| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/18/2008 08:53:37 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by JamieLynn:
leroy can't answer questions because he has been suspended. |
This is not good thing to do. Suspending someone just because you do not agree with his view is not good. We are not living under Taliban. Are we? |
I highly doubt that was the reason for the suspension. |
I am pretty sure this is the reason for suspension. If there was a way to give feed back to SC members about their handling of situation it would be useful to single out troll-SCs. |
Actually no. See a few posts before yours.
"You have been suspended from this portion of the site through 02/20/2008 for the following reason:
Engaging in a pattern of disruptive behavior." |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:54:11 PM · #27 |
It was not why, and he does not have a full site suspension. He is probably reading this thread, if he is onsite.
If Leroy wishes the reasons to be made public, he can either
a. forward the message to JamieLynn and she can post it.
b. pm me and let me know and I will post it.
c. reply to the ticket he was sent giving us permission to post it |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:54:27 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by trevytrev:
Seems pretty indebt but it would be pretty cool to ask questions on a pic and have the photogs answers(if he/she choose to) next to the question. Questions like why this choice of compositon/color/crop/..etc and have the photogs opinon and what they were trying to achieve. Could be useful to both sides, commenter and photographer. |
Not for the photographer to answer, for the viewer to answer during a critic.
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:54:45 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by JamieLynn:
ok, so hypothetically someone leaves a comment on an image of your wife saying "who is that ugly old trollop".. you report it and assume SC will handle it, as you say.
who is to say that leroy and/or his model aren't just as offended by the unattractive belly statement or the $20 statement as you would be about the ugly old trollop statement? so he reports it and SC DOESN'T handle it. so leroy and/or his model shouldn't be offended? is that what you all are trying to say? |
From the other currently open thread:
Originally posted by TooCool:
I usually have a good laugh and remind myself that the small minded are quite amusing... |
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:55:18 PM · #30 |
Why not a 'hide comment' feature.
I for one really dislike the 'personal opinion' clause, because that leaves the door open to the most horrid of comments because it is just 'personal opinion'. Granted some are few and far between, and rarely seen by me anymore, but there needs to be some type of control to the receiver. Hide comment, delete, something other then just a simple 'Report' because that doesn't always work.
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:55:29 PM · #31 |
| I'd like to see the reason... |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:56:33 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by littlegett:
Why not a 'hide comment' feature.
I for one really dislike the 'personal opinion' clause, because that leaves the door open to the most horrid of comments because it is just 'personal opinion'. Granted some are few and far between, and rarely seen by me anymore, but there needs to be some type of control to the receiver. Hide comment, delete, something other then just a simple 'Report' because that doesn't always work. |
All comments are ones personal opinion... |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:56:40 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by JamieLynn:
leroy can't answer questions because he has been suspended. |
This is not good thing to do. Suspending someone just because you do not agree with his view is not good. We are not living under Taliban. Are we? |
I highly doubt that was the reason for the suspension. |
I am pretty sure this is the reason for suspension. If there was a way to give feed back to SC members about their handling of situation it would be useful to single out troll-SCs. |
Actually no. See a few posts before yours.
"You have been suspended from this portion of the site through 02/20/2008 for the following reason:
Engaging in a pattern of disruptive behavior." |
Let me ask you a small question: Why demanding for a site feature as a paying member is disruptive behaviour. He has to start few threads because his threads were locked, his messages were deleted. Which I think is disruptive behaviour. Would these SC members be suspending for it?? I doubt it. |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:56:52 PM · #34 |
I just lost all respect for this thread and the others. This whole argument started because someone left a constructive criticism IMO about an image.
Then I find this comment made by the upset:
Comment on JamieLynn image: That's meeeee and ma two dolla ho :-D
With comments like this he should be banned friends or not.
This comment adds NOTHING NOTHING to anything
Kevin
and to think he's crying about a belly comment. Thats insane |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 08:56:56 PM · #35 |
Well, I am sure they do not take that responsibilty lightly.
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:01:51 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by JamieLynn:
leroy can't answer questions because he has been suspended. |
This is not good thing to do. Suspending someone just because you do not agree with his view is not good. We are not living under Taliban. Are we? |
I highly doubt that was the reason for the suspension. |
I am pretty sure this is the reason for suspension. If there was a way to give feed back to SC members about their handling of situation it would be useful to single out troll-SCs. |
Actually no. See a few posts before yours.
"You have been suspended from this portion of the site through 02/20/2008 for the following reason:
Engaging in a pattern of disruptive behavior." |
Let me ask you a small question: Why demanding for a site feature as a paying member is disruptive behaviour. He has to start few threads because his threads were locked, his messages were deleted. Which I think is disruptive behaviour. Would these SC members be suspending for it?? I doubt it. |
I'm not sure where the quote came from. That is not the entire explanation. That is one sentence out of several that explain fully why forum posting and commenting (they are tied together, if I recall correctly) has been suspended. |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:03:36 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
All comments are ones personal opinion... |
Then why even bother with a 'report' button?
