| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/18/2008 11:25:12 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
What he gets is suspension. Why? Because SC thinks disagreeing with them is disruptive behaviour. |
It should be obvious enough from posts in this forum and others that it takes considerably more than just disagreeing with SC to get suspended. |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 11:25:58 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by zxaar:
... What he gets is suspension. Why? Because SC thinks disagreeing with them is disruptive behaviour.
If you want to be fair do not let this discussion to be one sided, remove his suspension and have a dialogue about what you (SC) did or not do.
I really doubt you would remove his suspension and allow a fair dialoq. And this is why I believe the system is broken. ... |
Arjun - With all due respect, the SC IMO are a pretty fair group of people. Photographers, like all of us, and want DPC to run smoothly as much as the next person does.
In my 3+ years here I've seen quite a bit and I'm pretty confident that there has been a lot more to this story that what has been posted. And rightly so. If you had a disagreement with someone would you want it aired out in public?
Give 'em a break. They're not out to "get" us... |
Well I completely agree what you said about SC. I have a similar opinion about them. But suspending someone is not good thing. Sensorship on thread is also not good. This is what I am saying. Hope you understand. |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 11:27:53 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by zxaar:
What he gets is suspension. Why? Because SC thinks disagreeing with them is disruptive behaviour. |
It should be obvious enough from posts in this forum and others that it takes considerably more than just disagreeing with SC to get suspended. |
I know but in this case the situation would not arrive if the comments he found offensive were removed. As far as I know him, I am sure he would not report any comment without any reason. He never reported any of my comments as far as I know. |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 11:34:36 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
But suspending someone is not good thing. |
Flaunting the site rules is not a good thing either. Plenty of people have expressed harsh opinions in these threads without getting suspended, so there's clearly more to the story that you don't know.
Originally posted by zxaar:
Sensorship on thread is also not good. |
No kidding, but when we express reluctance to hide any comment on the photographer's whim we're the bad guys...? :-/ |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 11:37:54 PM · #80 |
| I do find it stange that so many would be for censorship, that is essentially what a delete comment button would be. Each individuel will be able to squash out any and all comments that he/she deems unfit to his/her liking. I have read the view that if a photographer finds a comment to be offensive then it should be up to the photographer to be able to delete the post. The problem is that all people have a different view of what offensive entails. One photog might think that the comment on his choice background is offensive, should he be allowed to eliminate that comment, after all he/she thinks it is offensive. I think having a group of people, as it is now, set up to review any and all comments reported to determine whether or not a comment violates the TOS and/or is offensive beyond reasonable standards is the best system. Is it perfect, no, nothing is ever perfect when personal opinion gets involved, but it is better than giving free reign to everyone allowing for censorship. I do feel that there should be a button for "this comment was not helpful" so you can at least aknowledge that you saw the comment and you felt it was useless. jmo, Trevor~ |
|
|
|
02/18/2008 11:43:51 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
so if someone disagrees with you decision, then he will be suspended. Correct, this is what SC has done.
About the system, I would say, yes it is broken.
Whenever someone requested for delete comment button, the reply he has got is there is a report post button. So the photographer uses it, and his request is ignored (or whatever you did other than deleting those comments).
So definitely this photographer (in this case Leroy) asks for delete button in forum, where he can voice his opinion (if allowed by SC).
What he gets is suspension. Why? Because SC thinks disagreeing with them is disruptive behaviour.
If you want to be fair do not let this discussion to be one sided, remove his suspension and have a dialogue about what you (SC) did or not do.
I really doubt you would remove his suspension and allow a fair dialoq. And this is why I believe the system is broken.
Yes it is broken. |
Zxaar, your conclusion might be logical if the facts as you have stated them were accurate. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Perhaps it would be helpful to review what actually happened here:
1) A comment was reported on Leroy's image. Not one single SC member posted that they felt the comment was inappropriate and needed to be removed, and it was not removed.
