| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/19/2008 08:23:38 PM · #151 |
Hey, if this is all due to something I said, I'm sorry. :(
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:26:04 PM · #152 |
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
Just curious. If a member is that disruptive and has a history of being abusive. Why not ban him/her for life. |
Because every forum needs a whipping boy. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:27:13 PM · #153 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Hey, if this is all due to something I said, I'm sorry. :( |
you tricked me into looking!
Comment:
Do you know why an elephant has a trunk?
They would look funny without one......
LOLOL! |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:28:33 PM · #154 |
Originally posted by JamieLynn:
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
Just curious. If a member is that disruptive and has a history of being abusive. Why not ban him/her for life. It seems to me it would be a better place. I do think a line has to be drawn at some point. From what I have experienced here at DPC SC does a pretty fair job. |
no need to ban him. check out his profile. |
That says nothing about him not coming back at all, or participating. Just that he will no longer pay the $25 to be a member.
Banned -- Not a member > Big difference
Originally posted by Leroy's profile:
Biography: I would like to express my sincere disappointment in the direction this site has turned. It was a great site. WAS.
Thanks SC.
At this point, I haven't decided if DPC is worth being a member of. I will not pay to be treated like an inferior though. I've asked Langdon to kindly refund my $25 membership fee which should not go into effect until March.
Kinda hard to want to give to a site that doesn't want you. |
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:29:10 PM · #155 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Leroy might respond to this.
/Arjun |
I'm sure he would dearly love to do so, but I guess you missed the fact that he is temporarily unable to do so......i.e. he has been banned for now. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:30:49 PM · #156 |
Originally posted by L2:
Originally posted by zxaar:
...Further PM is private talk, there is no reason for SC to poke its nose into it, on PM I shall be allowed to talk whatever way I wish. And you should not be allowed to take PM previledges from paying members. When you say deal with PM then let them deal with PM, simply stay out of personal business. Is it hard to understand.
...But you can not suspend and take PM privileges from a member. Just because someone thought he should be banned, it is not enough to suspend or ban someone. Keep personal issues out of this.
|
The PM system is a site privilege, and is subject to the Terms of Use. We will absolutely positively without a doubt suspend PM privileges in those cases where it has been used to harass and abuse other users.
There have been multiple complaints about it from the recipients of those PM's, and it remains under investigation.
We are not here to provide a way for our membership to be harassed and humiliated. |
Exactly same thing applies to rude comments recieved. How long you want to have this duplicity.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:33:26 PM · #157 |
| i didn't start my thread to continue the debate. it's already being discussed in two threads which were both left open, but my thread was locked? |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:38:18 PM · #158 |
Originally posted by desertoddity:
i didn't start my thread to continue the debate. it's already being discussed in two threads which were both left open, but my thread was locked? |
Because it's...
Originally posted by desertoddity:
it's already being discussed in two threads |
? |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:39:11 PM · #159 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by L2:
Originally posted by zxaar:
...Further PM is private talk, there is no reason for SC to poke its nose into it, on PM I shall be allowed to talk whatever way I wish. And you should not be allowed to take PM previledges from paying members. When you say deal with PM then let them deal with PM, simply stay out of personal business. Is it hard to understand.
...But you can not suspend and take PM privileges from a member. Just because someone thought he should be banned, it is not enough to suspend or ban someone. Keep personal issues out of this.
|
The PM system is a site privilege, and is subject to the Terms of Use. We will absolutely positively without a doubt suspend PM privileges in those cases where it has been used to harass and abuse other users.
There have been multiple complaints about it from the recipients of those PM's, and it remains under investigation.
We are not here to provide a way for our membership to be harassed and humiliated. |
Exactly same thing applies to rude comments recieved. How long you want to have this duplicity. |
We have, and we will, continue to apply the same criteria to reported forum posts, PMs sent, and comments made. We, as human beings, try to keep our personal feelings out of it, no matter how strong they may be. Yet you keep insisting that there is some kind of double standard. In fact, it's you who has the double standard; you decry censorship but you're also one of the first to want to censor others yourself. You can't have it both ways. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:39:59 PM · #160 |
IMHO, Leroy should be unsuspended for the duration of this discussion. He's effectively gagged right now, and is excluded from a debate which he started and which is obviously important to him. Having other users pass on messages from him is just adding to the fiasco.
