Trolls and friend voting, etc. - DPChallenge Forums

06/03/2009 08:08:12 AM · #26

Originally posted by Mark-A:

See that's just my point Jeb, you haven't distinguished between what is within the rules and what is not, I voted for Pikkels shot because a) I feel it justifies it but and this point is most important b) because the rules allow it!

It's still vote solicitation.

That's my point.....either you are okay with it, or you're not.

If it's not within the rules, why not just refrain from voting if you feel it's unethical?

Why be judge and jury, especially to a fellow member of the community?

Originally posted by Mark-A:

I also voted way back for Photokariangel (infact many times) because her shot was amongst the best in the competition and because the rules encouraged that type of voting...

I'm not saying I'm against that......personally, I have no problem with friend voting.

I don't solicit it myself......I feel that I'd know regardless of the outcome, and that just doesn't work for me, but I'll give you a plug, vote, yeah, whatever, if you ask.

Originally posted by Mark-A:

The one you refer to in the previous thread was violating the rules of that competition and I pointed this out that's all, surely it isn't such a big deal is it?

IMNSHO, it is when you get a friend DQed.

06/03/2009 08:12:12 AM · #27

Well I liken it to something like this (a bit of an extreme but hopefully it gets the point across):

a) I see someone taking something from a store and walking out without paying, so I report them to the owners and let them know someone has just stolen from them.

b) I see someone taking something from a store and walking out without paying, but there is a sign up saying "Please help yourself to this product, free today" so I carry on on my way.

Now I don't agree with taking something from someone without permission as that consistutes stealing, however if the shop is giving them away then that's perfectly ok and I might even indulge in said activity myself, does that make me a criminal, or a hypocrite? By your reasoning it does Jeb...

As for your recent post that went up as I was typing this, I don't believe I showed any problem with vote solicitation in that thread at all, I simply stated that in that instance it was against the rules, huge, huge difference.

I have apologised both publically and in a PM to Leo for getting him DQ'd I do regret it, but for the reasons I stated in previous thread, I have no idea why you cannot accept it in the same way Leo did and he was the one affected - seems you have more of a problem with me than I did with him?

06/03/2009 09:12:23 AM · #28

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by Mark-A:
See that's just my point Jeb, you haven't distinguished between what is within the rules and what is not, I voted for Pikkels shot because a) I feel it justifies it but and this point is most important b) because the rules allow it!

It's still vote solicitation.

That's my point.....either you are okay with it, or you're not.

If it's not within the rules, why not just refrain from voting if you feel it's unethical?

Why be judge and jury, especially to a fellow member of the community?

Originally posted by Mark-A:
I also voted way back for Photokariangel (infact many times) because her shot was amongst the best in the competition and because the rules encouraged that type of voting...

I'm not saying I'm against that......personally, I have no problem with friend voting.

I don't solicit it myself......I feel that I'd know regardless of the outcome, and that just doesn't work for me, but I'll give you a plug, vote, yeah, whatever, if you ask.

Originally posted by Mark-A:
The one you refer to in the previous thread was violating the rules of that competition and I pointed this out that's all, surely it isn't such a big deal is it?

IMNSHO, it is when you get a friend DQed.

I think it takes a stronger moral fiber to stand up and point out a rules violation when it's someone you know and respect doing something they shouldn't be doing. That takes a lot of integrity, and kudos for anyone that can do so. If you're refraining from getting a friend DQ'd, even when you know they are/have been doing something against the rules (or have made a mistake and are in violation), then that, I'm sorry to say, is cowardice.

ETA: I just wanted to point out that if someone has simply made a mistake, then the option remains to point out a mistake to the friend/person you know, and let them choose which road they take, as well. That would, IMO, also be more 'noble' :D

Message edited by author 2009-06-03 09:29:51.

06/03/2009 09:17:15 AM · #29

Originally posted by CEJ:

I think you're ignoring the ethics/principles.

I think I've CLEARLY pointed out where I think the ethical dilemmas lie, they just don't mesh with where yours do.

