| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/08/2006 10:47:51 PM · #1 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
you ALL seem retarded now.. this is pitiful. |
Yea, seriously. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:47:44 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
you ALL seem retarded now.. this is pitiful. |
Yep...and with that I'll add my junior-high 2 cent's worth...the last one to post in this thread is a rotten egg!!! 
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:47:32 PM · #3 |
Bye.
Message edited by author 2006-02-08 22:48:01. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:47:30 PM · #4 |
I think everyone who had anything to say has done so by this time and it seems little was resolved. So perhaps it is best at this time to lock this thread before it degrades to a point below where it has already descended to.
Oh, and for anyone who disagreed with me and a few and certain members of the SC  |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:44:14 PM · #5 |
you ALL seem retarded now.. this is pitiful.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:41:04 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
Originally posted by deapee:
you stop |
That's all you can say, or can you think of something to add? Wow...you're bright. |
I didn't say it twice, did I? Wow..just the fact that you really think I care if you mock me or try to imitate me makes me the least bit angry really brings humor to my, otherwise borring, day...thanks.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:39:24 PM · #7 |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:38:58 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by deapee:
you stop |
That's all you can say, or can you think of something to add? Wow...you're bright. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:37:51 PM · #9 |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:37:13 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by deapee:
Thanks for your pointless, meaningless, worthless $.02...save it next time, for you, it should add up pretty quickly. ;-) |
pot. kettle. |
pot. kettle. That's all you can say, or can you think of something to add? Wow...you're bright. |
Stop. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:36:23 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by deapee:
Thanks for your pointless, meaningless, worthless $.02...save it next time, for you, it should add up pretty quickly. ;-) |
pot. kettle. |
pot. kettle. That's all you can say, or can you think of something to add? Wow...you're bright.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:34:31 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by karmat:
(But know that it was first red and hue shifted to blue) |
There's an example of a bad response...what good does it serve, I feel as though you're just 'mocking the system' that you, yourself are a part of...making a joke out of something that is obviously not a joking matter to those participating in this thread. Childish if you ask me. |
Ummmmmmmmmmmm, she said she wanted blue jello. I was continuing the conversation about porridge/pudding/jello. It is also a photo of the day (where there are no rules, btw). I was not making the joke. Sorry if you don't like it.
But since you probably aren't convinced, I'm sorry if I didn't sound "professional" enough for you. So, I will recluse myself from this thread any further. |
I'm pretty sure he was just using sarcasm in a parody of some of the earlier replies on this thread. At least that is the way I took it. Most of what I type, even in this thread, is tongue in cheek, but it is rarely taken that way. But then I see absurd humor in almost everything I look at. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:33:49 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Thanks for your pointless, meaningless, worthless $.02...save it next time, for you, it should add up pretty quickly. ;-) |
pot. kettle. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:31:25 PM · #14 |
And it's NOT meant as a personal attack...it's how I'm viewing things and certainly how others are viewing things as well...it really is intended to help their 'public relations' in the future.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:30:08 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by deapee:
There's an example of a bad response...what good does it serve, I feel as though you're just 'mocking the system' that you, yourself are a part of...making a joke out of something that is obviously not a joking matter to those participating in this thread. Childish if you ask me. |
pot. kettle. |
I'm allowed to say 'politically incorrect' things or things that are childish...because I don't care what any single user of this site thinks of me, personally. My intent is to say that if the site council wishes to remain 'professional' and wishes to have the respect of the community, the members should act more profesionally, at all times.
Thanks for your pointless, meaningless, worthless $.02...save it next time, for you, it should add up pretty quickly. ;-)
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:27:59 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by karmat:
(But know that it was first red and hue shifted to blue) |
There's an example of a bad response...what good does it serve, I feel as though you're just 'mocking the system' that you, yourself are a part of...making a joke out of something that is obviously not a joking matter to those participating in this thread. Childish if you ask me. |
Ummmmmmmmmmmm, she said she wanted blue jello. I was continuing the conversation about porridge/pudding/jello. It is also a photo of the day (where there are no rules, btw). I was not making the joke. Sorry if you don't like it.
But since you probably aren't convinced, I'm sorry if I didn't sound "professional" enough for you. So, I will recuse myself from this thread any further, as I don't feel I can add anything else.
edited to add last nine words or so
edited again for stoopid spelling
Message edited by author 2006-02-08 22:40:28. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:26:50 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by deapee:
There's an example of a bad response...what good does it serve, I feel as though you're just 'mocking the system' that you, yourself are a part of...making a joke out of something that is obviously not a joking matter to those participating in this thread. Childish if you ask me. |
pot. kettle. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:22:16 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Speaking as a DPC-member, not SC, GROW UP!
|
Originally posted by ursula:
As far as I am concerned, neither I nor anyone else on the SC needs to explain anything further here. I also have no interest in saying which way I voted on your image. You have the official explanation. Live with it. |
How are those NOT poor responses?
