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

01/09/2006 11:17:17 PM · #176

Originally posted by alanfreed:

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.

Alan is right.

Qart

Canon EOS-30D

01/09/2006 11:19:15 PM · #177

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

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.

With all due respect to your opinion here, I find it hard to believe that you've got a real handle on what the average DPCer thinks. There are thousand of paying and non paying members signed on here and for you or anyone else to assume that you have your hand on the pulse of the community based on a sampling of opinions expressed here in these threads is in my opinion a little silly and alot arrogant. How did you get the idea that you were the chosen voice and who gave you the right to paint with such a wide brush. I'm an average DPCer. I take pictures, I put them in challenges and every time I do, I am grateful that I've got a place to go that will help me in my pursuits, and allow me the opportunity to learn from people who've got alot to share. Somewhere along the way, a few decided that it's not good enough to simply enjoy. If you have issues with the way the place is run, get up tomorrow, look in your pants and decide if you've got the balls to venture out and start a site like this on your own. If you do succeed in your enterprise, feel fortunate if you are lucky enough to find the help and support of a group of people who are willing to give so much to you and your members for so little in return. Oh, and see if you have patience and restraint enough to allow threads like this to go on and on and on without you yourself pulling the plug out of sheer frustration and yes, resentment... R.

01/09/2006 11:20:31 PM · #178

Originally posted by ursula:

Alan is right.

Re-read my last post on page 7...

And that being said, I want to say one more time, that the actions of individual site council members has, does, and always will, reflect on the 'site council' as a group.

Just because someone thinks this or that about the 'site council' in general does not mean they think that about EVERY individual member of the site council. It's all about perception, and maybe it's hard to see as a member, but each individual post, each individual sarcastic battle entertained my an individual coucil member reflects negatively on the group as a whole.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

01/09/2006 11:21:25 PM · #179

Originally posted by dpaull:

Originally posted by ursula:
Alan is right.

Re-read my last post on page 7...

And that being said, I want to say one more time, that the actions of individual site council members has, does, and always will, reflect on the 'site council' as a group.

Just because someone thinks this or that about the 'site council' in general does not mean they think that about EVERY individual member of the site council. It's all about perception, and maybe it's hard to see as a member, but each individual post, each individual sarcastic battle entertained my an individual coucil member reflects negatively on the group as a whole.

Nah .... too boring.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

01/09/2006 11:21:38 PM · #180

Originally posted by achiral:

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?

You are right that some of our replies might have shown our frustration a little too much.

Let me ask you a question though... if the same person took jabs at you over and over and over again in a public forum, don't you think you might occasionally say something you'd regret?

We're only human. It'd be nice if some people would treat us that way.

~Terry

01/09/2006 11:22:41 PM · #181

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by dpaull:

Originally posted by ursula:
Alan is right.

Re-read my last post on page 7...

And that being said, I want to say one more time, that the actions of individual site council members has, does, and always will, reflect on the 'site council' as a group.

Just because someone thinks this or that about the 'site council' in general does not mean they think that about EVERY individual member of the site council. It's all about perception, and maybe it's hard to see as a member, but each individual post, each individual sarcastic battle entertained my an individual coucil member reflects negatively on the group as a whole.

Nah .... too boring.

REAL mature

01/09/2006 11:23:28 PM · #182

Originally posted by dpaull:

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by dpaull:

Originally posted by ursula:
Alan is right.

Re-read my last post on page 7...

And that being said, I want to say one more time, that the actions of individual site council members has, does, and always will, reflect on the 'site council' as a group.

Just because someone thinks this or that about the 'site council' in general does not mean they think that about EVERY individual member of the site council. It's all about perception, and maybe it's hard to see as a member, but each individual post, each individual sarcastic battle entertained my an individual coucil member reflects negatively on the group as a whole.

Nah .... too boring.

REAL mature

What? Do I detect a note of anger?

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

01/09/2006 11:24:29 PM · #183

Originally posted by dpaull:

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.

For someone who doesn't want people speaking for them you are doing a damn good job of speaking for me now! If you were around during the rules changes that occured around 12/03 and 1/04 you would know that I speak out when I feel that the integrity of the site is being challenged. I was not on the wining side of things then. Even when it was clear that I was not on the wining side I still voiced my opinion. Nothing that arose during those discussions would have benefited me on a personal level. I spoke from passion about the site. You can not call me a coward on any level!

As far as people feeling that they are treated unfairly, I believe that the majority of people that participate in the forums, enter challenges, use portfolios, comment, vote, critique club members and DPCPrints that never have a complaint far outweighs the few squeeky wheels that whine (yes I'm using that word again) because they do not get their way...

