| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/17/2009 07:17:05 PM · #151 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by frisca:
and remember, Intelli, whether we PERSONALLY like her photos, we have NO influence on her score, at least no more than any other voter. How people get to be our "favourites" is beyond me. We appreciate members who contribute and are polite, but that doesn't mean we aren't as nice to those who are less than mannered. |
But, but, but I am well mannered.....honest!!! (hides whips behind my back!!!) |
Why do so many threads end up with Judi and a whip? ;-) |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 07:17:50 PM · #152 |
Naw, the site favorites have been on too long -- obviously someone like myself, just starting in January, doesn't stand a chance against them. Too much favoritism! Well maybe one day I'll have my chance...
:P :P :P :P |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 07:18:34 PM · #153 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by frisca:
and remember, Intelli, whether we PERSONALLY like her photos, we have NO influence on her score, at least no more than any other voter. How people get to be our "favourites" is beyond me. We appreciate members who contribute and are polite, but that doesn't mean we aren't as nice to those who are less than mannered. |
But, but, but I am well mannered.....honest!!! (hides whips behind my back!!!) |
Why do so many threads end up with Judi and a whip? ;-) |
Don't complain...you are one my biggest fans of the whips!!!!!! LMAO!
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 07:44:21 PM · #154 |
I am not taking any sides in this debate, But I do think this thread along with the threads like it in the past, should be proof that along with the writen rule sets should be a few photos of examples to help keep things a bit more clear to the photographer and voter alike. There are plenty of questionable and DQ'd photos on this site that can be linked to as examples, maybe it would be helpful to add them to the rules, They could be useful guidelines to the new members as well as the old, and could save everyone from having to read a bunch of pissing matches here in the forums.
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 08:01:57 PM · #155 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I am not taking any sides in this debate, But I do think this thread along with the threads like it in the past, should be proof that along with the writen rule sets should be a few photos of examples to help keep things a bit more clear to the photographer and voter alike. There are plenty of questionable and DQ'd photos on this site that can be linked to as examples, maybe it would be helpful to add them to the rules, They could be useful guidelines to the new members as well as the old, and could save everyone from having to read a bunch of pissing matches here in the forums. |
agreed wholeheartedly!! |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 08:04:02 PM · #156 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I am not taking any sides in this debate, But I do think this thread along with the threads like it in the past, should be proof that along with the writen rule sets should be a few photos of examples to help keep things a bit more clear to the photographer and voter alike. There are plenty of questionable and DQ'd photos on this site that can be linked to as examples, maybe it would be helpful to add them to the rules, They could be useful guidelines to the new members as well as the old, and could save everyone from having to read a bunch of pissing matches here in the forums. |
NOTHING will stop people from having to read a bunch of pissing matches in the forums :D |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 08:15:10 PM · #157 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I am not taking any sides in this debate, But I do think this thread along with the threads like it in the past, should be proof that along with the writen rule sets should be a few photos of examples to help keep things a bit more clear to the photographer and voter alike. There are plenty of questionable and DQ'd photos on this site that can be linked to as examples, maybe it would be helpful to add them to the rules, They could be useful guidelines to the new members as well as the old, and could save everyone from having to read a bunch of pissing matches here in the forums. |
NOTHING will stop people from having to read a bunch of pissing matches in the forums :D |
agreed, as well! |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 08:24:32 PM · #158 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by frisca:
and remember, Intelli, whether we PERSONALLY like her photos, we have NO influence on her score, at least no more than any other voter. How people get to be our "favourites" is beyond me. We appreciate members who contribute and are polite, but that doesn't mean we aren't as nice to those who are less than mannered. |
But, but, but I am well mannered.....honest!!! (hides whips behind my back!!!) |
Why do so many threads end up with Judi and a whip? ;-) |
Maybe shes trying to get the last crack in ;) *snicker*
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 09:04:06 PM · #159 |
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I am not taking any sides in this debate, But I do think this thread along with the threads like it in the past, should be proof that along with the writen rule sets should be a few photos of examples to help keep things a bit more clear to the photographer and voter alike. There are plenty of questionable and DQ'd photos on this site that can be linked to as examples, maybe it would be helpful to add them to the rules, They could be useful guidelines to the new members as well as the old, and could save everyone from having to read a bunch of pissing matches here in the forums. |
Each pic is unique, and even if you have examples, each pic will be subject to interpretation from the SC.
Black or white does not and should not exist here!
Forgot to add: Now give me a high vote will ya!!
