| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/21/2008 07:31:47 PM · #1 |
Originally posted by citymars:
Having just voted, I notice that Option 1 is currently in the lead. I wonder how much of that is just a knee-jerk reaction to the ongoing thread storm (or whatever it's called)? After all, the option about having the SC pay a little more heed to the wishes of a photographer asking for a comment removal (Option 3) is gently worded and unlikely to result in an increase of requests or more work for the SC. It's pretty much "leave it as it is" anyway.
EDIT: Perhaps I wasn't clear. I'm saying the option to have SC pay a little more attention is a good one (hardly controversial) and I think it would get more support if people gave it a bit more thought. |
For what it's worth, my own vote was for option 3... but then again, I'm probably the most liberal SC member with regard to what comments I think should be removed. Currently, comments are only removed if they are clear ToS violations, where I believe the guideline should be more in line with the forum rules.
~Terry
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 19:32:32.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 04:41:42 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by De Sousa:
In the above lines you mention "the photographer" and not "the commenter". |
No accident.
Originally posted by De Sousa:
I really don't care about Commenters cause (here) they don't exist at all. I do care about Photographers, kind people sharing their skills and giving feedback each other. |
I care about the site. The vast majority of the feedback on DPC comes from the comments and forums, and we treat them similarly: personal attacks and other ToS violations are removed. What sharing and feedback do we get from the photographers outside of forum posts and comments? Most of your own photos have no description whatsoever. If you saw how many requests we get to remove comments like the one I posted, you might realize just how much the site would lose. I ask you- what could possibly be offensive about that comment (on a photo with no model)? If all that mattered is that the photographer took offense, then we would remove the comment (and I suppose do the same for anything an OP objects to in the forums). Half the people who take the time to carefully consider a photo and offer such constructive criticism may very well decide not to bother. As another photographer who might have benefitted from that lost critique, I object. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 04:10:44 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by De Sousa:
The Photographer wish is a question of rights and not a question for morality interpretations. |
A photographer (really) demanded that we remove this post as offensive-
"Great photo, with nice composition. Although bluish in color, it doesn't have the feel of a duotone. Maybe converting this to B&W first and then adding the blue tone would have helped. I for sure don't think its DNMC, but believe you will get those people that feel it is. 8" |
Shannon,
We could be here, as long as we can, finding examples of comments falling for both sides of the discussion. I don't think arguing with examples will clear the problem cause we would be talking about morality interpretations and that's a never ending story.
Originally posted by scalvert:
Don't you think the photographer who posted that comment would be justifiably offended if it were deleted? Would he be as likely to post such comments on others' photos in the future? A little less than half of the poll responders would not, and such requests are all too common (maybe even the majority). |
In the above lines you mention "the photographer" and not "the commenter".
You right, cause this place is a community of Photographers and not a community of Commenters. Without the Photographers you'll not have comments at all. Don't you think the Photographer should come first over the Commenter?
The way the things are, the commenter has too much power and you know how powerful is a negative comment on a photograph, don't you? A lot of great Photographers just go away because they can't stand receiving some comments coming from polite people but completely out of context and sometimes just revealing ignorance about what they are commenting. Cause these situations exists all the time, we must protect the Photographer even knowing that some commenters would disapprove.
I really don't care about Commenters cause (here) they don't exist at all. I do care about Photographers, kind people sharing their skills and giving feedback each other. If you protect and give better conditions to the Photographer you'll receive more and valuable feedback from him... So simple as that: - More and valuable comments. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 03:02:57 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by De Sousa:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I thought you didn't care about majorities? :-) |
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
- Winston Churchill |
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."
- Winston Churchill |
"It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations."
- Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 02:57:31 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by De Sousa:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I thought you didn't care about majorities? :-) |
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
- Winston Churchill |
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."
- Winston Churchill |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 02:26:10 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
There's an echo in here (maybe its' dejavu). Could have sworn I read some of the exact same "discussion" going on here ==> Editorial control over comments recently (well, you may need to go back a page or two...or eight or nine). |
More than likely did :)
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 02:20:56 PM · #7 |
| There's an echo in here (maybe its' dejavu). Could have sworn I read some of the exact same "discussion" going on here ==> Editorial control over comments recently (well, you may need to go back a page or two...or eight or nine). |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 02:09:34 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by De Sousa:
The Photographer wish is a question of rights and not a question for morality interpretations. |
A photographer (really) demanded that we remove this post as offensive-
"Great photo, with nice composition. Although bluish in color, it doesn't have the feel of a duotone. Maybe converting this to B&W first and then adding the blue tone would have helped. I for sure don't think its DNMC, but believe you will get those people that feel it is. 8"
Don't you think the photographer who posted that comment would be justifiably offended if it were deleted? Would he be as likely to post such comments on others' photos in the future? A little less than half of the poll responders would not, and such requests are all too common (maybe even the majority). |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 02:05:26 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by DjFenzl:
And in the case that started this all "unattractive belly" was deemed to be more valuable a comment to the community than the photographer's / model's feelings.