Such is the nature of humanity sometimes.

06/03/2009 09:22:37 AM · #30

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Edward thank you! I was starting to believe I was the only one who understood the point I was trying to make in the original thread.

06/03/2009 10:26:55 AM · #31

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by Mark-A:

Edward thank you! I was starting to believe I was the only one who understood the point I was trying to make in the original thread.

I don't think the point is in question, it seems that there's much potential for the impression of adjustable/variable ethics, and to put the judgement on top of it seems unreasonable.

You're always within your rights to make your own judgements of people based on your ethics, but when you act on them, especially in a case where you're not necessarily charged with that duty, and someone else suffers for it, then that just doesn't seem right to me.

And calling someone a coward because they choose not to engage in that is also pretty unreasonable.....that smacks much more of a rationale for imposing your view.

Since when are we our brother's keepers?

What makes you think you're supposed to impose your ethics and morals on someone else?

That's where I have the issue.....when you start telling someone how to be because you're imposing your standards on them, that's really stepping over the line......It's hardly cowardice to mind your own business.

06/03/2009 10:28:31 AM · #32

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

ETA: I just wanted to point out that if someone has simply made a mistake, then the option remains to point out a mistake to the friend/person you know, and let them choose which road they take, as well. That would, IMO, also be more 'noble' :D

And at that point, it would be the most noble to leave the burden of conscience on them.

06/03/2009 10:41:43 AM · #33

So if you see someone mugging an old lady if you do not know them you help her but if you happen to know them then you leave them to it?

That's the impression you are giving me.

Originally posted by nikonjeb:

What makes you think you're supposed to impose your ethics and morals on someone else?

That's where I have the issue.....when you start telling someone how to be because you're imposing your standards on them, that's really stepping over the line......It's hardly cowardice to mind your own business.

Can you honestly not see that this is exactly what you are doing to me with your continued venting at the actions I chose to take, the one action I regret from that thread I have apologised for and to be perfectly honest I am about done with this whole topic now.

Message edited by author 2009-06-03 10:54:11.

06/03/2009 10:58:30 AM · #34

Originally posted by Mark-A:

So if you see someone mugging an old lady if you do not know them you help her but if you happen to know them then you leave them to it?

That's the impression you are giving me.

This is why I get so frustrated and tell people they're idiots.

If you find this to be a comparable analogy, I cannot POSSIBLY discuss things with you.

Originally posted by nikonjeb:

Originally posted by Mark-A:

So......I cannot inquire as to your reasoning without being determined to be unreasonable?

PLEASE tell me how to ask you about anything without offending you.

06/03/2009 11:02:48 AM · #35

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by K10DGuy:
I think it takes a stronger moral fiber to stand up and point out a rules violation when it's someone you know and respect doing something they shouldn't be doing. That takes a lot of integrity, and kudos for anyone that can do so. If you're refraining from getting a friend DQ'd, even when you know they are/have been doing something against the rules (or have made a mistake and are in violation), then that, I'm sorry to say, is cowardice.

Originally posted by Mark-A:
Edward thank you! I was starting to believe I was the only one who understood the point I was trying to make in the original thread.

I don't think the point is in question, it seems that there's much potential for the impression of adjustable/variable ethics, and to put the judgement on top of it seems unreasonable.

You're always within your rights to make your own judgements of people based on your ethics, but when you act on them, especially in a case where you're not necessarily charged with that duty, and someone else suffers for it, then that just doesn't seem right to me.

And calling someone a coward because they choose not to engage in that is also pretty unreasonable.....that smacks much more of a rationale for imposing your view.

Since when are we our brother's keepers?

What makes you think you're supposed to impose your ethics and morals on someone else?

That's where I have the issue.....when you start telling someone how to be because you're imposing your standards on them, that's really stepping over the line......It's hardly cowardice to mind your own business.

I understand what you're saying, but I think you're missing the fact that what you were railing against in the first place wasn't a pure moral judgment, but one where the person was breaking a rule. This isn't a matter of making a judgment based on ethics. Even here on DPC, we're supposed to send in validation requests when we THINK that people are violating the challenge rules. In Mark's case, he was doing it because he KNEW a rule was being compromised.

