry about the weird numbering in my list. It shows that they aren't necessarily the most important either.

4 - "The customer is always right." That is a big joke that comes down to the unwillingness to offend customers by businesses in the western "developed" world. It is a basic patronization that extends only to minor matters and lip service only. Some companies take it more seriously than others, but most realize that this is a pleasantry and falsehood. I have never worked at a job where I was actually told that this is an absolute truth. It doesn't take much thought to see how this would be impossible.

6 - "Democracy is the best way to run things." A few years ago, I had a very lengthy and very interesting discussion with an old Political Science professor at the doctorate level. One of the rather interesting things he told me is that the ancient Greeks decided that there are 7-8 basic forms of government (depending on how you define them). Each more watered-down than the previous. They actually decided that Democracy was the lowest on the list. It was considered by them to be the LEAST effective form of government. It is also the most watered down and is usually defined by its slowness to action and weak-handedness.

The major reasons that it is preferred in politics (that apply in this forum which is about DPC - not government) is that it is also less prone to corruption due to less power being given to each individual (it still doesn't change the basic adage that power corrupts, so will be rife with corruption regardless if the actual power of the members is great enough) and that it is less likely to cause offense as the decisions may represent the choices of the people.

This kind of thing is of course totally ridiculous in the setting of a business or a website. Typically, most people don't care about this sort of thing because it only affects the things on the edges of the website anyhow. Therefore, only a few vocal members will end up voting to make a change and the purpose of democracy will be lost.

This argument could get long-winded fast, so I'm going to stop here. Agree or disagree, you won't find too many businesses that are successful ANYWHERE that are run via true democracy. Heck, you probably won't even find any countries that are actually run via democracy either. Most countries actually gave democracy up ages ago preferring a more self-serving form of government that just looks like it.

[/politics]

11 - Swearing is bad for kids, so they should never see or hear it. It's the linguistic equivalent of junk food. Yeah it's bad for kids. So is coca cola. Trying to shield children from swearing is however a bit of a joke. To this day, I have never heard any group of people swear more than young adolescent drinkers. Okay, they were of driving age, so this isn't the point, but the second most amount of swearing I have ever heard was at the school yard growing up. Right from grade two to high school (16-17 years old is still considered age of minority in most places). Now I hang out with mostly adults, I seldom hear swearing. When I was going to school, I heard swearing so much that I don't think I even noticed when an older person swore. Censorship as is used in the 'developed' West is a bit of a joke. A lot of worrying about nothing. It's also been rendered unimportant because as was stated, this is not a family/children oriented site and has special rules of access for minors.

[/opinionated threadjack]

[opinionated on topic post]
having said those things, it should be pretty obvious that a voting oriented solution would serve neither D&L, nor the DPC user base.

The primary purpose of this website from a user's point of view is to see what other people think of your photos and learn from that.

What is interesting is that even a DQ'd photo gets votes and comments. It falls out of the standing for the ribbon race, but the primary goal is still accomplished.

If your primary goal is to get digital ribbons, then perhaps you need to rethink things. Or just learn how to use the cut and paste function of your computer.

There are a set of rules. If you try to stay in the safe middle, you will do just fine. If you try to shoot for the edges, you might get burned now and again. However, you only stand to lose a digital ribbon.

I would say that only a very small number of DQ'd entries actually result in valued members freaking out and quitting.

[/me]

01/09/2006 10:53:05 PM · #160

Originally posted by TooCool:

I disagree...I did have a good point to make, and I felt it has been made, pushed down, and beaten...I have little to no public support on the matter, and it can only go on for so long. When I said I didn't know my point, that was in reference to me quoting Alansfreed (a guy I'd like to keep as a friend and didn't mean to personally 'attack' and feel I made a big error and apologized for it).

Furthermore, in starting this post, I can assure every single person reading this now that I, in no way whatsoever, had any personal reasons behind it. No matter what I said or typed when defending myself throughout the topic, my intentions were that there are changes that need to be made.

--

Lastly, support through PM's and EMAIL seem to pop up all the time when discussions like this break out. Thanks to all who have sent me support. This is why things need to be put into a poll on the side of the page...it's easier for someone to click a buttong A B C or D than it is for people to publicly voice their opinion.