I hope you are right and for years to come, people who join this site will see that comment and become better photographers. |
Very similar comments have lead me to be more conscious about how my camera angles, lighting and presentation make the models look. Without that insight, I might not have considered it so, yeah, I hope so too.
Originally posted by nomad469:
... that is NOT the tone that this thing has taken ... read the threads ... it has taken the tone that these folks that should be hanging out at the wennie hut just simply cant handle a true critique. |
Right. You'd think from some posts that we would refuse to remove a hateful comment, but that's simply not true. Perception does not equal reality. |
But here is the rub ... your standard for hateful...obnoctious...demeaning...what ever word you want to use may be different than that photographer ... so what you are saying is that the majority opinion is more relevant than the opinion of the photographer that has the beef.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 02:00:19 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Perception does not equal reality. |
I think that's the nub of the whole discussion, in a variety of ways. Or if that's true or not, anyway.
Is offense given ? Or is it taken ? and who gets to decide.
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 14:01:00.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:56:50 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by DjFenzl:
And in the case that started this all "unattractive belly" was deemed to be more valuable a comment to the community than the photographer's / model's feelings.
I hope you are right and for years to come, people who join this site will see that comment and become better photographers. |
Very similar comments have lead me to be more conscious about how my camera angles, lighting and presentation make the models look. Without that insight, I might not have considered it so, yeah, I hope so too.
Originally posted by nomad469:
... that is NOT the tone that this thing has taken ... read the threads ... it has taken the tone that these folks that should be hanging out at the wennie hut just simply cant handle a true critique. |
Right. You'd think from some posts that we would refuse to remove a hateful comment, but that's simply not true. Perception does not equal reality.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:52:06 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by frisca:
nomad, we have in fact deleted a comment much like the one you just cited in your example. Your scenario falls down at the point where you assume the SC response will be negative. |
The problem isn't when the SC agree with the photographer about the content of the comment. Just remember, all of this started when you/SC took a different interpretation than the photographer. I do respect you all for the great job you have been done, but I don't recognize in you capabilities to decide over the photographer wish. All of this subject reminds me, some years ago in Portugal, when a woman would need to go to a Medical SC to abort. I'm glad that time is over and now she's the only person responsible for that decision. The Photographer wish is a question of rights and not a question for morality interpretations. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:42:08 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by Louis:
What I find very interesting about the poll is, even given that a clear majority have voted for "no change", should change happen, the majority will continue to comment as they always have. It appears from this poll that the major reservation people have for not wanting change, that commenting will suffer, is unfounded. |
I thought you didn't care about majorities? :-) |
Did I say that? I'm not sure I do, and I'm not sure I don't but I don't remember saying either way. |
Thought it was you...could have been spaz, and I'm not going back to wade thru the monster threads of the week. The general principle that came out from those in the "must have the delete button" camp, when it was mentioned that only a few vocal ones were in favor and the majority were not (hmmm...now it's coming back - the unofficial poll thread) the reply was basically who cares about the majority; minority voices should be heard (then a bunch of political/civil rights issues were brought in as compelling arguments).
I guess when an argument fits the need, use it, eh? |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:39:17 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by DjFenzl:
And in the case that started this all "unattractive belly" was deemed to be more valuable a comment to the community than the photographer's / model's feelings.
I hope you are right and for years to come, people who join this site will see that comment and become better photographers. |
In a different (more acedemic) setting you may be right ... Here ... not so sure
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:34:28 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by DjFenzl:
And in the case that started this all "unattractive belly" was deemed to be more valuable a comment to the community than the photographer's / model's feelings.
I hope you are right and for years to come, people who join this site will see that comment and become better photographers. |
Succinct! |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:30:56 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by nomad469:
...the feeling that has been put out there is the SC is going to fall on the side of the commenter even if the photographer is offended. |
Yes, that's the perception, but not the reality. We are sensitive to the photographer/model's feelings, but also need to strike a balance that allows for objective criticism of image content ("The hair is unappealing"). We would certainly remove anything anything clearly hateful, malicious, humiliating, etc. |
But Shannon ... that is NOT the tone that this thing has taken ... read the threads ... it has taken the tone that these folks that should be hanging out at the wennie hut just simply cant handle a true critique.
Solutions have been offered like "just put in a no comment flag in the profile" and stuff like that.
Thats why I keep beating the hell out of that deceased horse.
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 13:31:30.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:29:08 PM · #17 |
And in the case that started this all "unattractive belly" was deemed to be more valuable a comment to the community than the photographer's / model's feelings.