It seems to be a whole culture these days where we're so damn scared to say anything about anything, that people are beginning to get away with just about everything. No, of course going around imposing ethics and morals on everyone is a ridiculous notion, but holding off on reporting something that is clearly wrong (especially when it's something that is within a written rule-set in a micro-community), simply because the person doing wrong is a peer or friend, is just not being true to yourself, your peers, or your convictions. Especially if you'd have no problem doing it were that person not a peer/friend. (NOTE: 'you' in this context refers to 'you' plural and ambiguously)

06/03/2009 11:04:13 AM · #36

You get frustrated because you do not read what has been written, you get frustrated because you are incapable of taking a breathe and thinking about what you type and yet when someone (3 people infact) tell you you were out of order you STILL feel the need to start the whole darn thing over again, you get frustrated because you can ONLY see your view on any issue, over and over and over again in thread after thread after thread...

Seriously Jeb I'm done with you, please continue to whine and moan but do not expect a reply.

06/03/2009 11:35:34 AM · #37

Originally posted by Mark-A:

I have been making a point of being exceedingly careful of my wording in this thread because of the way you react.

I have no interest in doing anything other than discussing why people feel the way they do relative to the subject in question.

Just because three people disagree neither makes them right, nor I for that matter, just differing in pouints of view, and are we not all entitled to our opinions?

Just because you decide how I see things doesn't make it so, and just because you don't agree doesn't invalidate my view.

I have genuinely been trying to understand why you think the way you do.

Please stick to the salient points and refrain from name-calling and snide comments and perhaps we'll both learn something.

06/03/2009 12:05:16 PM · #38

My one last reply to this thread which I will try and give you all the answers you require, however firstly though you have the nerve to insinuate that I am an idiot and then dare to post this "Please stick to the salient points and refrain from name-calling and snide comments and perhaps we'll both learn something.", that is why I cannot take you seriously.

My reasoning for posting in the MM vote thread:

1) I regularly submit to that competition and I know the rules as I take care to look at all the rules in challenges I enter - that is not to say that I will never receive a DQ because anyone can make a mistake, several times through that thread I acknowledged that Leo may have not realised his actions were infact cheating, however he continued to stand by his comments and with you by his side I reacted badly and contacted the site for a rule violation. In hindsight I should have contacted him and let him know I was going to take this action if he continued down that line, let's be straight here, I would have reported him if he had of continued just as I would have done so had I seen an image on here breaking the rules (I cannot see the difference between requesting a validation for rule breaking here and reporting a rule violation elsewhere). I was not rude I was simply making a point of letting him know what he was doing was against the rules, I am not sure what you read in that thread that has started the continued tirade that has ensued but I do not think it is the same as other people have read.

2) I did not at anytime state that I was against people asking for votes, provided the rules allow for it I am all for getting behind site members and have done so many times before (both monetary and voting - I'm not the bad guy you keep making out Jeb), I will not vote for an image I feel is not worthy of my vote and rather than comment would just move on without voting or possibly voting for what I perceive to be the best image.

3) It matters not whether there is a prize or just a virtual ribbon at stake, cheating is cheating and I am within my rights to report that just as you are to ignore it, I chose not to ignore it just like I would choose to help the old lady whether I knew the mugger or not... That analogy was no more off the mark than your continued one about me speeding and my tax returns.

4) Before voting on Pikkels picture I took the time to read the rules, I knew that you would pick up on that but still wanted to encourage her because her image was worthy of a place on that calendar, that's not to say Leo's wasn't worthy at all it was a great image but the difference is the aforementioned breaking of rules.

Now I will humbly leave this thread, if you are REALLY concerned about why I took the action I did and you REALLY want to know more or you feel my answers here need some clarification then feel free to PM me, I am sure we can discuss it like adults and as you say maybe both learn something, but this is my last post here eitherway as I am done trying to explain myself to you in public.