2) Leroy did not like the decision, and made a retaliatory comment on an image belonging to the original commenter. This retaliatory comment was a personal attack on the commenter (TOS violation) and contained wildly inappropriate language and reference to sexual orientation (also a TOS violation). The retaliatory comment was removed.
3) Following that, a complaint thread was begun, and a public warning in an earlier thread was issued by an SC member to knock it off.
4) For the rest of the day, other threads were moderated by multiple SC members as what we sometimes call a "forum storm" developed. Posts had to be hidden, threads had to be locked to prevent further personal attacks, other commenters unrelated to Leroy's original complaint were unfairly called out in a hostile way, the community is all up in arms now, and a private warning was issued to Leroy.
5) Behind the scenes, what action to be taken regarding the retaliatory comment issue was discussed; it was determined that suspension of certain site privileges was in order.
OK? So it's not just as simple as someone speaking out and disagreeing with a decision that the SC made. It's much, much, much more than that.
|
|
|
|
02/18/2008 11:54:58 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by L2:
Originally posted by zxaar:
so if someone disagrees with you decision, then he will be suspended. Correct, this is what SC has done.
About the system, I would say, yes it is broken.
Whenever someone requested for delete comment button, the reply he has got is there is a report post button. So the photographer uses it, and his request is ignored (or whatever you did other than deleting those comments).
So definitely this photographer (in this case Leroy) asks for delete button in forum, where he can voice his opinion (if allowed by SC).
What he gets is suspension. Why? Because SC thinks disagreeing with them is disruptive behaviour.
If you want to be fair do not let this discussion to be one sided, remove his suspension and have a dialogue about what you (SC) did or not do.
I really doubt you would remove his suspension and allow a fair dialoq. And this is why I believe the system is broken.
Yes it is broken. |
Zxaar, your conclusion might be logical if the facts as you have stated them were accurate. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Perhaps it would be helpful to review what actually happened here:
1) A comment was reported on Leroy's image. Not one single SC member posted that they felt the comment was inappropriate and needed to be removed, and it was not removed.
2) Leroy did not like the decision, and made a retaliatory comment on an image belonging to the original commenter. This retaliatory comment was a personal attack on the commenter (TOS violation) and contained wildly inappropriate language and reference to sexual orientation (also a TOS violation). The retaliatory comment was removed.
3) Following that, a complaint thread was begun, and a public warning in an earlier thread was issued by an SC member to knock it off.
4) For the rest of the day, other threads were moderated by multiple SC members as what we sometimes call a "forum storm" developed. Posts had to be hidden, threads had to be locked to prevent further personal attacks, other commenters unrelated to Leroy's original complaint were unfairly called out in a hostile way, the community is all up in arms now, and a private warning was issued to Leroy.
5) Behind the scenes, what action to be taken regarding the retaliatory comment issue was discussed; it was determined that suspension of certain site privileges was in order.
OK? So it's not just as simple as someone speaking out and disagreeing with a decision that the SC made. It's much, much, much more than that. |
thanks for clearifying. I understood what you said. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:06:28 AM · #83 |
| When you add the Delete Comment button, will you please also add a Delete Last Score button as well? I really HATE the way some of these jackasses score my images. I only want 8s or better AND comments that tell me how great of a photographer that I am. Perhaps we should run a poll? |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:14:16 AM · #84 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by zxaar:
I think you should also read it again, he clearly said he reported some comments, those were not deleted by SC. So this reporting system is really broken and this proves it very well. |
So if someone disagrees with our decision, then the system is broken? |
If someone, especially a 3rd party, is offended by an inappropriate comment that is left in place, then, yes, the system is broken.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:22:28 AM · #85 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by zxaar:
I think you should also read it again, he clearly said he reported some comments, those were not deleted by SC. So this reporting system is really broken and this proves it very well. |
So if someone disagrees with our decision, then the system is broken? |
If someone, especially a 3rd party, is offended by an inappropriate comment that is left in place, then, yes, the system is broken. |
The problem is who deems what inappropriate? What one person deems inappropriate another may not, the system in place now has a group of people who look over comments reported and decide whether or not it is over the line or not. Giving control to one person is going to lead to abuse, imo. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:27:36 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by trevytrev:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by zxaar:
I think you should also read it again, he clearly said he reported some comments, those were not deleted by SC. So this reporting system is really broken and this proves it very well. |
So if someone disagrees with our decision, then the system is broken? |
If someone, especially a 3rd party, is offended by an inappropriate comment that is left in place, then, yes, the system is broken. |
The problem is who deems what inappropriate? What one person deems inappropriate another may not, the system in place now has a group of people who look over comments reported and decide whether or not it is over the line or not. Giving control to one person is going to lead to abuse, imo. |
The point you have raised I think is the main issue. But I think on portfolio images at least photographer should have control. It may not be selective if there are issues with it, it could be absolute, that is just say no to all comments or yes to all comments.
