Lockdown - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

03/25/2015 04:18:46 PM · #152

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Judi:
But please tell me why the scores haven't been adjusted?

That is actually a very fair question. Just out of curiosity Judi, how do you think they should be adjusted? Would simply replacing them with a 5 be fair?

Simply remove the vote in question.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

03/25/2015 04:29:42 PM · #153

Originally posted by Judi:

Rikki was suspended for one year. He chose to cancel his account. His name was revealed and scores were adjusted.

He revealed his own name. He asked SC to post his admission of guilt and his apology to the forum. Also, what happened with Rikki affected many, many people; his cadre of friend voters had all of THEIR votes removed, and that was a LOT of votes.

Judi

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

03/25/2015 04:31:56 PM · #154

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Judi:
Rikki was suspended for one year. He chose to cancel his account. His name was revealed and scores were adjusted.

He revealed his own name. He asked SC to post his admission of guilt and his apology to the forum. Also, what happened with Rikki affected many, many people; his cadre of friend voters had all of THEIR votes removed, and that was a LOT of votes.

At least he was grown up enough to apologize. AGAIN, I accept that there never will be an apology to the person targeted and I do accept your decision...I, like many, are just trying to understand why. :)

scalvert

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/25/2015 07:42:31 PM · #155

Originally posted by Judi:

I, like many, are just trying to understand why. :)

Because it's site policy� we don't reveal names, and scores are only adjusted when it makes a significant overall difference. One person voting high or low on a single account only has a tiny effect on one entry, and Langdon isn't going to recalculate multiple old challenges for that. Whether or not offenders apologize is entirely up to them. We'd much rather correct bad behavior and have the user continue participating in good faith than stigmatize someone for life over poor judgement since corrected. If punishment is served and the person plays by the rules, then past transgressions shouldn't make any difference. Those who demonstrate no intention of following the rules, or who engage in certain major offenses like EXIF tampering, are banned for life. For anyone else, we are ALL bound by the terms of service to treat each other with mutual respect and consideration... and that makes an offender's identity a moot point.

PennyStreet

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko

03/25/2015 08:27:16 PM · #156

If this person(s) expects to return, an apology might be wise. Enough said.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

03/25/2015 08:56:56 PM · #157

Originally posted by PennyStreet:

If this person(s) expects to return, an apology might be wise. Enough said.

Or else ... what?

Thank you for justifying our policy so clearly ...

PennyStreet

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko

03/25/2015 09:04:36 PM · #158

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by PennyStreet:
If this person(s) expects to return, an apology might be wise. Enough said.

Or else ... what?

Thank you for justifying our policy so clearly ...

If the person(s) returns I think it's likely that it will come out who they are. An apology would soften the blow, I think, assuming it's handled well.

03/25/2015 09:30:45 PM · #159

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by nygold:
It's been so peaceful without the ~~cheater~~ cheaters around.
I hope it stays like this after the quiet return that know one is supposed to know about.

Ok, my last response was seen as fueling speculation, so instead of using the kid gloves I'll just be direct.

That seems like a really stupid thing to say, explain how one person who was downvoting one other person was disrupting the peace, and also how the person who downvoted everyone in one challenge was disturbing the peace.

I'll be impressed if anything more complex than "Derp" comes out of you on this.

A lot less drama. !!!DERP!!! Derpy squid...

03/25/2015 09:31:56 PM · #160

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Seems people are still a bit hot.

03/25/2015 09:33:34 PM · #161

Don't snap at the victims for being upset.

scalvert

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/25/2015 09:40:22 PM · #162

Originally posted by PennyStreet:

An apology would soften the blow...

Once again you make the case for maintaining anonymity. It is not your job to ensure sufficient public remorse. EVERYONE here is to be treated with equal respect and consideration. It is a fundamental requirement of DPC's terms of service, and no apology is necessary to be treated as an equal participant on this site. Anyone who returns from a suspension does so as a member of this community in good standing, and the implication that he or she must do anything more to earn that respect and consideration or risk a "blow" is a reflection of the site's integrity, not theirs.

Message edited by author 2015-03-25 21:45:51.

jagar

Samsung Galaxy S9/S9+

Sony Sonnar FE 2.8 35mm ZA

03/26/2015 02:12:40 AM · #163

To position things as they stand so far:

The victim knows who she or he is. SC knows who the culprit is and the culprit knows who he or she is. The judges, culprit and victim are in the same room and the victim is simply waiting for an apology and perhaps an explanation, the judges because of some form of rigidty or pride are not allowing this to happen, it certainty isn't justice that's stopping them.

SC knows now that the victim knows, this is surely to be taken into consideration.

Message edited by author 2015-03-26 02:36:44.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

03/26/2015 04:25:58 AM · #164

Is this victim remotely as concerned as so many here are, or have they merely been happy the problem has been solved and moved on?

jagar

Samsung Galaxy S9/S9+

Sony Sonnar FE 2.8 35mm ZA

03/26/2015 06:42:47 AM · #165

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Is this victim remotely as concerned as so many here are, or have they merely been happy the problem has been solved and moved on?