ETA: Damn my typing ;)

Message edited by author 2009-06-03 12:07:31.

Leica 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 Vario Elmar-T ASPH

06/03/2009 01:03:59 PM · #39

Originally posted by Mark-A:

First, I *REQUIRE* nothing from you, nor do I presume to....

Second, I insinuated nothing, here's the EXACT quote, bolded and italicized for your reference: "This is why I get so frustrated and tell people they're idiots."

That was my comment in reference to your analogy of comparing your perception of cheating in a picture-of-the-day virtual ribbon to the assault of an old woman by a mugger. That to me seems idiotic, hence my comment......that doesn't state that I think you're an idiot.

Here in the US, assault and battery is a felony with serious legal consequences, not to mention the ethical and moral aspects of hurting another human being. How that compares to a virtual ribbon completely escapes me, regardless of whether or not the victim is known.

Originally posted by Mark-A:

My reasoning for posting in the MM vote thread:

1) I regularly submit to that competition and I know the rules as I take care to look at all the rules in challenges I enter - that is not to say that I will never receive a DQ because anyone can make a mistake, several times through that thread I acknowledged that Leo may have not realised his actions were infact cheating, however he continued to stand by his comments and with you by his side I reacted badly and contacted the site for a rule violation. In hindsight I should have contacted him and let him know I was going to take this action if he continued down that line, let's be straight here, I would have reported him if he had of continued just as I would have done so had I seen an image on here breaking the rules (I cannot see the difference between requesting a validation for rule breaking here and reporting a rule violation elsewhere). I was not rude I was simply making a point of letting him know what he was doing was against the rules, I am not sure what you read in that thread that has started the continued tirade that has ensued but I do not think it is the same as other people have read.

I see your point, I just don't happen to agree because I feel that the whole thing is a matter of degrees of involvement.

I hardly feel that this has been a tirade, and I won't make it into one.

Again, I really don't think that Leo saw what he was doing as a radical departure from his set of ethics. Despite what may have been a flouting of the rules, which has been suitably explained all 'round, again, it's not a crime against humanity. Looking at the contest realistically, what possible chance does an image of a male model stand of winning? Though that's irrelevant to the rules, it's a realistic take on the issue. Hence my complete lack of understanding of its importance......it just doesn't seem like a good issue to make a stance upon. It seems picayune.

Originally posted by Mark-A:

2) I did not at anytime state that I was against people asking for votes, provided the rules allow for it I am all for getting behind site members and have done so many times before (both monetary and voting - I'm not the bad guy you keep making out Jeb), I will not vote for an image I feel is not worthy of my vote and rather than comment would just move on without voting or possibly voting for what I perceive to be the best image.

Point made & taken.

I'd like to think I vote similarly.

Originally posted by Mark-A:

3) It matters not whether there is a prize or just a virtual ribbon at stake, cheating is cheating and I am within my rights to report that just as you are to ignore it, I chose not to ignore it just like I would choose to help the old lady whether I knew the mugger or not... That analogy was no more off the mark than your continued one about me speeding and my tax returns.

I wholeheartedly disagree......not claiming (or declaring in UK tax speak, I guess) revenue from the sale of an image, or exceeding the speed limit is done every day, all day by the population in general.....it was an analogy I used to bring you up on the stand of righteousness. You stated that when you got caught, the police officer gave you a break because you didn't hassle him about doing his job.

BUT.....you also, by doing just that, acknowledge that you *DO* in fact flout the law and speed.....maybe just every once in a while, but wrong is wrong, right?

That was where I was going. Neither you or I could possibly walk away from someone being mugged as long as we drew breath.....that HAS to be a given. Ergo, IMNSHO, not a good analogy.

Originally posted by Mark-A:

4) Before voting on Pikkels picture I took the time to read the rules, I knew that you would pick up on that but still wanted to encourage her because her image was worthy of a place on that calendar, that's not to say Leo's wasn't worthy at all it was a great image but the difference is the aforementioned breaking of rules.

