| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/17/2009 08:54:13 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by Simms:
yup, lets get rid of some of the old school and get some new faces in there. |
there's no guarantee that new faces are going to make any difference. :/ i was a new face (once), and still talk myself blue in the face, frequently. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 09:21:59 AM · #27 |
Well, since this just got bumped with a new post I'll toss in a comment of my own...
First, I think SC does a great job and experience counts. Second, the "rules" are overall very well written IMO - opinion has been asked for on the rules and the attempt at "rewrites" from the DPC community at large has shown how difficult getting rules written in a simple, understandable manner can be. Third, this website is NOT a democracy, it's a BUSINESS. Your "vote" if you want one, is your $25 annual membership fee - stay and renew, or leave if you don't like DPC anymore. Pretty simple choice.
I took a look at the 13 SC member profiles (I don't count the two owners and one admin as SC)...of the 13, 6 are quite active visibly. Of the remaining 7 only 2 have not been that active. I also wonder if they (SC) aren't sharing the duties and taking on what they can do in their volunteer time to contribute. For instance, some of the less visibly active SC members are the ones that answer the majority of DPC help requests (tickets generated from 'Report' posts, general questions, etc...). |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 09:22:59 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
Originally posted by Simms:
yup, lets get rid of some of the old school and get some new faces in there. |
there's no guarantee that new faces are going to make any difference. :/ i was a new face (once), and still talk myself blue in the face, frequently. |
Yep but we are assured to keep the same old same old with no changes, nothing wrong with shaking things up a bit every now and then. I mean we could always hold Iranian style elections, we already have the unrest in the streets lets just add a few errant ballots cast for new SC members to make it a bit larger. :p
Matt |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 10:53:11 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Well, since this just got bumped with a new post I'll toss in a comment of my own...
First, I think SC does a great job and experience counts. Second, the "rules" are overall very well written IMO - opinion has been asked for on the rules and the attempt at "rewrites" from the DPC community at large has shown how difficult getting rules written in a simple, understandable manner can be. Third, this website is NOT a democracy, it's a BUSINESS. Your "vote" if you want one, is your $25 annual membership fee - stay and renew, or leave if you don't like DPC anymore. Pretty simple choice.
I took a look at the 13 SC member profiles (I don't count the two owners and one admin as SC)...of the 13, 6 are quite active visibly. Of the remaining 7 only 2 have not been that active. I also wonder if they (SC) aren't sharing the duties and taking on what they can do in their volunteer time to contribute. For instance, some of the less visibly active SC members are the ones that answer the majority of DPC help requests (tickets generated from 'Report' posts, general questions, etc...). |
I understand what you are saying - but I am not calling for a vote, I understand the whole business versus democracy thing. All I am saying is that it would be nice to see one or two of the `not so active` SC members actually make the effort to engage in photography from time to time, and if they are doing so, then maybe they should enter challenges. Its just nice to lead by example sometimes. I have far more respect from someone who tells me why xyz isnt allowed in my photo than someone who as far as I can tell hasn`t even touched a camera or attempted any creative photography in the past 2 or even 3 years. If they feel that entering their work on DPC is below them, then maybe they should review their standing in the site council before we all just think they are here for a little powertrip and feeling of self-importance in their lives.
but yes, I agree at least 60% of the SC are useful members and I respect their opinion from time to time and in several cases they would usually be my first port of call when I have questions regarding creativity etc.. I dont always agree with them, but I respect them and their views (usually these are memebers who `walk the walk` AND `talk the talk`).
Before anyone throws in the "But Langdon doesnt enter many challenges" argument - duuuh - Langdon owns the site. I knooooww. The SC don't, although some of them like to THINK they do... ;)
Message edited by author 2009-06-17 10:55:12. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 11:05:26 AM · #30 |
| Well said Mark - point taken. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 12:55:59 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by aliqui:
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by aliqui:
They could always pick a night shifter from let's say, Oregon? Hey, I'm a night shifter from Oregon! Imagine that... |
LMAO.....but the SC is already stacked with majority Americans.....shouldn't there be a fair representation from right across the globe? |
There's not any from Oregon... |
Sorry aliqui. If Judi's been blacklisted, my bridge has been burned, torn down, and alligators put in the river. ;) I don't think I'm gonna be on the SC anytime soon. But it's all good.