If a 'punishment' suspension is still required by SC, why not delay it until this discussion is played out? |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:40:47 PM · #161 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by L2:
...We are not here to provide a way for our membership to be harassed and humiliated. |
Exactly same thing applies to rude comments recieved. How long you want to have this duplicity. |
Nice try, but again, there is a big difference between the wildly inappropriate content of the retaliatory PM's and the orignal comments made. Big difference. Huge.
Let's put it this way, the content of the PM's as reported to us would never ever stand as a public comment on an image. Never. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:42:12 PM · #162 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
i didn't start my thread to continue the debate. it's already being discussed in two threads which were both left open, but my thread was locked? |
Because it's...
Originally posted by desertoddity:
it's already being discussed in two threads |
? |
then they need to combine the two threads or lock one of those, as well. and as i said before, i didn't start mine to continue the same debate by the same people that is going on in both of them.
there was no need to slap me down for asking a question. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:44:22 PM · #163 |
Hey Shannon,
One is supposed to be about a website suggestion, and the other is supposed to be about requesting a poll on it. Quite right though, it would be better if it were all in one thread but we've kind of gone a bit awry. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:45:48 PM · #164 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by L2:
Originally posted by zxaar:
...Further PM is private talk, there is no reason for SC to poke its nose into it, on PM I shall be allowed to talk whatever way I wish. And you should not be allowed to take PM previledges from paying members. When you say deal with PM then let them deal with PM, simply stay out of personal business. Is it hard to understand.
...But you can not suspend and take PM privileges from a member. Just because someone thought he should be banned, it is not enough to suspend or ban someone. Keep personal issues out of this.
|
The PM system is a site privilege, and is subject to the Terms of Use. We will absolutely positively without a doubt suspend PM privileges in those cases where it has been used to harass and abuse other users.
There have been multiple complaints about it from the recipients of those PM's, and it remains under investigation.
We are not here to provide a way for our membership to be harassed and humiliated. |
Exactly same thing applies to rude comments recieved. How long you want to have this duplicity. |
We have, and we will, continue to apply the same criteria to reported forum posts, PMs sent, and comments made. We, as human beings, try to keep our personal feelings out of it, no matter how strong they may be. Yet you keep insisting that there is some kind of double standard. In fact, it's you who has the double standard; you decry censorship but you're also one of the first to want to censor others yourself. You can't have it both ways. |
Well you have personally adressed me (by quoting) and hence if I were you my post were deleted.
(as its done many times)
This is example of double standard SC follows.
I do not have double standards I am asking do the same for all. If someone reports something take action but do it both ways. If he reported comments just delete them.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:46:50 PM · #165 |
Originally posted by desertoddity:
there was no need to slap me down for asking a question. |
The intent was not to "slap down" anyone. Two threads on a topic is definitely enough. The discussions are different enough that, for better or worse, they have been allowed to stand, though one thread is arguably enough on the topic.
The question you asked was a legitimate one, but could just as easily been asked here as opposed to in a new thread. We do hope you understand. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:47:42 PM · #166 |
Originally posted by L2:
Hey Shannon,
One is supposed to be about a website suggestion, and the other is supposed to be about requesting a poll on it. Quite right though, it would be better if it were all in one thread but we've kind of gone a bit awry. |
While Shannon's question was obviously sparked by the current debate, the question itself was of a general nature that totally deserved its own thread. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:49:31 PM · #167 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by desertoddity:
there was no need to slap me down for asking a question. |
The intent was not to "slap down" anyone. Two threads on a topic is definitely enough. The discussions are different enough that, for better or worse, they have been allowed to stand, though one thread is arguably enough on the topic.
The question you asked was a legitimate one, but could just as easily been asked here as opposed to in a new thread. We do hope you understand. |
you guys really don't help your image by being so heavy-handed with the thread-locking powers.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:53:35 PM · #168 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
I do not have double standards I am asking do the same for all. If someone reports something take action but do it both ways. If he reported comments just delete them. |
So exactly what are you asking? If someone reports an abusive comment or post, it is removed. If it's not abusive, it's not removed. It works the same for comments and forum posts, and the civility rules also apply to PMs, though of course we can't take PMs back.