I hope you are right and for years to come, people who join this site will see that comment and become better photographers. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:25:24 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by nomad469:
...the feeling that has been put out there is the SC is going to fall on the side of the commenter even if the photographer is offended. |
Yes, that's the perception, but not the reality. We are sensitive to the photographer/model's feelings, but also need to strike a balance that allows for objective criticism of image content ("The hair is unappealing"). We would certainly remove anything anything clearly hateful, malicious, humiliating, etc. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:20:45 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by frisca:
nomad, we have in fact deleted a comment much like the one you just cited in your example. Your scenario falls down at the point where you assume the SC response will be negative. |
I am sure you have. And that is refreshing to hear and honestly I would be shocked if something that screwed up would be allowed to stand...
But based on the feelings expressed by some this would be borderline as the author has rights to have their opinions heard above that of the photographer...the feeling that has been put out there is the SC is going to fall on the side of the commenter even if the photographer is offended.
ETA... the point is ...I say again... this is not about harsh critique but much fuzzier ground.
It has been turned into people just cant take harsh critique or as Shannon pointed out sometimes not so harsh critique.
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 13:24:11.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:14:35 PM · #20 |
| nomad, we have in fact deleted a comment much like the one you just cited in your example. Your scenario falls down at the point where you assume the SC response will be negative. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 01:11:08 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by alexgarcia:
Originally posted by Azrifel:
I'm getting friggin tired and haven't felt a desire to comment or vote for a long time now and all this stupid delete talk is increasing that feeling even more.
Sometimes it looks like DPC has become a group hug site where everyone only wants positive comments and with a lot of sucking toes going on. |
Agree with Az. It seems to me that is a bit boring to see this aspect again and again.
Can you please direct me to some of that comments you would like to delete? I can asume that some people is more rude than other, and that some people hasn't got english as the first language, so some expresions can sound more rude than intended.
I receive comments I both like and dislike. Or agree or disagree. But if I upload to a photographic web a photo I know someone can say something I don't like to listen, but then I can choose if I want to keep posting to that website.
Please understand me, I'm not saying you can leave an insulting comment, I'm talking about critiques. For example, a comment as "I don't like this image at all" for me wouldn't be quite helpful (doesn't help me to improve), it's an opinion that I can desagree, but I can assume somebody else doesn't like my shot at all.
Álex. |
Please do NOT interpretor this as stirring the pot...PLEASE...
I offer this up for to make a point ONLY...
The point of the whole set of discussions were comments that were considered "offensive" or in your word "insulting"
The argument was made that the procedure in place currently would be to contact the SC and they would act on the "merits" of the comment and if they found (collectively?) that the comment was indeed offensive or harmful that they would gladly remove it ... If it did not rise to the level of being offensive then the comment stays...WITHOUT regard to the wishes or sensibilities of the photographer. (If my understanding is incorrect please feel free to correct me )
Fair enough...
Here is where that fails
You have a image of Semana Santa in your gallery (very cool image IMHO but lets put that aside for a second)
You receive a comment That reads
This image I find hate filled why would you post these clansmen ... you should be ashamed.
NOTE THIS IS NOT MY PERSONAL OPINION
You take serious offense to that statement and do not want it associated with that image.
As per policy you contact the person that made the comment and graciously ask that they remove or restate that comment ... their response in PM is "pound sand you hate monger"
The commenter is obviously wrong ... you go to the SC ...
They determine that the comment is the commenter's valid opinion on the image and lets it stand.
Your option ... delete and repost the image to get rid of the comment.
Not a cool situation.
This is where a photographer controlled delete button would come into play.
See the difference between that and a harsh critique
ETA:
This whole issue has been made to be about critique. That has never been the true basis of the conversation.
Message edited by author 2008-02-21 13:15:01.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2008 12:54:15 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I thought you didn't care about majorities? :-) |
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."
- Winston Churchill |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 12:52:39 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by Louis:
What I find very interesting about the poll is, even given that a clear majority have voted for "no change", should change happen, the majority will continue to comment as they always have. It appears from this poll that the major reservation people have for not wanting change, that commenting will suffer, is unfounded. |
I thought you didn't care about majorities? :-) |
Did I say that? I'm not sure I do, and I'm not sure I don't but I don't remember saying either way. |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 12:46:28 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Louis:
What I find very interesting about the poll is, even given that a clear majority have voted for "no change", should change happen, the majority will continue to comment as they always have. It appears from this poll that the major reservation people have for not wanting change, that commenting will suffer, is unfounded. |
I thought you didn't care about majorities? :-) |
|
|
|
02/21/2008 12:39:50 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Louis:
...should change happen, the majority will continue to comment as they always have. It appears from this poll that the major reservation people have for not wanting change, that commenting will suffer, is unfounded. |
44% say they would comment less, and you think that commenting wouldn't suffer? |
Dunno - do those 12 who are going to comment more, comment more often than the ones who say they are going to comment less ? Do the ones who say they are going to comment less, comment much anyway, or contribute more or less to the corpus of pointless/ silly/ off topic comments ?
Who knows ?
|
|