The best new SC would be people with longtime experience on DPC, but most of those people are troublemakers, thus the impasse... ;) |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 01:43:25 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Sorry aliqui. If Judi's been blacklisted, my bridge has been burned, torn down, and alligators put in the river. ;) I don't think I'm gonna be on the SC anytime soon. But it's all good.
The best new SC would be people with longtime experience on DPC, but most of those people are troublemakers, thus the impasse... ;) |
Why not? you are well respected, active on the site both as a contributor and offering advice - your work is fantastic, you are level headed, not part of a clique.
When I was thinking about who would be good at SC your name was one of 4 I picked.. and I am happy to name them.
Judi,
Hotpasta
DrAchoo
Bear_Music
seriously though - why not? |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 01:55:28 PM · #33 |
Does this count as Spam
Cheers
Ron
Message edited by author 2009-06-17 13:56:27. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:00:31 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Judi,
Hotpasta
DrAchoo
Bear_Music
seriously though - why not? |
You might have some hope with Enzo. :) The other three of us have been passed over already for whatever reason. Personally I worry that I've had too much fun in Rant and people's impression of me has devolved into a grumpy dude always arguing with everybody. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:01:39 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Simms:
Judi,
Hotpasta
DrAchoo
Bear_Music
seriously though - why not? |
people's impression of me has devolved into a grumpy dude always arguing with everybody. |
you're not?? |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:01:59 PM · #36 |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:03:38 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Simms:
I have far more respect from someone who tells me why xyz isnt allowed in my photo than someone who as far as I can tell hasn`t even touched a camera or attempted any creative photography in the past 2 or even 3 years. If they feel that entering their work on DPC is below them, then maybe they should review their standing in the site council before we all just think they are here for a little powertrip and feeling of self-importance in their lives. |
my personal situation:
in recent years i have been doing a ton of professional photography, and it makes up close to half of my income. i give DPC about 90% of the credit for that, actually, because the time i have spent here has been invaluable for a lot of reasons (critiques, forums, community). DPC, in short, helped me launch my business.
unfortunately, as anyone who has turned their hobby into their job can tell you, once you've been doing insert task here all day it's really hard to come home and force yourself to do some more of it. that's also why i hardly turn on the computer on the weekends (because the other half of my income comes from sitting in front of one.) therefore, i haven't entered any challenges in quite a while.
however, i don't think entering challenges should be a prerequisite to being on the SC.
as far as the rules go, i can totally see why people think they're restrictive. i think they're restrictive. but they're restrictive for a reason -- to level the playing field in the challenges. the rules are never going to be able to keep up with all of the changes in styles and technology. we've done a reasonable job updating them as we go (including HDR, excluding in-camera multi-exposures). are they perfect? nope. never claimed to be. they serve a very specific purpose.
my personal goal on the SC is to give people who have maybe outgrown (or grown tired of) the standard challenge format more reason to stay at DPC. the introduction of expert editing challenges was a big one, as was the inclusion of the DPL. i was a BIG supporter of both of those moves. i've also been working with nagging langdon (and others) to come up with ways to give the user-created side challenges more visibility on the site. creating the forum for them was a start, but an inadequate gesture IMHO. i think the future of the site lies in self-directed usage (i.e. where YOU GUYS get to control more of what's going on, like side challenges) because that's going to be the easiest way for the site to grow. as you all know, on the web no growth = death.
unfortunately, as you already know, the SC has very little access to the guts of the site. far from being superpowers, we just get a few extra buttons here and there. we can debate to the death changes that "should" be made to the site (and we do...some of the inactive SC might just be unconscious at their desks from banging their heads on their keyboards), but in the end DPC is owned by two people.
instead of railing on the SC and what we do or do not do and how awful we're making everyone's lives, a better approach might be to spur some forum discussion about what you DO want to see on DPC. we can stick our heads into the conversations and tell you why things are a good idea or why they might not work. we're always interested in feedback, and i think it's high time that some of these discussions take place out in the open.
BUT:
the biggest impediment to having deep conversations about the direction of the site is that the threads are invariably taken over by one or two people who are going to argue, steadfastly, no matter what. case in point. once the conversation devolves into a he-said/she-said argument, it's lost all usefulness.
so, i move that we have more open conversations about where DPC is and where it should go, but i will only support this motion if the community helps keep the conversation on track.
THAT'S where you can really make a difference. trust me...being on the SC is not going to grant anyone immediate authority to turn things on a dime.
