DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> Missing Top Favorite Photograph
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 78, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/07/2005 08:01:07 PM · #26
Originally posted by kpriest:
I think it was mistake to remove it for that reason and it was an even bigger mistake on the admins part to allow this.


Just for the record, the admins had nothing to do with it. I removed the photo last night when John asked me. I didn't bring it before the Council before I did it and the decision is not one that is supported by most of the Council members. It was my mistake and I'm the only one to blame for the potential can of worms. The admins have already set the ball rolling in terms of preventing future worms from sneaking out. I apologize. (Please direct all hate mail to me.)
 11/07/2005 08:03:23 PM · #27
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by kpriest:
I think it was mistake to remove it for that reason and it was an even bigger mistake on the admins part to allow this.


Just for the record, the admins had nothing to do with it. I removed the photo last night when John asked me. I didn't bring it before the Council before I did it and the decision is not one that is supported by most of the Council members. It was my mistake and I'm the only one to blame for the potential can of worms. The admins have already set the ball rolling in terms of preventing future worms from sneaking out. I apologize. (Please direct all hate mail to me.)


No hate mail. It's a controversial subject. If someone really wants their image removed I think it is their right however I think the placeholder idea brought up earlier in this thread could be implemented to accommodate both sides of the controversy.
 11/07/2005 08:04:34 PM · #28
Originally posted by mk:
I apologize. (Please direct all hate mail to me.)


Just for you, mk...


11/07/2005 08:05:06 PM · #29
Originally posted by mk:
Just for the record, the admins had nothing to do with it. I removed the photo last night when John asked me. I didn't bring it before the Council before I did it and the decision is not one that is supported by most of the Council members. It was my mistake and I'm the only one to blame for the potential can of worms. The admins have already set the ball rolling in terms of preventing future worms from sneaking out. I apologize. (Please direct all hate mail to me.)


Oh, MY! A double can of worms!
I hope they don't confiscate your keyboard! You'd be a great loss to us if they did!
 11/07/2005 08:08:20 PM · #30
Originally posted by mk:
(Please direct all hate mail to me.)

I misplaced my torch, so I am battering you with these flowers... ;-)


11/07/2005 08:43:26 PM · #31
I think this shows the I don't care attitude and it pisses me off when people request stuff be moved. But you can't win em all. Screw it!!!
 11/07/2005 09:52:20 PM · #32
Originally posted by rex:
I think this shows the I don't care attitude and it pisses me off when people request stuff be moved. But you can't win em all. Screw it!!!


we agree!
 11/07/2005 10:35:53 PM · #33
It's his photo. If he wants it removed, then it should be removed. Very simple. People should worry this much about their own photos, not other's. ;o)
 11/07/2005 10:39:26 PM · #34
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
It's his photo. If he wants it removed, then it should be removed.


Same goes for user names apparently. Looks like you've got a new moniker. ;-)
 11/07/2005 10:43:25 PM · #35
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
It's his photo. If he wants it removed, then it should be removed.


Same goes for user names apparently. Looks like you've got a new moniker. ;-)


I like to keep people guessing. ;o)
11/07/2005 10:58:01 PM · #36
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
It's his photo. If he wants it removed, then it should be removed.


Same goes for user names apparently. Looks like you've got a new moniker. ;-)


I like to keep people guessing. ;o)


Or not. Looks like you're making the "guessing" easier, to me. =0
 11/07/2005 11:05:27 PM · #37
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by kpriest:
I think it was mistake to remove it for that reason and it was an even bigger mistake on the admins part to allow this.


Just for the record, the admins had nothing to do with it. I removed the photo last night when John asked me. I didn't bring it before the Council before I did it and the decision is not one that is supported by most of the Council members. It was my mistake and I'm the only one to blame for the potential can of worms. The admins have already set the ball rolling in terms of preventing future worms from sneaking out. I apologize. (Please direct all hate mail to me.)


I don't think you have done anything wrong. Nothing was done outside current guidelines/policies. If I had requested it from anyone else, I would have expected the request to be honored.

Why was it a mistake? Who is claiming that someting was done wrong/incorrectly/improperly?
11/07/2005 11:12:07 PM · #38
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Nothing was done outside current guidelines/policies.


That's true, but it's also disappointing. Removing an old image, particularly a ribbon winner with so many views and favorites, takes away a bit of this site's heritage. If political rant comments were annoying you, we could have just cleared them and let the photo remain for others to enjoy. :-(
 11/07/2005 11:22:16 PM · #39
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Nothing was done outside current guidelines/policies.


That's true, but it's also disappointing. Removing an old image, particularly a ribbon winner with so many views and favorites, takes away a bit of this site's heritage. If political rant comments were annoying you, we could have just cleared them and let the photo remain for others to enjoy. :-(


I don't believe that censoring comments constantly is a viable solution. The photo should either absorb all the comments it receives or it should receive none. As stated earlier, there really should be a method of preventing comments. It is logical that a photographer doesn't want feedback. I wanted feedback on that photo at the time I posted it and was delighted to get what I got. As I said earlier, it got old and every new wave of visitors to this site feels the need to redundantly add their own two cents worth to it. You would understand my view of this much more if you were on the receiving end of it and thought about the image the way I do. I can't expect anyone to be able to do that though.

There are plenty of GREAT photos on this site, and many more to come. Removing one of them at the photographer's request isn't going to degrade this site in any way whatsoever.