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

01/09/2006 11:26:16 PM · #184

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.

With all due respect, what a load. Prior to applying for SC, I personally had NEVER ONCE visited the chatroom, and as the more senior members of the SC can attest, I was not in any way a "buddy" of any SC member in particular. Though I had often expressed support for the SC in general, I had also campaigned for some rather out-of-the-box ideas that I saw as improvements.
Since joining the SC I've seen two rounds of further appointments, and I can assure you the process is anything BUT a buddy system. It really rankles me when these type of baseless accusations are made, without any support whatsoever. It's not only destructive but downright mean-spirited.

01/09/2006 11:28:31 PM · #185

Originally posted by kirbic:

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.

With all due respect, what a load. Prior to applying for SC, I personally had NEVER ONCE visited the chatroom, and as the more senior members of the SC can attest, I was not in any way a "buddy" of any SC member in particular. Though I had often expressed support for the SC in general, I had also campaigned for some rather out-of-the-box ideas that I saw as improvements.
Since joining the SC I've seen two rounds of further appointments, and I can assure you the process is anything BUT a buddy system. It really rankles me when these type of baseless accusations are made, without any support whatsoever. It's not only destructive but downright mean-spirited.

Bummer! I always wanted to be Jean-Luc's buddy, and have a tea, Earl Grey, black ....

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

01/09/2006 11:29:36 PM · #186

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Originally posted by achiral:
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?

You are right that some of our replies might have shown our frustration a little too much.

Let me ask you a question though... if the same person took jabs at you over and over and over again in a public forum, don't you think you might occasionally say something you'd regret?

We're only human. It'd be nice if some people would treat us that way.

~Terry

I'll be honest with you, I wish the site council would just trust in the rules and be more authoritarian, then you don't have to give explanations and get into discussions like this. It doesn't seem "nice", but that's what the rules are there for...to take pressure off you guys. It would eliminate a lot of the personal stuff I think. Obviously you can't be authoritarian in all situations, but certain situations with certain members who may have a pattern of behavior...Why even get into it?

Yes site council take a lot of crap...but I think you can control the amount of crap you take in as well.

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

01/09/2006 11:31:50 PM · #187

Originally posted by clubjuggle:

We're only human. It'd be nice if some people would treat us that way.

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.

You got my vote of confidence!

BobsterLobster

Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro

01/09/2006 11:32:11 PM · #188

Okay, I went over the line with that comment... like I said it's late, but I really am going to bed now. And like I said, I am grateful for the hard work of the SC.

alanfreed

Nikon Z9

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

01/09/2006 11:33:46 PM · #189

Just a few random thoughts before I fall face-first into the keyboard and call it a night.

I think it's important to remember that each member of Site Council is also an individual, and in addition to being SC members, we're also users of the site, too. Most of us have been with the site for several years, and I think it's safe to say that we're all very passionate about it.

Some of us restrain our passion better than others, I suppose. I know that when I see the site being bashed in the forums, or if SC is getting a tongue lashing from someone, I'll take that personally and I'll feel the need to defend the comments... like I've done in this thread.

Could I word things a little more eloquently and full of political correctness? Sure, I suppose so, but I will sometimes speak out because I feel the need to defend what we do.

Is Site Council perfect? No, I don't think so, and it never will be. We're dealing with numerous subjective issues all the time, and inevitably with subjectivity comes some degree of debate over consistency.

There's no real litmus test for SC members; we each have our own opinions about how things should be run. Personally, I'm an advocate of maintaining photographic integrity. I'm one of the "major element nazis," I guess you could say. There are others who feel strongly that the rules should be relaxed beyond their current state. And there are those who are in between.

We're a diverse group of users who debate site integrity situations to come up with a consensus.

The point I'm trying to make is that we make every effort to discuss issues that come up, and we honestly make a genuine effort to be fair with everyone. There have been times when we've made mistakes, and we've owned up to them, too.

Sorry for all the rambling... I realize all of this isn't going to clear up a whole lot of this discussion. This is just my way of saying that I feel good about my role on SC, and I think very, very highly of my counterparts. There are some extremely bright people on SC, and I can tell you with confidence that every one of us is here with very pure intentions.

Message edited by author 2006-01-09 23:43:33.

CNovack

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

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

01/09/2006 11:37:18 PM · #190

Originally posted by dpaull:

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.

