|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/17/2009 02:02:36 PM · #26 |
very true. i've been to forums where just to post text you have to pay $10/yr.
consider the fee here a bargain...
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Probably the "how much money does this site generate?" question is not a helpful avenue for this thread to go down. |
|
|
|
|
12/17/2009 02:05:22 PM · #27 |
I half agree and half disagree with Simms. I'm one of the people who joined almost 4 years ago (in this forum I feel like a newb). I joined this site and another site when I first started my photography hobby/career. I quickly stopped submitting photos to the other site because there was no sense of community that I got from this site. I credit this site with teaching me a majority of my photography and editing ability. There were alot more useful tutorials as threads when I started....I particuarly remember coming in and searching for CINDI's portrait thread and Pimp those eyes tutorials. Everytime I submitted a portrait I'd check my comments and wonder if Cindi saw it and what she thought about it. I read her threads everyday and tried to implement the things she taught into my portraits.
Most threads were relevant and everytime you came there would be different threads to read. I disagree that there most threads are personal life or rants....sometimes you need to rant about photography to keep the passion going. If it were too easy you'd get bored of it.
There did seem to be more people entered into challenges which required you to really work at the trade to beat any of those great photographers out there.
The DPL did help me grow as a photographer. TEAM STRANGER...none of us knew each other and we just wanted to put together a team. We did and we helped eachother in our threads and most of us boosted our scores by nearly 0.5 of our average if not more. I scored by first 6 because of the DPL and I know my team did not vote on my photos. that theory was something that people who didn't score well in challenges came up with (team members voting down other photos). I'm proof that isn't true. If you want to do DPL and create that community...my idea would be to do it as a draft. Have people sign up as individuals and teams are randomly generated or have it where all photographers are ranked by average and the teams are generated by going down the line (top photographer team 1, 2nd team 2, 3rd team 3 up to how every many teams) snake it so that the last team gets two picks and goes back up (like fantasy football auto draft). That will even up the teams. All friends won't be on the same team so they won't be accused of voting their friends up and everyone down...and the higher ranked photographers can help the lower ranked photographers become better.
The FSM...I like it but the site doesn't really need it. The free study's are there to let you express yourself and don't really need to be a best score of the year thing. It's a show us what you did this month that didn't fit or wasn't used ni any of the challenges. It's supposed to allow you express your true joy of photography without being forced to fit a description...You asked me FreeStudy's should be Expert editing (and trust me I have no clue on how to do expert editing) but advanced editing kind limits your FREE Expression.
Mentor/Student thing..is something that should be done on your own. The site can create something for list of those agreeing to be mentors and a list of those looking for a mentor...and then let it be on you to connect. My job has a mentor/mentee program and it doesn't work at all. If you choose to do it on your own you can find someone with the same likes.
If you really want to bring particpation back into the challenges (and this is the one I think people are going to go at me for)....get rid of side challenges. Side challenges is what draws people away from the site challenges. It takes away from people posting challenge suggestions...why post it as a challenge suggestion when you can just create a forum as a side challenge? This would force the community to the site challenges. If people want to do side challenges, let them do it on their own website. There were hardly any side challenges when I started and now there's several every day.
People have been posting threads about getting rid of site challenges. I'm not for or against it...but if I were to give a suggestion on how to do it...I would say get rid of 1 open challenge and alternate the remaing one advanced and basic each week. keep two member challenges, but have one as basic and one as advanced. I think people would be more inclined to be a member for more options and the editing choice (wasn't it like this before?)
Lastly if you wanted to boost more participation...make it so people have to enter a challenge say at least 1 a year....that way you can get rid of those with fake accounts, 2nd accounts for extra votes, those who just come to steal photos, those who just come in to cause trouble with no care for photography, those who only do side challenges and not really contributing to the site.
I lied...not lastly....bring back critique club? How did that disappear? Don't leave it open to just anyone to come in and do critique club..it should be people who score well on DPC. Obviously this would be hard becuase the people who score well will have to want to do it.
I think Site Council has done a great job at listening to our complaints and working to fix what they can and when they can (except DPL...I think there was a poll and a majority said bring it back). But they have done alot this year and you can't say that they don't listen to the community. I think alot of us don't know who SC are anymore until you read a thread and they name themselves as SC.
I'll probably have more to add later..but this one was long enough. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 02:06:02 PM · #28 |
Why is it that when people discuss about a social website they go to discussing what the owners supposedly make as well as the lack of involvement of the owners/moderators?