So if you allow others to comment then you have to put up with whatever is commented. If you do not want to get any comment on any of your photos, just refuse to every body.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 02:35:12 AM · #87 |
| That doesn't sound unreasonable having an option to deny commnets and if you choose to allow comments then the current system of dealing with comments that you wish to report could still be implamented. Though, I'm not sure why you post pic if you don't want feedback, but maybe some use this as a storage site. There is a hide photo option already though, why not just use that. Also, would the no comment option be available for challenge entries?b/c I would be against it in that section of DPC. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 04:38:24 AM · #88 |
Demostrations erupt outside DPC headquarters
Meanwhile deep inside the secure building...
 |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 05:30:04 AM · #89 |
| Get over it already. If you don't want comments that you might not like or might not agree with, post your photos on your wall at home and have your friends tell you how nice they all are when they come over. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 06:46:58 AM · #90 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Demostrations erupt outside DPC headquarters
Meanwhile deep inside the secure building...
|
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:38:50 AM · #91 |
So to recap this whole **Wow what, would you call this** Um THING!
For all those that don̢۪t want to read all of this I have posted all the important stuff.
Leroy wanted SC to poll the public and they said NO! THREAD LOCKED. Then he was like but, but... SC said "NO!" THREAD LOCKED. Then as the young boy grew into the MAN we all know, Leroy started this thread. His voice MUST be heard by those of the DPC world. As the thread started Leroy did not know the can of worms that would have been released, and so it was.
[user]fotomann_forever[/user]: Can we poll the public... 1,2,3,4,5, or 6?
 Dirt_Diver: 2
Ecce Signum: 1
[user]fotomann_forever[/user]: 4
 Katmystiry: We need a 7 in that poll.
Ecce Signum: Aghhh yes 4 it is, I like your "pictures".
Man_Called_Horse: But Eye_Fetch...
trevytrev: This isn't Eye_Fetch!
 Quasimojo: I say "1", "NOW PITTYDAFOO"
[user]fotomann_forever[/user]: READ MY LIPS typing, "NO MORE NUDES RUDES.
iamkmaniam: Lets live in the 50's and change nothing, EVER. And something about a couch.
FAST FORWARD, Leroy gets the boot for speaking out.
SC says it's not their fault.
zxaar thinks we live in a Taliban.
cpanaioti doesn't believe that Leroy got the boot.
 JamieLynn steps in and reassures everyone that Leroy got the boot for "Engaging in a pattern of disruptive behavior."
 karmat "says can't we all just get along"
littlegett thinks we should have an option 8
Qart wants to see someone to repost all the reasons.
zxaar Thinks that SC should be suspended for locking threads.
iamkmaniam says "It's only a belly comment"
karmat Said "I locked them cause I wanted too, Mind ya business"
JulietNN says "there are rules everywhere, in elementary school and at the grocery store. I mean You wouldn't walk into the movie theater with your own popcorn would you??? 