Might I add quickly, that these opinions are not necessarily the LEAST popular, just the least popular of those willing to voice their opinions.

--

Big thanks to Bobster for having the gonads to agree with something I've said publicly.

TooCool

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

01/09/2006 10:54:01 PM · #161

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

Hmm... that's not quite what I saw. I saw someone who was becoming frustrated, but then we've all been there. The opening post asked for consistency amongst the SC, and I think this is a fair request.

The consistancy he wants are not in the best interest of this site. He wants totally unmoderated forums. He wants to be able to spam at will. He wishes to be able to bash anyone at anytime for any reason with out the possiblity of being edited. He has a history of being suspended from the site for TOS violations. He claims that the S/C is participating in a popularity contest when it comes to upholding the rules and in the same breath wants to invoke a popularity contest to floor the same council...

I see the consistency of the SC. I see them doing the best that they can considering the time resources that they have to do their VOLUNTARY jobs. Perhaps they do not always edit out posts that need editing. Perhaps they did not see those posts or they were not notified of them. Perhaps they do make some mistakes in upholding the rules as they see them. Perhaps they do let their opinions out in the forums in ways that may not seem the best for the site. They are however only human. I have not seen any arguement in this thread to prove that any other system of choosing the council will be better than the one we already have. I only see the whining of a couple of unsatisfied individuals at least one of which has a questionable background when it comes to this site...

01/09/2006 10:55:14 PM · #162

Some interesting points, but I still think that DPC should be more democratic.
IMO, part of the SC's role should be to represent the wishes of the excellent DPC community and pass on public opinion to D&L. But I think that some of them lose their 'common' touch, which leads to threads such as these. It can start to sound like nobody cares what the average DPCer thinks, and we are being dictated to by SC members who were not chosen by us.
Running things in a democratic way can be less efficient, but DPC is surely not about profits and efficiency? It's about community and learning IMO.

01/09/2006 10:58:34 PM · #163

I can't tell you how much it pisses me off when people resort to the term 'whining' when people care enough about this place to bother voicing their opinions here.

Message edited by author 2006-01-09 22:59:13.

TooCool

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

01/09/2006 11:00:29 PM · #164

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

I can't tell you how much it pisses me off when people resort to the term 'whining' when people care enough about this place to bother voicing their opinions here.

There is a difference in voicing your opinion because you truly want to make improvements to the site and whining because you don't get your own way. One is for the betterment of the whole and one is childish at best...

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

01/09/2006 11:01:21 PM · #165

Originally posted by TooCool:

The consistancy he wants are not in the best interest of this site.

THAT IS YOUR OPINION!

Originally posted by TooCool:

He wants totally unmoderated forums.

No I don't, but a totally unmoderated, anything-goes, rant section would be nice. But I'll settle for some consitance throughout all forums, and not just singled-out posts and/or posters.

Originally posted by TooCool:

He wants to be able to spam at will.

I've never spammed, and I do not condone spam. But, like was mentioned, there needs to be consitancy...either it's allowed, or it isn't. Don't delete one post, and leave another.

Originally posted by TooCool:

He wishes to be able to bash anyone at anytime for any reason with out the possiblity of being edited.

Are you reading the thread? A couple pages back I said clearly I do not mind it when people take a stab at me. I could care less...but yes, I do not want to be edited unless you're going to edit everyone every time that specific situation arises.

Originally posted by TooCool:

He has a history of being suspended from the site for TOS violations.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN suspended for VIOLATING the TOS. Ask anyone -- I've came close from time to time and been suspended once for 'coming close'.

Originally posted by TooCool:

He claims that the S/C is participating in a popularity contest when it comes to upholding the rules and in the same breath wants to invoke a popularity contest to floor the same council...

Wow, you REALLY do speak for me, don't you? You seem to know EXACTLY what I want, huh?