Message edited by author 2009-09-17 21:06:03. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 09:11:19 PM · #160 |
Originally posted by LVicari:
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I am not taking any sides in this debate, But I do think this thread along with the threads like it in the past, should be proof that along with the writen rule sets should be a few photos of examples to help keep things a bit more clear to the photographer and voter alike. There are plenty of questionable and DQ'd photos on this site that can be linked to as examples, maybe it would be helpful to add them to the rules, They could be useful guidelines to the new members as well as the old, and could save everyone from having to read a bunch of pissing matches here in the forums. |
Each pic is unique, and even if you have examples, each pic will be subject to interpretation from the SC.
Black or white does not and should not exist here!
Forgot to add: Now give me a high vote will ya!! |
why do you think all the photos need to be in color??
:P |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 09:33:51 PM · #161 |
Originally posted by Steef:
Originally posted by LVicari:
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I am not taking any sides in this debate, But I do think this thread along with the threads like it in the past, should be proof that along with the writen rule sets should be a few photos of examples to help keep things a bit more clear to the photographer and voter alike. There are plenty of questionable and DQ'd photos on this site that can be linked to as examples, maybe it would be helpful to add them to the rules, They could be useful guidelines to the new members as well as the old, and could save everyone from having to read a bunch of pissing matches here in the forums. |
Each pic is unique, and even if you have examples, each pic will be subject to interpretation from the SC.
Black or white does not and should not exist here!
Forgot to add: Now give me a high vote will ya!! |
why do you think all the photos need to be in color??
:P |
would duotones be acceptable? |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 09:36:40 PM · #162 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Steef:
Originally posted by LVicari:
Originally posted by Bugzeye:
I am not taking any sides in this debate, But I do think this thread along with the threads like it in the past, should be proof that along with the writen rule sets should be a few photos of examples to help keep things a bit more clear to the photographer and voter alike. There are plenty of questionable and DQ'd photos on this site that can be linked to as examples, maybe it would be helpful to add them to the rules, They could be useful guidelines to the new members as well as the old, and could save everyone from having to read a bunch of pissing matches here in the forums. |
Each pic is unique, and even if you have examples, each pic will be subject to interpretation from the SC.
Black or white does not and should not exist here!
Forgot to add: Now give me a high vote will ya!! |
why do you think all the photos need to be in color??
:P |
would duotones be acceptable? |
Only for the Site Council's Favorite Members. DQ's to the rest of us.
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 09:37:15 PM · #163 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Steef:
Originally posted by LVicari:
Black or white does not and should not exist here! |
why do you think all the photos need to be in color??
:P |
would duotones be acceptable? |
Well then you get into a gray area... |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 09:40:17 PM · #164 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Steef:
Originally posted by LVicari:
Black or white does not and should not exist here! |
why do you think all the photos need to be in color??
:P |
would duotones be acceptable? |
Well then you get into a gray area... |
I think this is giving people grey hairs. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 09:45:36 PM · #165 |
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Wow, this photo has been validated and is acceptable? Knew it from the beginning. Just glad to be able to show the blatant favoritism that happens around here finally. I know the other folks who tend to side with SC will not agree, but others who may be new, or just logical and fair will hopefully see this before they get their hopes up of doing well on here. This is one of the other reasons I do not enter challenges much anymore. |
Yea, claiming Conspiracy and Blatant Favoritism is SO much simpler than reading and understanding the rules, listening the the patient SC explanations of the rules in this thread, including responses to your own hypotheticals. It just HAS to be a grand conspiracy on the part of many many people to keep you down, rather than any laziness or stubbornness on your part, any unwillingness to listen and understand, learn something new you could apply to your own images in the future.
The explanations were logical and fair, so new members who see this thread and are open-minded & logical will actually understand what sorts of things can be cloned out, and what cannot--they can learn something about the rules. People who are stubborn, closed-minded, and have their heels dug in before they even understand the rules won't get it. But those (few, if any) will find your Conspiracy Theory and will automatically excuse themselves from bothering to understand or learn.
So I guess that is a win-win of sorts.... |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 09:59:27 PM · #166 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Wow, this photo has been validated and is acceptable? Knew it from the beginning. Just glad to be able to show the blatant favoritism that happens around here finally. I know the other folks who tend to side with SC will not agree, but others who may be new, or just logical and fair will hopefully see this before they get their hopes up of doing well on here. This is one of the other reasons I do not enter challenges much anymore. |
Yea, claiming Conspiracy and Blatant Favoritism is SO much simpler than reading and understanding the rules, listening the the patient SC explanations of the rules in this thread, including responses to your own hypotheticals. It just HAS to be a grand conspiracy on the part of many many people to keep you down, rather than any laziness or stubbornness on your part, any unwillingness to listen and understand, learn something new you could apply to your own images in the future.
The explanations were logical and fair, so new members who see this thread and are open-minded & logical will actually understand what sorts of things can be cloned out, and what cannot--they can learn something about the rules. People who are stubborn, closed-minded, and have their heels dug in before they even understand the rules won't get it. But those (few, if any) will find your Conspiracy Theory and will automatically excuse themselves from bothering to understand or learn.