....wow. what a lot of words. did anyone read that? |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:04:02 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
people's impression of me has devolved into a grumpy dude always arguing with everybody. |
you're not?? |
Touche. :)
Message edited by author 2009-06-17 14:06:14. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:04:23 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
and people's impression of me has devolved into a grumpy dude always arguing with everybody. |
i thought that was a prereq, not an impediment. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:09:31 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Originally posted by Simms:
....When I was thinking about who would be good at SC...
Judi,
Hotpasta
DrAchoo
Bear_Music... |
WTF!?!? No love for Slippy !?!?
You'll be the first one I banish once I get my spot on the SC, you'll see!
  |
DIdnt I put your name as well??
Oh... ah well, maybe next time. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:12:07 PM · #41 |
OK, I guess I should start working on my campaign slogans and bumper stickers...
|
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:15:32 PM · #42 |
| I think all the SC should quit. It's much nicer on this side. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:18:38 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
....wow. what a lot of words. did anyone read that? |
I did, and it's good to see an example of how, while a SC member may not be as "active" visibly, that same person has a lot to bring to the group when participating (professional photography work, etc...).
I do wonder about your choice of forum thread example however. The conversation initially was good, but as is the case with most threads that creep up in pages of postings, they are going to derail eventually. While there were one or two "voices" that were louder than others, they sure shook the tree from all angles and didn't leave too much left to discuss with all of the counterpoints that were made. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:19:05 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
Originally posted by Simms:
I have far more respect from someone who tells me why xyz isnt allowed in my photo than someone who as far as I can tell hasn`t even touched a camera or attempted any creative photography in the past 2 or even 3 years. If they feel that entering their work on DPC is below them, then maybe they should review their standing in the site council before we all just think they are here for a little powertrip and feeling of self-importance in their lives. |
my personal situation:
in recent years i have been doing a
|
I read it and it makes a lot of sense, but really - not one challenge in two years? not even in the 1000th challenge, the hidden gem one, its not like we even had to go out and shoot for that one, all we had to do was trawl our HDDs and find some pretty pictures, but then again you wasn't alone on that one.
I fully understand that SC have a life outside of DPC, but really, I think some of the current members really need to question why they are still on SC, if they deserve to be on SC and would the site and SC benefit from some new blood. personally I think yes.. I am sure others do, but I think some of those don't like to vent it openly like I do. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:26:43 PM · #45 |
Mucky I respect your thoughts and opinions very much. I think your well thought out reply makes a lot of sense. But in reality until Langdon becomes more active in his own site, or gives over some power to someone who wants to grab it by the balls and lead it into the future its going to stagnate in the water it currently sits. your intentions are good and should be applauded but good intentions don't get you anywhere when you are held back by the powers that be(Langdon).
Matt |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:29:54 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by MattO:
But in reality until Langdon becomes more active in his own site, or gives over some power to someone who wants to grab it by the balls and lead it into the future its going to stagnate in the water it currently sits.
Matt |
Hey, I don't agree with Matt too often, but sometimes he hits the nail on the head. I'm afraid the golden age of DPC may be on the wane... |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 02:44:27 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by MattO:
But in reality until Langdon becomes more active in his own site, or gives over some power to someone who wants to grab it by the balls and lead it into the future its going to stagnate in the water it currently sits.
Matt |
Hey, I don't agree with Matt too often, but sometimes he hits the nail on the head. I'm afraid the golden age of DPC may be on the wane... |
Huh, I guess a good thought can make it from my brain to the keyboard every now and again. :p
Matt |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 03:37:04 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by aliqui:
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by aliqui:
They could always pick a night shifter from let's say, Oregon? Hey, I'm a night shifter from Oregon! Imagine that... |
LMAO.....but the SC is already stacked with majority Americans.....shouldn't there be a fair representation from right across the globe? |
There's not any from Oregon... |
Sorry aliqui. ... |
You haven't lived in Oregon long enough to be considered a resident anyway. You'd be running as Mr. Washington. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 03:52:21 PM · #49 |
| I like all the SC we have now, but.... I'd really like to see Slippy on the SC. I think he would shake things up and Langdon would have to start paying attention again. |
|
|
|
06/17/2009 03:55:20 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by FireBird:
I like all the SC we have now, but.... I'd really like to see Slippy on the SC. I think he would shake things up and Langdon would have to start paying attention again. |
I disagree. I think Slippy's decisions would be erroneous, arbitrary, outlandish and outrageous. In other words, it wouldn't change anything. |
|