They are concerned and they would like an apology and a reason.

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

03/26/2015 07:26:49 AM · #166

I'm not sure a public apology is needed. If the victim is aware and wants one they should get it. In private.

If I were the victim and knew who the culprit was and they knew I knew and I never got an apology, I'd be hard pressed to not foster animosity toward them. If the culprit was truly remorseful they owe it to the victim to apologize. It's also of no concern to the rest of us. The pubic wasn't the target and the public isn't owed an apology.

edited as noted

Message edited by author 2015-03-26 08:50:03.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

03/26/2015 08:08:26 AM · #167

I found this on the net just incase anyone might want it.
They can cut and paste it, it should cover just about everything.

Dear {Recipient}

Please allow me to apologize for what I {said, did, etc�} on {day of week}. My behavior was extremely inappropriate, immature, and lacked the respect {you, organization} deserved. It was a disruption and distracted others from {doing their job, learning, etc�}.

It was embarrassing, but I learned that nobody appreciated my poor behavior. In the future, I have every intention of curbing my thoughtless actions and learn to adjust my behavior befitting the environment and situation.

Again, I am sorry for my actions and I hope that we can put this matter behind us. I look forward to {working, learning from, etc�} you {again/soon}. If you have any thoughts in this, please feel free to share. You may contact me at your convenience at {email/phone}.

Sincerely,
{Sender Name}

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

03/26/2015 08:59:21 AM · #168

Originally posted by Mike:

I know there was a preexisting issue between these two people, where there seems to already have been plenty of animosity going both directions, and you think that a private apology here is going to fix it? Are you being serious?

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

03/26/2015 09:01:18 AM · #169

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Mike:
I'm not sure a public apology is needed. If the victim is aware and wants one they should get it. In private.

If I were the victim and knew who the culprit was and they knew I knew and I never got an apology, I'd be hard pressed to not foster animosity toward them. If the culprit was truly remorseful they owe it to the victim to apologize. It's also of no concern to the rest of us. The pubic wasn't the target and the public isn't owed an apology.

edited as noted

I know there was a preexisting issue between these two people, where there seems to already have been plenty of animosity going both directions, and you think that a private apology here is going to fix it? Are you being serious?

oh I'm sorry, i didn't realize i was only giving my opinion. I'm also not privy to the inside info on the matter that others, outside of SC, apparently have :P

ETA - peace offerings, especially remorseful ones, are always a bad idea, not sure what i was thinking.

ETA2 - Im sorry.

Message edited by author 2015-03-26 09:04:29.

bohemka

Nikon D700

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM for Nikon

03/26/2015 09:18:55 AM · #170

Originally posted by Cory:

Airing their dirty laundry publicly certainly won't fix it. Who cares? The SC is monitoring that no future voting issues result from their personal spat and that's that as far as this site should be concerned.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

03/26/2015 09:24:55 AM · #171

Originally posted by Mike:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Mike:
I'm not sure a public apology is needed. If the victim is aware and wants one they should get it. In private.

If I were the victim and knew who the culprit was and they knew I knew and I never got an apology, I'd be hard pressed to not foster animosity toward them. If the culprit was truly remorseful they owe it to the victim to apologize. It's also of no concern to the rest of us. The pubic wasn't the target and the public isn't owed an apology.

edited as noted

I know there was a preexisting issue between these two people, where there seems to already have been plenty of animosity going both directions, and you think that a private apology here is going to fix it? Are you being serious?

oh I'm sorry, i didn't realize i was only giving my opinion. I'm also not privy to the inside info on the matter that others, outside of SC, apparently have :P

ETA - peace offerings, especially remorseful ones, are always a bad idea, not sure what i was thinking.

ETA2 - Im sorry.

I know very little myself, outside of a few comments made in private.. What I do know is that there was some pre-existing issue that caused this, (and even if I didn't know that it'd be pretty darn obvious, given the context). The fact is that this will almost certainly only deepen the conflict, at least if my understanding of human behavior and history are any sort of reliable guide. No idea what you mean by "I didn't realize I was only giving my opinion", but that seems a very odd thing to say. As for the ETA, they're not always a bad idea, but when it's an ongoing feud, they are very unlikely to fix the issue. Mostly in cases like that I think the only solution is to avoid interaction, there are 7 billion people on the planet, no reason to play nice with anyone I've found myself to strongly dislike.

ETA: I expect any apology would be about as sincere as you are here when you say "I'm sorry"...

Message edited by author 2015-03-26 09:26:00.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

03/26/2015 10:22:54 AM · #172

If they can't get along then maybe this sandbox is too small.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

03/26/2015 10:32:53 AM · #173

Originally posted by nygold:

If they can't get along then maybe this sandbox is too small.

Only if they can't manage to avoid each other to some degree. (Or of course, get along, but I think that's unlikely)..

The fact is that SC will eventually ban one of them if they don't behave themselves here. As for what they do in their personal lives? It's really none of our business.