I never questioned the rules in either instance; I just found it odd that someone who was so vehement about Leo's vote solicitation was so much in favor in this case. You didn't just vote, you made a point of commending the OP on her efforts.

It's a fine cause, and the increase in traffic is encouraged, I'm just puzzled at the change of heart.

I was under the impression that it was vote solicitaion in general, and illegal vote solicitation in particular that you were against.

Originally posted by Mark-A:

Now I will humbly leave this thread, if you are REALLY concerned about why I took the action I did and you REALLY want to know more or you feel my answers here need some clarification then feel free to PM me, I am sure we can discuss it like adults and as you say maybe both learn something, but this is my last post here eitherway as I am done trying to explain myself to you in public.

ETA: Damn my typing ;)

Well, since I was roundly slapped about in the other thread, surely we can engage in a discussion without placing unnecessary burdens on anyone if we're civil, can't we?

You owe me nothing and are under no obligation to me in any way. I am not requiring you to explain ior justify anything, and I really don't think my queries today would lead into that kind of presumption.

I'm not going to apologize for the way the last thread got completely out of hand unless you feel that it's necessary in order to move on because I'm not sure how truly remorseful either of us is about simply feeling strongly about our beliefs.

Let me say that I don't mean to infer anything about you as a person in general, just that I don't necessarily agree with your views on some things. That doesn't mean that I think that reflects on you as a whole.......I do however get the feeling that has been done in return, but I'm quite open to the possibility that I may be mistaken.

Have a good day.

MAK

Leica M Monochrom

06/03/2009 01:16:50 PM · #40

So when are you 2 getting married then?

Leica 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 Vario Elmar-T ASPH

06/03/2009 02:02:54 PM · #41

Oh dear God I don't know why I am replying but here goes:

Originally posted by nikonjeb:

Second, I insinuated nothing, here's the EXACT quote, bolded and italicized for your reference: "This is why I get so frustrated and tell people they're idiots."

Quoted from Merriam Webster online dictionary:
1 a: to introduce (as an idea) gradually or in a subtle, indirect, or covert way b: to impart or suggest in an artful or indirect way : imply

So therefore I suspect you were implying by your message that I was being an idiot, which is further expressed in your message further on, if this was not the case then fair play.

Originally posted by nikonjeb:
Here in the US, assault and battery is a felony with serious legal consequences, not to mention the ethical and moral aspects of hurting another human being. How that compares to a virtual ribbon completely escapes me, regardless of whether or not the victim is known.

Then I am afraid this is where we really differ in our thoughts, I see wrong as wrong the moment we start deciding what level of wrong doing is acceptable then we are surely doing a disservice to society? You are correct I do flout the law occassionally with regard to speeding, however if someone reported me for speeding or for not declaring an image sale then I would not think I was hard done by when the authorities came knocking, because I would accept my actions as wrong and in doing so accept the penalty.

Just to clarify something are you honestly saying you have never asked for a validation on an image? I suspect you must have surely?

Another thing you mention is that it's a level of involvement, it might surprise you that I am also quite an active member of the MM community and therefore my level of involvement is unknown to you is it not? So being judgemental of my decisions based on involvement alone is a mute point isn't it?

Originally posted by nikonjeb:
Again, I really don't think that Leo saw what he was doing as a radical departure from his set of ethics. Despite what may have been a flouting of the rules, which has been suitably explained all 'round, again, it's not a crime against humanity. Looking at the contest realistically, what possible chance does an image of a male model stand of winning? Though that's irrelevant to the rules, it's a realistic take on the issue. Hence my complete lack of understanding of its importance......it just doesn't seem like a good issue to make a stance upon. It seems picayune.

Why should I (or anyone else) be restrained by Leos (or anyone elses) ethics? If someone feels it is ok to steal from their local shop does that mean I should accept that, does that mean that I am not allowed to express my dislike that they choose to do this? You see I had no hard feelings towards Leo, I still have no hard feelings towards him and wish him well in everything he does, but I really do find it hard to understand why you feel the need to push me on my decisions even though I have explained the situtation quite a few times, maybe I am not making myself clear and maybe it's my fault I don't know...