We try to intrude as little as possible by removing only those posts & comments that clearly are in violation of the ToS and/or posting rules, but I guess that doesn't satisfy you. You'd ask that we remove anything anytime anyone requests it. At the same time, you feel that we censor you, and you are not pleased about that. There is simply no pleasing you. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:57:10 PM · #169 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by zxaar:
I do not have double standards I am asking do the same for all. If someone reports something take action but do it both ways. If he reported comments just delete them. |
So exactly what are you asking? If someone reports an abusive comment or post, it is removed. If it's not abusive, it's not removed. It works the same for comments and forum posts, and the civility rules also apply to PMs, though of course we can't take PMs back.
We try to intrude as little as possible by removing only those posts & comments that clearly are in violation of the ToS and/or posting rules, but I guess that doesn't satisfy you. You'd ask that we remove anything anytime anyone requests it. At the same time, you feel that we censor you, and you are not pleased about that. There is simply no pleasing you. |
Why you should decide what I find abusive and offensive. If I reported it I find it offensive, its simple.
And this is why we need editorial control over our images. As Gorden is asking and you are arguing against it. It all boils down to this.
As photographer I know many of us want more control over our images those we post here. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 08:57:50 PM · #170 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by Gordon:
the one thing that has amazed me from this whole discussion is how everyone seems to believe that all the other users of the site are petty, immature fools that can't handle any negative feedback at all. and that they certainly couldn't possibly be trusted with any sort of editorial control at all.
Of course that would be none of the people voting in this thread, just the other people. You know, them. |
Gordon, you consistently and conveniently ignore the well-reasoned arguments as to why giving editorial control to comment recipients is a bad idea, and keep implying that anyone who doesn't agree with doing so is automatically denigrating the intelligence and restraint of the rest of the membership. I would submit that it is you who underestimates the intelligence of the site's membership. |
The well-reasoned arguments seem to revolve around the fact that the majority of users will delete unflattering comments, offensive or not. As a result the commenting system will grind to a halt.
Or have I missed another well reasoned argument ? Maybe it needs to be posted in all caps prior to storming out to get the point over more clearly? It seems to be summed up by this post from the first response to this thread
Delete comment button 2. Not a good idea ('wow great shot' on every image springs to mind)
Message edited by author 2008-02-19 20:58:40. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 09:01:43 PM · #171 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
As photographer I know many of us want more control over our images those we post here. |
As a photographer you have read the contract and accepted it, if it is now displeasing renegotiate or decline its acceptance. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 09:05:16 PM · #172 |
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
Originally posted by zxaar:
As photographer I know many of us want more control over our images those we post here. |
As a photographer you have read the contract and accepted it, if it is now displeasing renegotiate or decline its acceptance. |
Yes this is the reason many of us simply leave this site. When I get bored I would also do the same.
On another note, if the system seems to have some issues, it is not bad idea to change the rules and make things better. No matter what we signed on, change can still come if there are willing people to listen.
If system do not change people just move out of that system.
(Now you would say if I do not like the system I can move out. Yes you can and I might if its not worth to me). |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 09:08:16 PM · #173 |
Originally posted by karmat:
That says nothing about him not coming back at all, or participating. Just that he will no longer pay the $25 to be a member.
Banned -- Not a member > Big difference
|
i know this.
maybe you should observe that he has deleted the majority of his portfolio and i'm going to guess that this whole trainwreck has deterred him from partaking in the forums any longer. looks as though some got their wish. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 09:11:19 PM · #174 |
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
Originally posted by zxaar:
As photographer I know many of us want more control over our images those we post here. |
As a photographer you have read the contract and accepted it, if it is now displeasing renegotiate or decline its acceptance. |
maybe i misunderstood you, but i would consider a discussion and poll about a site feature to be renegotiating. |
|
|
|
02/19/2008 09:12:38 PM · #175 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
Originally posted by zxaar:
As photographer I know many of us want more control over our images those we post here. |
As a photographer you have read the contract and accepted it, if it is now displeasing renegotiate or decline its acceptance. |
Yes this is the reason many of us simply leave this site. When I get bored I would also do the same.
On another note, if the system seems to have some issues, it is not bad idea to change the rules and make things better. No matter what we signed on, change can still come if there are willing people to listen.
If system do not change people just move out of that system.
(Now you would say if I do not like the system I can move out. Yes you can and I might if its not worth to me). |
Yes you are correct, however I believe this thread is part of the renegotiate aspect, and members will decide at its conclusion.
I did not mean the statement to be a personal attack on you. |
|
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 03:07:15 PM EDT.