This is a social website, devoted to digital photography competition. You want to know what the first thing I did was when I re-uped a couple days ago from nearly a year away? I voted. I voted on current challenges, even before updating my profile, even before uploading the first image into my portfolio, even before making a 'Hi' im back thread in the forums. I voted.
You people tend to forget about the simple fact of the matter is that this website is virtually in the control of its users. If there are too many challenges offered, do not submit to them. Which most have been doing. That was one of the first thing I noticed is more challenges, less participants per challenge. Which I though was funny because before I left people where complaining about too few challenges and too many participants per challenge. People found it threatening to try and vote and comment on 200-600 entries. Now they don't even reach 100. 90-40-76, the three challenges currently in voting. Does each entry have a comment? How many people are voting? Langdon, Drew, the SC have nothing to do with that. It is the Users who choose to not vote, not participate.
This is a social website and its users are the ones to blame. Take responsibility. I can honestly say I have not done enough. I joined the critique club before, but never took the extra time to continuously do critiques for those requested. I want to do more, and I may go back to see if I am even able to be active again. Yet, how many people will understand that I talk from my point of view. my perceptions of their image, my experiences. I do not have the same emotional attachment to your cat, your kid, the tree you planted out front as you do. I will tell you the image is cruddy but I will also offer suggestions, my personal suggestions of what can be done.
So, for me, instead of telling the 'site' what they can do to make things better. How about the users tell the 'site' what they will do to make it better. Set some goals, voting/commenting/critiquing. Don't just discuss the negativity of how you feel. Change is inevitable and it will happen with or without you. So tell us what your positive reaction or even your proactive methods to maintain the strength in the community.
Participate, or don't. Just do not sit there and discuss money because either you pay and are proactive in the way it is used or you don't. The 25bones is money well spent, just for storage and the small number of active honest members here. Sure I can host my images with photobucket, or even dArt, or even my own website. But ya know what, from a selfish standpoint DPC generates very nicely for google and the more people who see my images, the better. Perhaps I can get a sale, a feature, a mag spread. Perhaps not.
The first thing I did was vote. What was the first thing you did?
|
|
|
|
12/17/2009 02:06:43 PM · #29 |
 simms
snip>>>> Next - Site Council - Refresh some of the members OR encourage them to start entering photos - seriously I know a LOT of people feel the same, its only some of us who actually vocalise it - its not a personality thing but it would be great if the perceived rule makers and enforcers are seen to be participating in what the site actually stands for - that is - Digital Photography Challenges - lead by example - enter photographs, vote on challenges, comment on entries. It would certainly gain you a lot more respect from a quiet majority of the userbase.
end snip _________________________________________
I do dispute your comment above.
The SC does participate. While I'm not a talker in the forums-others are. Some enter all the challenges some off and on.
The SC is not a group that sits behind a 'green curtain'.
Since 2002 . .
I have Votes Cast: 137,638-----I have entered 202 Challenges comments:Made: 13,338
You have Votes Cast: 12,920------you've entered 67 Challenges comments:Made: 1,832
To quote you: It would certainly gain you a lot more respect from a quiet majority of the userbase.
If I don't have your respect by now then I never will.
Discussion is a good thing. I actually like much of what you said. It's always good to get things out in the open and see what folks are thinking and feeling. Change is good. We need more changes, we will have more changes in time.
Message edited by author 2009-12-17 14:07:42. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 02:18:21 PM · #30 |
I may be wearing a blue shirt now, but for nearly 5 years I participated on SC. While 'm guilty as charged with regard to not entering a lot of challenges, you can see me 2nd in all-time votes cast (to another SC member), and 5th in forum posts. You'd never believe the latter statistic, unless you know how active I was in SC discussions. It pains me to hear people opine that the SC isn't involved in the day-to-day. You would simply not believe the amount of work that goes on.
I do wholeheartedly agree that changes/improvements are necessary, in fact I exchanged a couple PMs with Langdon earlier in the Fall on just that matter. I've watched paid membership decline for a couple years, from 3000 to under 2000, a 33% loss. Much more, and we will not have the "critical mass" necessary to sustain the site. We have certainly seen some positive changes over the past year, as Shannon stated. What we really need, however, are changes that will drive new membership and continued involvement from seasoned (notice I avoided saying "old"??) members. We should be looking to the most successful photo sites on the 'net and asking ourselves why they are so successful, and how we can equal or exceed their performance. We also need to look at how to market ourselves. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 02:29:12 PM · #31 |
Well, for me, I don't see how adding new technical features to the site will bring back the "old vibe" when, in those olden times, they didn't have those features either. Not against new features and improvements, just saying that always pushing the site and the site council for more stuff is not, to my mind, going to address the root problem that has been troubling me here of late: civility.