In response to your statement in "if you chooose to sell your prints at dpcprints and accept that somewhat-low payout, that's up to you.
" I do not consider the payout low. In fact it is a pretty decent rate compared to others. Zazzle has the lowest average of paying out an artist commision on sales -they pay out the artist a 10% earning - AND YOU CANNOT SET YOUR OWN PRICES. It is a flat price across the board for different print sizes.

On another statement that you make:
"and that print COSTS $3.50" Are you also taking into account the skill of the printers that print out these materials into that cost? And you never countered my argument about the fact that some of that money earned MAY be shuttled BACK into maintaining and running the site. (here is another question to consider just how much prints DO they end up selling here at DPC? - It may not be enough)

Lastly I noticed that you did not tackle any other points that I made but zeroed in on my statments about the Prints program.

And I must point out that making a statement "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." does little to help others understand your point of view or rally to your cause if you are going to attack them. Yes, you may disagree on one or several points made BUT there are ways to state your opinion without resorting to hostile statements that do nothing to promote healthy discourse.

01/09/2006 11:37:59 PM · #191

Originally posted by alanfreed:

Sorry for all the rambling... I realize all of this isn't going to clear up a whole lot of this discussion. This is just my way of saying that I feel good about my role on SC, and I think very, very highly of my counterparts. There are some extremely bright people on SC, and I can tell you with confidence that every one of us is here with very pure intentions.

Do not apologize! Most of us truly appreciate the work that you do here even if we do not agree with you all the time 100%. Most of us do not want you to be drones that run a program in your heads about what is right/wrong. Most of us are probably glad we are not in your shoes today! :-P

01/09/2006 11:38:48 PM · #192

OK...since we've seen it's ok to swear, and it's ok to name call, I will write this final post...

--

with the level of sarcasm rising (that is a sign that you can't argue your point you know) from certain site council members and others as well, I will say that I am done with this thread...whatever happens happens.

ursula, no, you did not make me angry.

TooCool...you are not worth the effort. But I will say that yes, you are a coward...if YOU want to continue this discussion, send me your email address and I can tell you exactly how I feel about you.

01/09/2006 11:40:58 PM · #193

Originally posted by C Novack:

Originally posted by dpaull:

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.

In response to your statement in "if you chooose to sell your prints at dpcprints and accept that somewhat-low payout, that's up to you.
" I do not consider the payout low. In fact it is a pretty decent rate compared to others. Zazzle has the lowest average of paying out an artist commision on sales -they pay out the artist a 10% earning - AND YOU CANNOT SET YOUR OWN PRICES. It is a flat price across the board for different print sizes.

On another statement that you make:
"and that print COSTS $3.50" Are you also taking into account the skill of the printers that print out these materials into that cost? And you never countered my argument about the fact that some of that money earned MAY be shuttled BACK into maintaining and running the site. (here is another question to consider just how much prints DO they end up selling here at DPC? - It may not be enough)

Lastly I noticed that you did not tackle any other points that I made but zeroed in on my statments about the Prints program.

And I must point out that making a statement "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." does little to help others understand your point of view or rally to your cause if you are going to attack them. Yes, you may disagree on one or several points made BUT there are ways to state your opinion without resorting to hostile statements that do nothing to promote healthy discourse.

OK lol...one more post, but this is it, I swear. Look lady, get your own thread. You are obviously confused as to how DPC prints works. START YOUR OWN THREAD. they send the files out to be printed...so yes, the price of $3.50 is the cost OF EVERYTHING INVOLVED IN THE PRINTING PROCESS of the actual image. Sheesh...get a clue and get your own thread.

01/09/2006 11:42:04 PM · #194

Originally posted by dpaull:

TooCool...you are not worth the effort. But I will say that yes, you are a coward...if YOU want to continue this discussion, send me your email address and I can tell you exactly how I feel about you.

Why would I give you my email? You can PM me at will. I'm entertained by the small minded!

(Yes I called you a name. You started it.)

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

01/09/2006 11:44:11 PM · #195

Originally posted by TooCool:

Originally posted by dpaull:
TooCool...you are not worth the effort. But I will say that yes, you are a coward...if YOU want to continue this discussion, send me your email address and I can tell you exactly how I feel about you.

Why would I give you my email? You can PM me at will. I'm entertained by the small minded!

(Yes I called you a name. You started it.)

OK just one more, last one though.

I want your email so I can have a discussion with you personally. If I PM you, it's through DPChallenge and I can assure you that I intend on breaking the terms of service when I talk with you...I'd rather keep it seperate.

alanfreed

Nikon Z9

01/09/2006 11:47:19 PM · #196

Originally posted by dpaull:

OK just one more, last one though.

Now you're reminding me of Cher's "farewell" tour(s)
;)