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:07:12 PM · #38 |
As far as locked threads. One was locked because it was denigrating into throwing personal insults (posts by more than Leroy were hidden, btw), and was getting WAY off topic. This one was subsequently started (or bumped, actually).
A second one was locked because it served no purpose -- to anyone not reading the forums, it would not have made any sense. He subsequently opened a second one, more clearly outlining what he wanted, and it is still going.
Would SC be treated the same way? Yes, and probably more severely. |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:10:57 PM · #39 |
Where ever you go in life, what ever you do in life, there are rules. Even yourself as a person has a set of rules. Sometimes they are there to break or bend to your own degree. But when you are in someone else house, you respect their rules. This is the same thing, we are in the house of Landon, even if we do have to pay for it. We have to pay to go into any historical place, they have rules adn if they are broken, there are conciquences (really sp there).
So on this site we are not the rulers of the domain, so we abide by the rules, we may not like them, but they are there.
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:16:29 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by littlegett:
Then why even bother with a 'report' button? |
(and in response to JamieLynn too)
Because there are levels of common decency. This is a photography site where we all submit photos to compete in challenges, and to invite criticism. If people don't like it and only want to hear positive comments (or even have control over those comments) then what is the value of DPC to them, and indeed the rest of us? I want gloves off honesty in comments - good bad and ugly. Personally I'm too scared to comment negatively on photos because I don't want to upset anyone and I know if I say it straight I will.
If a really oversensitive person submits a photo, it gets panned with harsh comments, whose fault is that? Do we really have to protect the submitter like that? Seems to me if you go down that road you end up with a lot of pointless galleries with fat egos and no learning (Flickr springs to mind, as do so many others).
Thicker skin/don't submit/open your mind is what I'd say to anyone in favour of these proposed changes.
N
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:18:42 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by karmat:
As far as locked threads. One was locked because it was denigrating into throwing personal insults (posts by more than Leroy were hidden, btw), and was getting WAY off topic. This one was subsequently started (or bumped, actually).
A second one was locked because it served no purpose -- to anyone not reading the forums, it would not have made any sense. He subsequently opened a second one, more clearly outlining what he wanted, and it is still going.
Would SC be treated the same way? Yes, and probably more severely. |
You know you have given the reason why the threads were locked, but the same time you have suspended member for starting or bumping threads.
If he did not start the threads so quickly or immediately after each other, I am sure you could not argue that he was engaged in disruptive behaviour. If the threads were not locked he would be discussing it there.
You still can not label a person to be involved in disruptive behaviour if he starts few threads quickly. Or write few comments that you did not like.
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:24:02 PM · #42 |
Without regard to anyone being right or wrong about any of this stuff, I'm still quite curious if there is going to be a POLL? Is there some reason this couldn't be done? Seems an awful lot of people are willing to give their opinion anyway - why NOT make it a 'fair' discussion?
eta - Leroy asked me to post something here. In essence, he's asking people / SC to please concentrate on the issue, rather than these particular circumstances.
Abridged, but polite & succinct.
Message edited by author 2008-02-18 21:29:34.
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:25:10 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
I say leave the rules as they are.
to be honest Leroy I find this comment more offensive then the one in question: It's from the framed challenge
(comment) Love it Leroy! Did you take any of the eyes starring up at the couchie?
(Your response) No, I thought eye contact was the better approach.
I also find that you took the time to answer it more disturbing.
As a professional photographer I would be more selective of wording and the conversations I get involved in. If you think the world is not watching just Google yourself. It's very possible that there is a bride out there looking for a photographer and googles your name. And what does she find: a conversation about one of his images and couchie. If this was my girlfriend (Now Wife)she is looking someplace else. Just something to think about.
Just a semi-professional honest opinion. |
really? because unprofessional to me would have been if leroy said 'no, damn.. i wish i would have thought about that.' and really, i don't think the question would have even struck a nerve with you so much if the word "couchie" (which i am hoping he means coochie because i don't know what a couchie is) wouldn't have been used. what if the commenter had said "did you take any shots of the blonde girl looking upward menacingly?" would that have offended you? then would you have been disturbed by the fact that leroy answered that question?
i have worked with leroy several times and will continue to for a very, very long time i'm sure. he is extremely professional as well as being a GREAT friend of mine that i know i can talk to about anything, be it photography or my personal life. when we are shooting, he doesn't speak to me or touch me inappropriately (i have had my fair share of this by others). he makes sure i am comfortable at all times and is so amazingly fun to work with. of all the photographers i have worked with, he is by far my favorite and i get the most compliments on his work.
so as a professional photographer, he is top notch. and i hope that when someone googles his name, they find something i had to say about him =) |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:28:52 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by rossbilly:
Without regard to anyone being right or wrong about any of this stuff, I'm still quite curious if there is going to be a POLL? Is there some reason this couldn't be done? Seems an awful lot of people are willing to give their opinion anyway - why NOT make it a 'fair' discussion? |
this seemed like a good place to put a little message from leroy.. he says "me being suspended doesn't matter and I don't care, but SC should make an honest attempt to deal with the issue instead of blowing it under the rug" |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:29:11 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Quasimojo:
common decency |
This is the only part that matters to me from your post. Yet, it is lost so many times with some comments and growing a thicker skin doesn't change that fact that the commenter was allowed to lose 'common decency' with terrible comments because they are of his/her 'personal opinion'.