In my time here, I have noticed that almost any thread can become a rant and argument thread--back in my 'old days' here it was (or seems like it was) much more rare for threads to have to be locked, and there is so much more arguing, name calling, blaming, and ranting in the forums. Blocking the Rant forum is almost meaningless now.
Two factors have caused my participation to be less in the last several months: some demands on my time have forced me to be much more selective how I spend the free time I do get, and when I come here with any of that precious time, I have been much more likely to be disappointed by negativity, complaining, whining and verbal assaults in the threads and forums that used to inform and inspire me. I love to come and see the wonderful images produced by the members and users, but clicking on a forum thread now seems to be a much less rewarding thing than it used to be.
"Vibe" is, to me, not about features and watermarks and overlays, but in how the community behaves irrespective of features.
Sadly, very sadly to my mind, the only feature that would immediately allow me to directly affect the "vibe" I get here is a user-block feature, so that no matter what forum thread I am in, I won't be disturbed by The Usual Suspects. I would pay extra for that feature, so I could do a more customized, surgical "ignore," as ignoring the Rant thread is not sufficient, and individually ignoring threads is reactive, a choice to be made after the negativity has already been encountered. It is an imperfect solution, to be sure, but without it, I have just tended to ignore the entire site a bit more, instead. Which is also sad.
To be clear, I really like the site, the features, and feel the SC does a great job of being fair and equitable. The vast majority of the membership and users seem to be here for the same reasons, and there are only a small minority of members who seem to be instigators on a steady basis. But it is a pretty steady basis.
So, when I see all proposed solutions point at the SC and Langdon, I think it is kind of like blaming the "current administration" of the government (no matter what administration it is) for all the problems in society. The key difference is that we all do, to some extent, have to participate in society on some level. Participating here is completely optional (leaving out Update Button Addiction Syndrome for now :). I think a Good Vibe is entirely up to us collectively, rather than features and functions. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 03:31:36 PM · #32 |
I agree with much that has been said on both sides here, but one thing really bothers me. Instead of trying to fuel a resurgence in growth and positivity, it truly seems, at least to me, that the SC is always quick to be snippy and defensive anytime SC questions arise. Case in point, this thread. Justine and Shannon, you are two of the most transparently involved SC members around here, and I respect both of you greatly. However, comparing yourselves to Simms to show how much more superior you and other SC members are by looking at your statistics is in very poor taste. You guys accepted these positions and all of the criticism and responsibilities that go along with them. I have mentioned before that I think 'term limits' should be imposed on SC members. Its like administration anywhere. It keeps new thoughts and ideas flowing. Jumping on the defensive when questioned as a whole seems very reactive to me. What would be the harm in rotating 2 or 3 SC members every year or so? Maybe I am missing a large part of the picture altogether. Help me understand.
As far as the site as a whole, I like it right now. I have, in recent history, been more of a critic and a skeptic than a productive member of the site. I am working to change that. I have trapped myself in more rant threads than anything constructive here lately. I am adopting David's thought in the fact that religious and political discussions here rarely change the views of anyone. Thus, I am trying to avoid those unless I have anything other than bitching and personal beliefs to contribute. I was vocal about the increase in size limits and the addition of watermarking. We got our size limits, and watermarking will fall where it falls. Me being a dick about it isn't going to change it one way or the other.
With that in mind, much of the general vibe of the site does fall onto members and users. But there are some things that D&L can do to promote growth and development. The DPL was a blast and a lot of people participated. I still want to see it back. It really seemed to be a huge success from a user standpoint. I'd also like to see the mentor/student program added to the site. That may be the one thing that would spur growth more than most. I also really, really like the annual award ideas. That seems like it would be fairly easy to implement when considering the complexity of the site as a whole. I do like the expanding number of available challenges, though. I'd hate to see that shrink, but I absolutely see the point that Simms is making about pooling us all together more closely. I do not, however, like the constant retreads on so many challenges. There are so many good ideas that seem to hit the front page and disappear without  Langdon ever taking a good look at them.