Originally posted by TooCool:

I see the consistency of the SC. I see them doing the best that they can considering the time resources that they have to do their VOLUNTARY jobs. Perhaps they do not always edit out posts that need editing. Perhaps they did not see those posts or they were not notified of them. Perhaps they do make some mistakes in upholding the rules as they see them. Perhaps they do let their opinions out in the forums in ways that may not seem the best for the site. They are however only human. I have not seen any arguement in this thread to prove that any other system of choosing the council will be better than the one we already have. I only see the whining of a couple of unsatisfied individuals at least one of which has a questionable background when it comes to this site...

You see consistancy? You must not spend much time here, because things are not consistant. You'd be a fool to not notice the inconsistancies that occur.

--

Anyway, like I said...there need to be changes, and clearer and updated rules. Maybe electing the site council members was a bit of a push and not necessary, and the age limit thing was a bit ridiculous, but there do need to be changes to the way things are written that allow less personal interpretation.
--

That being said, please, please, don't ever think that you are able to communicate to others what I want or what I think or anything about me for that matter. Just about everything you stated was something I wanted or something I thought is completely wrong.

CNovack

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

01/09/2006 11:02:35 PM · #166

O.K. as a member I am going to say this to those who are bringing up the opinions of having the the SC "replaced by more members who are for the community" and that their needs to be 'elections'?

1) A site that is operated, run, and PAID for by founding individuals is NOT a democracy. They COULD choose to run it any way they choose too. If the majority of their rules and regulations and conduct is offensive and offending then there WOULD NOT be any members who would choose to join OR stay - much less any volunteers for the Site Council to help run the place and help maintain a community. DPC would have fallen and not got off the ground with bad business and customer/community relations skills. The same applies to the present moment...if the majority of people on this site were displeased then they would be leaving in droves and taking their business elsewhere. Seeing the participation on the many other forums and the challenges I don't see that disatisfaction.

2) With ANY community one needs to set rules and guidelines - otherwise there will be utter choas on how the place is run. Again it would feedback into the overall satifaction of the community it draws. When was the last time you saw a site/a business/a country WITHOUT rules and community guidelines? They do not survive for very long or if they do they generally have a majority of people who AVOID the site/business/country and it goes into a downward spiral that it may or may not recover from. So those Regestiered User's Agreement not only applies to members, us - it also applies to the SC. It is just good business practice - and any business that has a ruling body that fails to adhere to those guidelines they outline and uphold practices that ENHANCE and ENRICH the community they provide the serves too they therefore will ultimately fail.

Judging from the amount of healthy & sometimes charged discourse throughtout the forums and heavy participation in challenges I see very little evidence of a failing business/ failing site/ or failing community.

3) To respond to those who say that creators, D&L and whoever else on the SC probably makes a pretty penny with the Prints program - How do you know? - And since tone of voice cannot be carried off in mere text that question is not stated in an accusatory attack. It is a question that is asked to make one stop and think BEFORE answering.

4) A slight pause - Now onto piggyback off of number three: There are some things we should take into consideration:

DPC has a prints program that pays the artists 50% profit from their sale. Well where does the other 50% go?!?!?!?!

- How does the printers get paid? How do they pay for all the ink, toner, paper supplies that is used every time a print is ordered? That stuff and skill does NOT come cheap. Undoubtably some of that other 50% goes to paying for that stuff -

Not to mention get shuttled back into maintaining the site. Servers and bandwith CAN'T BE CHEAP either.

FROM the ABOUT PAGE
" To date, 50,875 users have submitted 84,354 photographs to 435 challenges. 90,833 photographs have been submitted to 1,779 portfolios."

This stuff has to be put somewhere, maintained and paid for otherwise we would see the server going down cronically and thus be denied access to this site. I have yet to see this situation occur.

kyebosh

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

01/09/2006 11:03:07 PM · #167

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Originally posted by kyebosh:
quite a read... think i'll go grab a beer.

Grab one for me too, please?

~Terry

sure thing, have a golden monkey, my fav! ;-)

Shiiizzzam

Sony DSC-F707

01/09/2006 11:08:30 PM · #168

Will ALL the above being said...I say...Drew and Lang can run this site anyway they see fit. Suggestions are fine. That doesn't mean they will change anything. You just can't please everyone. If you are so unhappy then you don't have to be a part of it. I see too much drama and not enough trying to grow as a photographer. Lighten up...chill out and support them in this or move on. That's MY 2 cents worth.