Originally posted by nikonjeb:
I wholeheartedly disagree......not claiming (or declaring in UK tax speak, I guess) revenue from the sale of an image, or exceeding the speed limit is done every day, all day by the population in general.....it was an analogy I used to bring you up on the stand of righteousness. You stated that when you got caught, the police officer gave you a break because you didn't hassle him about doing his job.

Yep my point was I accepted that I was doing wrong instead of sounding off about it being 00:45 and that noone else was on the road and there were no pedestrians around so what was the big deal? The big deal was that no matter what I was still in the wrong... So yes wrong is wrong

Originally posted by nikonjeb:
I never questioned the rules in either instance; I just found it odd that someone who was so vehement about Leo's vote solicitation was so much in favor in this case. You didn't just vote, you made a point of commending the OP on her efforts.

As I've said a few times now, it's not Leos vote solicitation that I was against it was the breaking of the rules of the competition.

Originally posted by nikonjeb:
I'm just puzzled at the change of heart.

I was under the impression that it was vote solicitaion in general, and illegal vote solicitation in particular that you were against.

See above.

Originally posted by nikonjeb:
I'm not going to apologize for the way the last thread got completely out of hand unless you feel that it's necessary in order to move on because I'm not sure how truly remorseful either of us is about simply feeling strongly about our beliefs.

Let me say that I don't mean to infer anything about you as a person in general, just that I don't necessarily agree with your views on some things. That doesn't mean that I think that reflects on you as a whole.......I do however get the feeling that has been done in return, but I'm quite open to the possibility that I may be mistaken.

Have a good day.

I don't ask for or expect an apology, if you should apologise to anyone I guess it is Leo as it was partly the aggressive response that I received from you in the initial thread that got my back up and helped make the decision to report the image, that is a direct fault of me though not you as I should have been the bigger man.

I don't dislike you Jeb, I just find that sometimes you can be very irritating, you get a bee in your bonnet and you hold on like a dog with a rope, I have never jumped in any of your previous threads to make a point of this and I have no idea why you felt the need to jump in on that thread and drag the conversation in to a train wreck, more over I have no idea why you needed to bring it in to this thread either :(

Please I do sincerely hope this has cleared everything up, I have REALLY tried to be constructive and informative without too much sarcasm. If we can keep it civil I am more than happy to continue a debate, the moment it goes off the rails again I will just stop replying.

Will you marry me?

MAK

Leica M Monochrom

06/03/2009 02:21:00 PM · #42

OK, if he says "YES" then I get the job as 1st photographer seeing as it WAS my idea.
If he says "NO" .... oh feckit! I'll marry you myself

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

06/03/2009 02:21:45 PM · #43

No you wont! You're just after my white glass! ;)

ETA: Yep just checking I spelt Glass correctly! ;)

Message edited by author 2009-06-03 14:25:42.

Yo_Spiff

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

06/03/2009 02:45:41 PM · #44

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

06/03/2009 02:46:44 PM · #45

That would be so much funnier if half way through they changed the yes / no around ;)

ETA: My Damn typing (again)

Message edited by author 2009-06-03 14:47:04.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

06/03/2009 02:52:47 PM · #46

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Very well said, and I agree completely.

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

06/03/2009 02:59:46 PM · #47

Wow...this is so not what I intended or expected when I started this thread. Perhaps I did not state my original thoughts correctly. I'll just go back to being quiet from now on.

Message edited by author 2009-06-03 15:00:28.

06/03/2009 03:02:20 PM · #48

Originally posted by CEJ:

Wow...this is so not what I intended or expected when I started this thread. Perhaps I did not state my original thoughts correctly. I'll just go back to being quiet from now on.

It's DPC. This is completely normal.

06/03/2009 04:57:12 PM · #49

Originally posted by Mark-A:

No you wont! You're just after my white glass! ;)

ETA: Yep just checking I spelt Glass correctly! ;)

Yeah....if I say yes, you'll know it's not about the equipment.....