Now how the hell do I summarize all that rambling. I have no idea other than to say I still love this place even with my recent gripes and bitching. I do think that there are many things that can be done to spur growth from the administration side of the table, but I also believe that we as participants, not specifically users or members, have a lot to do with the overall growth and attitudes as well. I am working on mine, so lets see where it all goes.
and let's see how many time I have to come back and edit my piss poor spelling |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 03:34:16 PM · #33 |
If you look at my statistics it's clear I have never been hugely active in the challenges, but I am passionate about the value of the site and I do still visit every day. DPC was largely responsible for pulling me back into photography after almost 10 years away from the camera. In 2004 it was encouragement from site members, such as  grigrigirl, that pulled me from my shell and got me to start taking pictures of people rather than things. I'm now coming to the end of my second full year as a semi-professional photographer and I'm hoping it will be by full time career within two years. I can honestly say that DPC changed my life and for that reason alone I will always be a loyal member.
I can also say that despite visiting the site every day, it is now rare that I submit to challenges or post in the forums. Every once in awhile I'll make a push, but usually it ends in frustration. I'm trying to expand my local portrait work and move into editorial photography. I need to challenge myself to improve every single day in order to be competitive in this industry. While I know there are some amazing photographers here, it's getting harder and harder to hear their voices through all of the other noise on the site. When I joined DPC I believed that the word challenge suggested we should challenge ourselves to learn and grow by shooting against a new challenge topic every week. The motivation was growth, not winning. What I sense now is many people hoping to bring themselves up by knocking others down. Identifying points of failure has become much more common then identifying points of success.
Photography isn't about which camera system you own or which computer platform you use. Photography also isn't always about having everything in focus or using rich saturated colors to make a pretty picture. I believe the challenge is to find a way to communicate with our viewers in a way that is meaningful. I could talk about photography for hours with anybody that is passionate about the topic and I will always try to encourage anybody that picks up a camera as a form of expression. I'm just a little frustrated that I have to dig so far now to find this type of discussion.
Message edited by author 2009-12-17 15:42:25. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 03:46:29 PM · #34 |
ericwoo Snippy OMG your right.
I am a snippy and hauty chick. However in this case I felt attacked and was responding to: lead by example - enter photographs, vote on challenges, comment on entries. It would certainly gain you a lot more respect from a quiet majority of the userbase.
It ticked me off and I'm full of piss and vinegar today. (okay *most days)
I do not feel I am superior to Simms or anyone.
Let me address term limits. Fine with me, the majority and Langdon rule. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 03:50:36 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
comparing yourselves to Simms to show how much more superior you and other SC members are by looking at your statistics is in very poor taste. |
It's not an issue of superiority. It's about demonstrating the folly of using challenge entries or number of comments as a measure of site participation and devotion. The insinuation is that anyone who doesn't enter and comment regularly must be out of touch with the site... even though the SC includes some of the most active people in both categories. Langdon himself has very few of either, yet he's arguably spent more time and effort on this site than anyone and plays an active role almost daily.
Message edited by author 2009-12-17 15:54:45. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 03:52:22 PM · #36 |
Regarding the SC bit of the talk:
Recently, the last 2-3 months, I haven't really been entering challenges or voting or commenting. I know that right now I am under bucket loads of stress and work and just simply do not have time bar a few comments on the boards etc.
Now think of it this way.
The SC have jobs, have families, have stress and on top of all that, do a job on here with no wages. Is a wonder that some might not enter as much as you would like?
I know that the two years that I have been here there have been many changes. I have learnt more than if I had gone to college. I know that if I have a question about anything, I can post a message on the board and someone will know something. Look at my recent message on asking about buying a computer for editing my photos. Tons of replies from all very knowledgeable people, people that did this for a living. Granted I had no idea what they where saying half the time, but I posted what I thought would be a good computer and they held my hand so I could buy a computer just for editing pictures.
littlegett said it best. If you want to change the site, then it is in OUR hands, we are the ones that have to participate more. It is no good if the site is whizz bang if no one commenting, doing challenges, mentoring etc etc etc.
edited to add: who the hell says Whizz Bang nowadays!!!!!!!
Message edited by author 2009-12-17 15:56:30. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 03:53:12 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
comparing yourselves to Simms to show how much more superior you and other SC members are by looking at your statistics is in very poor taste. |
It's not an issue of superiority. It's about demonstrating the folly of using challenge entries or number of comments as a measure of site participation and devotion. The insinuation is that anyone who doesn't enter and comment regularly must be out of touch with the site. Langdon himself has very few of either, yet he's arguably spent more time and effort on this site than anyone and plays an active role almost daily. |
I agree with that, but reacting defensively just seemed out of place to me. All that can be well illustrated without SC:Member comparisons. That's all I was trying to point out. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:01:28 PM · #38 |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:05:21 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
I may be wearing a blue shirt now, but for nearly 5 years I participated on SC. While 'm guilty as charged with regard to not entering a lot of challenges, you can see me 2nd in all-time votes cast (to another SC member), and 5th in forum posts. You'd never believe the latter statistic, unless you know how active I was in SC discussions. It pains me to hear people opine that the SC isn't involved in the day-to-day. You would simply not believe the amount of work that goes on.