01/09/2006 11:09:04 PM · #169

Originally posted by C Novack:

DPC has a prints program that pays the artists 50% profit from their sale. Well where does the other 50% go?!?!?!?!

- How does the printers get paid? How do they pay for all the ink, toner, paper supplies that is used every time a print is ordered? That stuff and skill does NOT come cheap. Undoubtably some of that other 50% goes to paying for that stuff -

You're wrong.

Say you sell a print for $20.00 -- and that print COSTS $3.50 to be printed...the amount that gets split is $16.50 -- $8.25 to you and $8.25 to the owner(s)...I am not saying that is not fair...are there higher paying places out there? certainly...if you chooose to sell your prints at dpcprints and accept that somewhat-low payout, that's up to you.

Anyway, if you don't understand how DPC prints works, don't pretend like you know...if you want help in understanding, I believe there is a DPC prints forum (or if there isn't, then there should be)...but either way, start your own thread.

01/09/2006 11:09:29 PM · #170

Of course DPC does not HAVE to be democratic. I think some parts of it would work better if it was. And I have a voice, and there is a forum for me to argue it on.
However, there is a strong case for it here, from what D&L have said about the site council's function:
'In May 2002, we realized that it was becoming increasingly difficult to keep track of everything happening on the site, so we introduced the Site Council as a voice for the DPChallenge Community. Site Council members are volunteer helpers whose primary job is to keep us aware of the needs of the community. They are chosen based on outstanding community and site participation. '
You get that? A voice for the community. Surely a voice for the community would work best if it was democratic? The needs of the community? Democratic.
Every time there is a new SC position open, the person chosen often does NOT have outstanding community and site participation. What they have is time spent on the chat rooms with the SC, it's a buddy system.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/09/2006 11:11:44 PM · #171

Originally posted by TooCool:

Like I said, I am not whining...I do not whine. I truly want the site to be better, and am sick of hearing people feeling they are being treated unfairly.

That being said, there is a difference in having a valid opinion to add, and voicing your opinion on the winning side of things to try to gain some public appreciation...the latter, which I believe is what you are attempting to do here, borders on that of the cowardly.

alanfreed

Nikon Z9

01/09/2006 11:14:13 PM · #172

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

Every time there is a new SC position open, the person chosen often does NOT have outstanding community and site participation. What they have is time spent on the chat rooms with the SC, it's a buddy system.

I'd beg to differ with you there. When I was chosen to be on SC, I had only minimal communication with any of the folks who were onboard at that time.

When new positions come up, people toss their hats into the ring, and as a group we give very serious consideration to everyone who applies. There are some names that are going to jump out at us because we've seen positive contributions from them in one form or another.

Just about everyone on the site has a few people they exchange PMs with, but no two "buddy" lists are the same, and that's certainly true of those of us on SC. Your statements are just plain false.

01/09/2006 11:14:47 PM · #173

Anyway, probably not the best time for me to post as that's when I get into the most arguments! I'm going to go back to bed now. Night all, and please bear in mind that I'm grateful for the hard work of the SC.

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

01/09/2006 11:15:49 PM · #174

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

I'd have to agree...Let me first say that I am guilty myself of saying some pretty crazy things on the forums in the past...probably hurtful to some, probably way out of line. i stopped posting however because I stopped feeling like i was an equal member of the community.

i don't know anything about dave's history of insanity...it doesn't matter, but the level to which some site council members have gone to in this thread is exactly the same as the original poster's, and that's what turns me off to the site council sometimes. why even get involved in a thread like this, adding sarcastic jabs back and forth with someone who you have had trouble with before and know well?

it just looks bad on site council to even consider responding to stuff like this with the kind of sarcasm and patronization that can be so easy to do with a keyboard, brain, and 5 seconds...all i'm asking for is a little more class. granted, if you look at a lot of my past posts, you might consider me classless so take this with a grain of salt if you wish.

I'm not here to support david so much as i am to 2nd what bobster is saying about things...about how the site council carries themselves...why paint yourselves as sarcastic patronizing overlords (to those who don't know you) by including yourselves in a discussion like this, which by the sound of it, is not the first you've had with this member?