So I guess that is a win-win of sorts.... |
Oh yeah...especially seeing as you haven't bothered entering in over a year.
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 10:24:09 PM · #167 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Steef:
Originally posted by LVicari:
Black or white does not and should not exist here! |
why do you think all the photos need to be in color??
:P |
would duotones be acceptable? |
Well then you get into a gray area... |
I think this is giving people grey hairs. |
See what I mean! Can't even agree on the spelling of Grey/Gray!! |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 10:35:43 PM · #168 |
Oh my...I can't believe anyone who owns a camera and enters any type of contest could even say such a thing. Making "junk" look interesting is one of the magical aspects of photography.
Originally posted by Intelli:
... she takes pictures of junk and makes it look interesting. |
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 10:36:25 PM · #169 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
Oh my...I can't believe anyone who owns a camera and enters any type of contest could even say such a thing. Making "junk" look interesting is one of the magical aspects of photography.
Originally posted by Intelli:
... she takes pictures of junk and makes it look interesting. |
|
Some people are so jealous over other peoples junk!
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 10:40:25 PM · #170 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by PGerst:
Oh my...I can't believe anyone who owns a camera and enters any type of contest could even say such a thing. Making "junk" look interesting is one of the magical aspects of photography.
Originally posted by Intelli:
... she takes pictures of junk and makes it look interesting. |
|
Some people are so jealous over other peoples junk! |
Especially when you can put that junk in box.
Step 2: Put your junk in that box |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 10:52:56 PM · #171 |
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Wow, this photo has been validated and is acceptable? Knew it from the beginning. Just glad to be able to show the blatant favoritism that happens around here finally. I know the other folks who tend to side with SC will not agree, but others who may be new, or just logical and fair will hopefully see this before they get their hopes up of doing well on here. This is one of the other reasons I do not enter challenges much anymore. |
Doesn't it strike you as the least bit odd that your one-man-band act is playing to the people who compete on a regular basis with Irene?
If this so-called conspiracy/favoritism thing held any water, wouldn't you think that those of us who actually participate in challenges would have a beef?
Yet.....we don't!
Think about it.....
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 10:59:40 PM · #172 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Wow, this photo has been validated and is acceptable? Knew it from the beginning. Just glad to be able to show the blatant favoritism that happens around here finally. I know the other folks who tend to side with SC will not agree, but others who may be new, or just logical and fair will hopefully see this before they get their hopes up of doing well on here. This is one of the other reasons I do not enter challenges much anymore. |
Doesn't it strike you as the least bit odd that your one-man-band act is playing to the people who compete on a regular basis with Irene?
If this so-called conspiracy/favoritism thing held any water, wouldn't you think that those of us who actually participate in challenges would have a beef?
Yet.....we don't!
Think about it..... |
Naw, we're all just Irene in disguise so that she can win ALL the ribbons! And I like, I mean we like, to talk to myself, I mean ourselves! |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 11:00:16 PM · #173 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Wow, this photo has been validated and is acceptable? Knew it from the beginning. Just glad to be able to show the blatant favoritism that happens around here finally. I know the other folks who tend to side with SC will not agree, but others who may be new, or just logical and fair will hopefully see this before they get their hopes up of doing well on here. This is one of the other reasons I do not enter challenges much anymore. |
Doesn't it strike you as the least bit odd that your one-man-band act is playing to the people who compete on a regular basis with Irene?
If this so-called conspiracy/favoritism thing held any water, wouldn't you think that those of us who actually participate in challenges would have a beef?
Yet.....we don't!
Think about it..... |
He may be a wee bit jealous of her capability to take amazing photos with simplistic forms and to be able to ribbon with them. You know the old saying...if you can't beat 'em...join 'em....but obviously he thinks he can beat that ability or else he would have entered a fantastic and outstanding image that would have beat Irene....sigh!
|
|
|
|
09/18/2009 12:23:55 AM · #174 |
Originally posted by LVicari:
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by PGerst:
Oh my...I can't believe anyone who owns a camera and enters any type of contest could even say such a thing. Making "junk" look interesting is one of the magical aspects of photography.
Originally posted by Intelli:
... she takes pictures of junk and makes it look interesting. |
|
Some people are so jealous over other peoples junk! |
Especially when you can put that junk in box.
Step 2: Put your junk in that box |
Thank you for that link..i'm crying here with so many laughts, i saw this video a long time ago on TV and couldn't remember the song or name. hahahahahah |
|
|
|
09/18/2009 02:45:53 AM · #175 |
| Well after sifting through all the posts I can say that at least now I have a better understanding of the rule. I had a much narrower understanding of the rule than was intended so thanks for the clarification. |
|