Granted, by allowing the comments to stay visible it allows others to see what kind of 'Common decency' that user has. And in most cases not even part of the site anymore.
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:29:38 PM · #46 |
Message edited by author 2008-02-18 21:30:03. |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:30:30 PM · #47 |
as far as the poll goes --
Langdon (the owner, for those that may not know) is the only one that can do site-wide polls. Ultimately, it is your decision.
Leroy listed 5 or so options in the first post. If you want your opinion noted in poll-like fashion, please feel free to post it here as others have done.
:) |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:30:36 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by JamieLynn:
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
I say leave the rules as they are.
to be honest Leroy I find this comment more offensive then the one in question: It's from the framed challenge
(comment) Love it Leroy! Did you take any of the eyes starring up at the couchie?
(Your response) No, I thought eye contact was the better approach.
I also find that you took the time to answer it more disturbing.
As a professional photographer I would be more selective of wording and the conversations I get involved in. If you think the world is not watching just Google yourself. It's very possible that there is a bride out there looking for a photographer and googles your name. And what does she find: a conversation about one of his images and couchie. If this was my girlfriend (Now Wife)she is looking someplace else. Just something to think about.
Just a semi-professional honest opinion. |
really? because unprofessional to me would have been if leroy said 'no, damn.. i wish i would have thought about that.' and really, i don't think the question would have even struck a nerve with you so much if the word "couchie" (which i am hoping he means coochie because i don't know what a couchie is) wouldn't have been used. what if the commenter had said "did you take any shots of the blonde girl looking upward menacingly?" would that have offended you? then would you have been disturbed by the fact that leroy answered that question?
i have worked with leroy several times and will continue to for a very, very long time i'm sure. he is extremely professional as well as being a GREAT friend of mine that i know i can talk to about anything, be it photography or my personal life. when we are shooting, he doesn't speak to me or touch me inappropriately (i have had my fair share of this by others). he makes sure i am comfortable at all times and is so amazingly fun to work with. of all the photographers i have worked with, he is by far my favorite and i get the most compliments on his work.
so as a professional photographer, he is top notch. and i hope that when someone googles his name, they find something i had to say about him =) |
No comment |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:33:09 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by karmat:
As far as locked threads. One was locked because it was denigrating into throwing personal insults (posts by more than Leroy were hidden, btw), and was getting WAY off topic. This one was subsequently started (or bumped, actually).
A second one was locked because it served no purpose -- to anyone not reading the forums, it would not have made any sense. He subsequently opened a second one, more clearly outlining what he wanted, and it is still going.
Would SC be treated the same way? Yes, and probably more severely. |
You know you have given the reason why the threads were locked, but the same time you have suspended member for starting or bumping threads.
If he did not start the threads so quickly or immediately after each other, I am sure you could not argue that he was engaged in disruptive behaviour. If the threads were not locked he would be discussing it there.
You still can not label a person to be involved in disruptive behaviour if he starts few threads quickly. Or write few comments that you did not like. |
We found Leroy's behavior to be intentionally inflammatory, and he was given a short time-out. That's all there is to say on the matter. We're here to make sure that the forums remain a civil venue for intelligent discussion. If Leroy wishes to air the laundry as to the specifics of why he got the (very short) suspension, then as Karmat posted, he has avenues to do so. |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 09:41:54 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
I just lost all respect for this thread and the others. This whole argument started because someone left a constructive criticism IMO about an image.
Then I find this comment made by the upset:
Comment on JamieLynn image: That's meeeee and ma two dolla ho :-D
With comments like this he should be banned friends or not.
This comment adds NOTHING NOTHING to anything
Kevin
and to think he's crying about a belly comment. Thats insane |
thing is.. he posted that on MY image. i would surely like the option to delete that comment had i found it offensive.
also, at that particular shoot, i was the one that called laise (the model) a two dolla ho. i guess that makes me unprofessional. or it could make her my best friend. and she could actually have a sense of humor -GASP- i know its a hard concept to grasp.
as far as his comment adding nothing to anything.. i guess thats why they make the little box to check for helpful comments =) |
|
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: 08/02/2025 09:48:31 AM EDT.