Quasimojo says "people don't like my wife"
zxaar: Why did you freeze the cheese man for bumping threads?
rossbilly: Oh yeah, is there going to be poll or what?
JamieLynn: Leroy is a real photographer. He doesn't touch me or anything!
JamieLynn again posting for Leroy: I don't care if I was suspended or not, I just want a poll to happen.
karmat: You're preaching to the choir.
iamkmaniam: No comment!
JamieLynn: But...
iamkmaniam: No comment!
zxaar: "Can we have a poll about this thread locking issue?"
JamieLynn: lets poll the polls
kirbic: Help>Contact and use the "Administrative inquiry" link
kirbic: makes joke
rossbilly: Propane bottles.
kirbic: yeah, propane bottles!
zxaar: questions a post.
kirbic: read it again
zxaar: No you read it again
glad2badad: Needs to read this recap
kirbic: So if someone disagrees with our decision, then the system is broken?
zxaar: YES!
 scalvert: Daddy's here now ya'll calm down and have some JELL-O!
zxaar: I don't like Jell-O!
scalvert: How about some pudding then?
trevytrev: notsurewhathewassayingbecauseallhiswordslookedlikedtheywerealltogether.
 L2: "forum storm" is in effect
zxaar: Ummm okay?
ericwoo: If Leroy̢۪s gonna get a poll, I want a revote button.
Art Roflmao: captures what's really going on. ,
ericwoo: Stop crying about it!
Dirt_Diver: laughs at Art's pictures.
END OF RECAP
Message edited by author 2008-02-19 08:48:15. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:43:58 AM · #92 |
| :P That's a pppllllltttt to you Dirt dude. :) |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:47:19 AM · #93 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
:P That's a pppllllltttt to you Dirt dude. :) |
Glad I could help. :) |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:50:23 AM · #94 |
nice recap! wish you had posted this before i read the whole dang thing! lmao
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:51:21 AM · #95 |
Wel, DIrt, once again you are the voice of reason. It is all clear now!!! heheheh (wheres that rope!)
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 10:03:36 AM · #96 |
Originally posted by Dirt_Diver:
So to recap this whole **Wow what, would you call this** Um THING!
...
cpanaioti doesn't believe that Leroy got the boot.
...
END OF RECAP |
Oh really? Maybe you should read the thread again. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 10:21:42 AM · #97 |
Originally posted by trevytrev:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by zxaar:
I think you should also read it again, he clearly said he reported some comments, those were not deleted by SC. So this reporting system is really broken and this proves it very well. |
So if someone disagrees with our decision, then the system is broken? |
If someone, especially a 3rd party, is offended by an inappropriate comment that is left in place, then, yes, the system is broken. |
The problem is who deems what inappropriate? What one person deems inappropriate another may not, the system in place now has a group of people who look over comments reported and decide whether or not it is over the line or not. Giving control to one person is going to lead to abuse, imo. |
The person offended deems what's appropriate. I do not mean that someone should post a photo and then claim to be offended because a comment is made about the image being out of focus, poorly composed, or underexposed. What is unacceptable is comments where a model is derided for being too fat, too skinny, the wrong color, unattractive etc.
If you're speaking to someone and inadvertently say something they find offensive but some third person doesn't think what you said is offensive then does that mean the person you offended isn't offended?
The problem is that, the appropriateness of a comment is determined by a 3rd party (Site Council) whose response is inconsistent.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 10:24:12 AM · #98 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Do you think threads should be locked?
1.) With loctite?
2.) With a locknut?
3.) With a hammer?
4.) Only male threads, never female threads
5.) Never, it's inhumane to the threads |
6.) Not locked. But lubricated with the rendered
fat of smarta$$ SC members. ;) |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 10:27:43 AM · #99 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Ummm...what was this thread about again? |
Allowing SC to carry concealed while on duty. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 10:30:14 AM · #100 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Give 'em a break. They're not out to "get" us... |
I don't know. Several of them look like people I saw on the
grassy knoll that day...... |
|