If I have offended the SC/Admins by requesting this, let ME be the one to apologize. It's not MK's fault. I asked her to do it and there was no logical reason that it couldn't be done.

If you decide to change the policy based on this event, that's fine. Consider some of the previous posts in this thread in that event also...

1. A photographer may have a real need to remove a photograph. There needs to be a mechanism in place to handle that.

2. Offer the ability to submit a photo to portfolios and challenges where the submitting photographer has the option for any comments received to be invisible to the public. This makes more sense than turning off the ability to comment.
 11/07/2005 11:24:59 PM · #40
Originally posted by mk:
Just for the record, the admins had nothing to do with it. I removed the photo last night when John asked me. I didn't bring it before the Council before I did it and the decision is not one that is supported by most of the Council members.

Since the self-DQ rule was not part of the rules in effect for that challenge, the photo should not be eligible for self-DQ. Simple as that.

Sorry mk, but I think that was a very poor decision on your part, especially to do so without first bringing the issue up with the rest of the SC.

John, the way you continue to "toy" with DPC (just like when you demanded that all your tutorials be removed a while back) continues to baffle me.

Maybe somebody should ask to have your interview removed from the site.

Message edited by author 2005-11-07 23:31:55.
 11/07/2005 11:29:12 PM · #41
Originally posted by EddyG:

John, the way you continue to "toy" with DPC (just like when you demanded that all your tutorials be removed a while back) continues to baffle me.


I couldn't expect you to understand anything about the way I think. It was obvious in the past as it is now too.
 11/07/2005 11:32:03 PM · #42
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Why was it a mistake? Who is claiming that someting was done wrong/incorrectly/improperly?

I thought it violated current policies in two ways. First, the rule allowing self-DQ was only instituted recently, and -- IMO -- applies only to photos submitted since that rule went into effect, not retroactively to photos submitted under a different set of rules.

Secondly, someone posted an exerpt from the rules (both old and new) which states that we ask that DQ requests be made during the voting period, but will be entertained up to a week afterwards. This implies a "statute of limitations" for submitting DQ requests of any kind, one which in this case has long since lapsed.

Since this action involved making an exception to one or both of those provisions, I thought it should have been brought up for discussion first, rather than after unilateral action was taken.

However, since Langdon is the one who actually purged/hid the image, my opinion has no practical standing in the matter -- he can do whatever he wants about it.
 11/07/2005 11:32:17 PM · #43
Personally, I think it is outrageous that you had to succumb to the slings and arrows of political animosity and remove your photo.
The fair alternative would have been to ask everyone to recreate their own national version of your flag picture and field their own hate mail. "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternity"

Free Tibet !
One Ireland !
 11/07/2005 11:33:53 PM · #44
Originally posted by Jammur:
Personally, I think it is outrageous that you had to succumb to the slings and arrows of political animosity and remove your photo.
The fair alternative would have been to ask everyone to recreate their own national version of your flag picture and field their own hate mail. "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternity"

Free Tibet !
One Ireland !


You forgot, Vive le Quebec libre. (I think I got that right)
 11/07/2005 11:40:12 PM · #45
Originally posted by GeneralE:


Since this action involved making an exception to one or both of those provisions, I thought it should have been brought up for discussion first, rather than after unilateral action was taken.


If it's that huge a deal, why not just re-instate the photo and be done with it? If what I asked for is against the rules, put the photo back on and all is well.
 11/07/2005 11:40:54 PM · #46
That reminds me, can we finish off the d***ed State Flag project -- I have teachers waiting for prints!

All three kindergarten teachers at Isaac's school were very happy with the Alphabet Soup/Picture Alphabet ones ....
 11/07/2005 11:46:51 PM · #47
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by GeneralE:


Since this action involved making an exception to one or both of those provisions, I thought it should have been brought up for discussion first, rather than after unilateral action was taken.


If it's that huge a deal, why not just re-instate the photo and be done with it? If what I asked for is against the rules, put the photo back on and all is well.

It's up to Langdon -- I have no control over it, or even know if he still has the file available. Presumably there's a backup of the site somewhere.

I have no problem with creating an option to not accept comments on a photo, though I don't think I'd use it myself. But, not having seen the comments you got, I can't really say for sure.

I don't think we should have an option to hide comments unless they violate the site TOS.
 11/07/2005 11:49:05 PM · #48
Originally posted by GeneralE:

I don't think we should have an option to hide comments unless they violate the site TOS.


Why? I can understand that you may not want to do it to your own photos, but why coudln't others have that option?
 11/07/2005 11:50:15 PM · #49
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by GeneralE:

I don't think we should have an option to hide comments unless they violate the site TOS.


Why? I can understand that you may not want to do it to your own photos, but why coudln't others have that option?

To hide the comments from yourself? I guess that would work - then you wouldn't have been so offended.
 11/07/2005 11:55:27 PM · #50
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by GeneralE:

I don't think we should have an option to hide comments unless they violate the site TOS.


Why? I can understand that you may not want to do it to your own photos, but why coudln't others have that option?

Because it interferes with the free exchange of ideas and the learning which can take place in reading those comments.

When you submit a photo to a challenge, you are saying that you are willing to have people comment on your photo and record a numerical evaluation. I don't think it's fair to go back later and censor their contributions, particularly not selectively.

If you don't want comments on a photo, why submit it to a challenge in the first place, when that's how we run them? Just post it at pBase and put a link in the forum if you want people to "look but don't touch."
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 06:53:01 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 06:53:01 AM EDT.