| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/13/2004 10:44:43 AM · #51 |
| i agree wholeheartedly with mag, very well said. |
|
|
|
02/13/2004 11:22:11 AM · #52 |
|
|
|
02/13/2004 11:42:35 AM · #53 |
Here, here. I agree with Mag also.
I enjoy the photography aspect of this site, but it is also the only forum site I go to on the web. I find that things that interest the community on DPChallenge, tend to interest me as well. I like having other than photography posts as well. I always assumed that the 'General Discussion' was the place for other than those, but I can see the other points of view. And I always thought that 'Rant' is for ranting.
My vote for a separate 'Off Topic' forum. |
|
|
|
02/13/2004 11:56:41 AM · #54 |
I participate in a few web forums, this isn't the one I spend most time on at all.
Some are primarily about travel, this one is about photography, others are about other interests.
All have developed into communities of friends who share much more than site-topic-related information.
|
|
|
|
02/13/2004 12:06:29 PM · #55 |
right, but many folks don't want to see the off topic stuff - so it needs to be set up in a way where all off topic threads are together, then offer the option in the preferences area to disable those topics if you would like.
the forum moderators - would need to direct threads to the proper topic. it would keep the off-topic stuff off the main page for those that don't care to read it, and the on-topic stuff would be more readily available to those people.
i am a member of a number of forums, all with different focuses - i chose the forums based on the main focus of the site - not to catch up on what is going on in someones life somewhere else - join a general message board somewhere if that is what you are after. or allow those that feel that way to disbale the topics they would prefer not to see.
|
|
|
|
02/13/2004 12:19:32 PM · #56 |
It doesn't bother me if forums are rearranged to allow people to opt out of non-photography related chats - makes perfect sense to me.
But suggesting that people find a "chat only" general message board instead misses the point.
One often bases friendships on a shared interest or goal and the friendship then extends beyond that scope. A general message board doesn't allow for that initial shared interest in the first place from which the bonds of friendship develop.
|
|
|
|
02/13/2004 12:23:58 PM · #57 |
I have no problem with off topic posts. All I wish is that posters would consider others when posting. It goes without saying that it is in bad taste and not very PC to pigeonhole and stereotype different cultures here, or anywhere for that matter. Why should it be different when posting content that is offensive to persons afflicted with conditions such as dyslexia, schizophrenia, ADD, epilepsy, etc.; remember these people are human beings too.
|
|
|
|
02/13/2004 12:26:14 PM · #58 |
my problem with this whole thing is that the 'site council' refuse to show any balls on any issue. also i really think it hurts their credibility to start personally biased threads and really divides the site because of the power that are granted them demands respect, yet they don't have enough respect to handle things outside of starting a new thread. site council starting politically motivated or personally biased threads in ANY forum is riddiculous and should be disallowed.
how can this be achieved?
site council needs to develop some generally accepted standards that most forums would go by on average...post them, and then lock, move, delete threads and posts that are offensive or unnecessary. i also would suggest taking away the shades from people's names and just having site council have the username 'site council' or something so that people don't become upset with setzler because he is doing his job as a site council member or upset with any other site council member for posting personal issues in the forums. i say let site council members log in as 'site council' do what needs to be done to regulate the forums from time to time, and then log back in to the regular username with no site council connotations so this bullcrap doesnt keep happening.
as an example this thread would have been about twenty posts shorter if instead of jmsetzler it said site council. also this is the kind of post the john could have locked and made a sticky at the top of all forums as a reminder to posters how the forums should be used. istead this instantly turned into an argument because the post seems personal
Message edited by author 2004-02-13 12:37:05.
|
|
|
|
02/13/2004 01:03:03 PM · #59 |
I'm not sure how asking everyone on the site to be considerate is politically motivated or personally biased. However, I do agree that we need to develop some new standards and we're working on it. I think John's post was just a reminder in the meantime.
I can't people how many people react so violently to being asked to be considerate.
-mk (who prefers not to see the balls of anyone on this site, thx) |
|
|
|
02/13/2004 02:30:53 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by mk:
I'm not sure how asking everyone on the site to be considerate is politically motivated or personally biased. However, I do agree that we need to develop some new standards and we're working on it. I think John's post was just a reminder in the meantime.
I can't people how many people react so violently to being asked to be considerate.
-mk (who prefers not to see the balls of anyone on this site, thx) |
this is exactly the kind of reaction you should expect with non-anonymous site council membership. any personal touch like a username with the added site council isn't and shouldn't be seen as a site council consensus opinion, which totally degrades the authority site council has.
my reference to politically motivated posts have nothing to do with this post, but that is my opinion on what the standard should be "in general"
|
|
|
|
02/13/2004 03:25:49 PM · #61 |
One idea which might work would be to start having SC indicate when they are posting in their official capacity and when they are posting as individual members with personal opinions.
I hope that would help bring a stop to the incessant SC bashing that is sad to see when these people are voluntarily giving up their time to make this site WORK.
|
|
|
|
02/13/2004 05:11:48 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
One idea which might work would be to start having SC indicate when they are posting in their official capacity and when they are posting as individual members with personal opinions. |
We are ALWAYS stating our personal opinion unless we make it clear that we are delivering an "official ruling" on some question. |
|
|
|
02/13/2004 05:56:50 PM · #63 |
I don't think it's always clear.
Most times it is but I don't think that's always the case.
My feeling is that, when a post IS made in an official capacity, that there be some way for SC to make this crystal clear.
My interest is only in reducing the SC bashing that's a constant of this site lately.
Since I'm not SC and don't get bashed, it's no skin off my nose whether the idea is taken onboard or not.
I proposed it because I think it would help clarify rather than leaving it to common sense, which, frankly, is not something I'm sure all members here have.
Myself included, on occasion! ;)
|
|
|
|
02/13/2004 06:01:51 PM · #64 |
| I don't have a problem with your plan, and appreciate the motivation. I was just giving you my personal opinion (not official SC position) about what our posts (should) mean. |
|
|
|
02/13/2004 06:03:32 PM · #65 |
|
|
|
02/13/2004 06:23:27 PM · #66 |
the problem is we as posters don't determine how our posts are perceived. if site council posts become anonymous this wouldn't be an issue. i just think site council and and the forums should move out of the dark ages of DPC and into the present capabilities
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 04:29:47 PM EDT.