Originally posted by ursula:
No, I don't think it was a poor response. It was simply saying that an official explanation had been given, and none other is needed here anymore.
|
That's not what you were 'simply saying' -- re-read!
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:20:09 PM · #19 |
| I disagree with the final ruling, but yeah, it's getting old. Ignore thread here I come. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:15:47 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by samanwar:
Originally posted by ursula:
[quote=nsbca7] [quote=ursula] [quote=nsbca7]
As far as I am concerned, neither I nor anyone else on the SC needs to explain anything further here. I also have no interest in saying which way I voted on your image. You have the official explanation. Live with it. |
Wow, this was not something I expected to hear from a Site Council, I am sorry to say it but this was a very poor response for a very valid question.
This whole Disqualification thing that is going on based on rules that are still being rewritten is ridiculus and just plain wrong, finish rewriting your rules but until then you should be disqualifying entries only based on the existing rules.
Of course you're not going to do this, because you don't have to. You will keep DQ'ing entries based on your own taste only because you can. And you will avoid the trouble of providing explainations .. Good for you .. |
No, I don't think it was a poor response. It was simply saying that an official explanation had been given, and none other is needed here anymore. We were talking about the plane with motion blur picture, not your picture, so don't confuse the issues by throwing your picture in here.
I also think that voting is a private issue. For the record, you have no idea what my voting patterns are, or how I voted on this particular image, or on any other image that came up for disqualification.
And ... anyone who thinks that I or anyone else at SC is disqualifying images based on who they are submitted by, or not disqualifying images based on who requested that they be DQed, is just totally off. I can hardly believe it that anyone would even pay any attention to these claims. It's just plain ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:15:04 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by karmat:
(But know that it was first red and hue shifted to blue) |
There's an example of a bad response...what good does it serve, I feel as though you're just 'mocking the system' that you, yourself are a part of...making a joke out of something that is obviously not a joking matter to those participating in this thread. Childish if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:13:41 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by blemt:
Sorry, as I told you, I had a long shift. Then needed to take the time to read through the thread.
My decision has been consistant over ALL the shots that have been discussed related to motion blur. I consider it an added element that has a significant impact on the image and on EVERY SINGLE ONE, I've voted to DQ.
Now apaprently you want more detail. There's none to give. I'm very sorry that this upsets you to this degree. I'm very sorry that you feel singled out. Not a single thing I say is going to convince you that I truly did not even look at who's image this was. I looked, made the decision, consistant with how I have voted since I've been on SC.
It's unfortunate that this particular part of the major elements rule is cauing a problem right now. Periodically you will have a series of events that hits at just the wrong/right time. As I said, we are working on the clarification. It's not easy, and it's not fast. Trying to find the balance point means creating rules that flex, while at the same time show clear boundaries.
Now, I'm sure that you are going to turn right back around and tell me I'm wrong, my definition of major element is wrong, and SC is evil. That's your right.
You are just as entitled to your point of view as any other member of this site. All I ask is that you all please remember that on the other side of the computer screen is a human being. I will very politely remind you that I stated at the beginning of the day that I had a long shift at work today. When I got home, the first thing I did was log in here to read the thread and reply to you.
I've got stomach flu, I should be in bed, and I have to do a turnaround shift tomorrow for another 11 hours. I have personal obligations that have not been attended to today in order to reply to you this morning and this evening.
I do this KNOWING you aren't going to like my answer. I do this knowing that this is probably a waste of pixels. I told you that I'd reply and I have.
Now with respect, I'm off to bed to enjoy this second bout of stomach flu. Have a good evening. |
See, this is how site council memebrs should act...very good attitude, and I feel you've accomplished more in that one post than anyone has in the past 9 pages.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:13:18 PM · #23 |
| There is a picture of blue jello in my PaD, clara. If you can figure out some way to make it materialize, have at it. (But know that it was first red and hue shifted to blue) |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:11:17 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by samanwar:
Wow, this was not something I expected to hear from a Site Council, I am sorry to say it but this was a very poor response for a very valid question. |
I agree...I think they should hold a more 'presentable image' at all times. You don't hear the President of anything say "well, as a person (not as a President), I really dislike that country and think they should all burn." - a bit far-fetched, yeah, but it's the same thing.
All think bickering back and forth in the past couple of months and even now is definately instigated by them...they need to step back and act as professionals. If they can't, then maybe it's time for some new S/C...it's a shame that people view the "site council" as a whole and that the immature actions and/or responses of a select few unprofessional site council members reflects badly on the whole group...but that's the way the cookie crumbles, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:10:28 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is). |
Really kissing up for that job. |
I understand that you are really upset and frustrated with us (meaning SC) right now, but please don't vent your aggravations on others. Please. |
Just tired of being told to shut up and eat my porridge. |
Shut up and eat your porridge. |
I wanted pudding. |
Can I have blue jello if we are taking requests? |
|
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: 04/19/2024 05:25:40 PM EDT.