I do wholeheartedly agree that changes/improvements are necessary, in fact I exchanged a couple PMs with Langdon earlier in the Fall on just that matter. I've watched paid membership decline for a couple years, from 3000 to under 2000, a 33% loss. Much more, and we will not have the "critical mass" necessary to sustain the site. We have certainly seen some positive changes over the past year, as Shannon stated. What we really need, however, are changes that will drive new membership and continued involvement from seasoned (notice I avoided saying "old"??) members. We should be looking to the most successful photo sites on the 'net and asking ourselves why they are so successful, and how we can equal or exceed their performance. We also need to look at how to market ourselves. |
Kirbic, you hit the biggest thing that should be spurring changes or listening to the members. If 1/3 of my customers(members) or $25,000 left my business I'd be looking at myself wondering what the hell just hit me, what can I do to get it back, what should I do to get more to join? I realize Langdon is busy, he has a new wife and a kid on the way, if it's not here already. But dang man you also have a responsibility to the people who have been putting coin into your business all these years. At least I would hope he wouldn't be taking it for granted.
Matt |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:05:57 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
I agree with much that has been said on both sides here, but one thing really bothers me. Instead of trying to fuel a resurgence in growth and positivity, it truly seems, at least to me, that the SC is always quick to be snippy and defensive anytime SC questions arise. Case in point, this thread. Justine and Shannon, you are two of the most transparently involved SC members around here, and I respect both of you greatly. However, comparing yourselves to Simms to show how much more superior you and other SC members are by looking at your statistics is in very poor taste. You guys accepted these positions and all of the criticism and responsibilities that go along with them. |
Simms specifically called out SC members for their lack of participation. The logical thing to do was to prove otherwise. What better way to prove something than numbers?
Originally posted by ericwoo:
I have mentioned before that I think 'term limits' should be imposed on SC members. Its like administration anywhere. It keeps new thoughts and ideas flowing. Jumping on the defensive when questioned as a whole seems very reactive to me. What would be the harm in rotating 2 or 3 SC members every year or so? Maybe I am missing a large part of the picture altogether. Help me understand. |
Now it sounds like you're attacking certain SC members (not necessarily Justine and Shannon) and saying some of them have been there too long (too arrogant? same rules for too long? same attitude for too long? I don't know the reason...). Remember that this is not a democracy and SC members have to maintain certain standards which Langdon chooses. We could suggest a change in the requirements, but we shouldn't be telling SC members that they've been there too long - unless there's an OBVIOUS arrogance by a certain SC member, we shouldn't be suggesting anything close to that. And if you have a problem with a specific member, feel free to report it - that's one type of request that will definitely be answered. Speaking of which, can we have a "send to Langdon and  Drew only?"-type inquiry. Complaints about SC members shouldn't be forwarded to the SC. Not that I have a problem with the SC, I <3 them =D (No, I really do. They do a lot to help this site and I have a lot of respect for them). However, inquiries concerting SC members should really only be seen by the only people "above" the SC - Drew and Langdon.
Message edited by author 2009-12-17 16:08:11. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:08:50 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
I agree with that, but reacting defensively just seemed out of place to me. All that can be well illustrated without SC:Member comparisons. That's all I was trying to point out. |
It was Simms who posted the comparisons --  scalvert and  justine were merely pointing out that they contained erroneous information ... |
...and once again, the SC is infallible...i apologize for me errant transgressions. Since you all agree, I must be wrong once again.
You guys are all illustrating my previous point. There is no need to jump to the defensive. So you got questioned. You are in a position that users and members will, from time to time, question your position, abilities, intentions, and overall usefulness to the site. It would seem to me that this part of it just goes along with the territory. Your defense could be well illustrated without calling out or comparing yourselves to the posters. Just point out what you guys have done NOT what you have done in relation to someone else that brings up a question. Why is that necessary? Your group is a figure head. Figure heads get questioned. A lot. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:10:35 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Originally posted by kirbic:
I may be wearing a blue shirt now, but for nearly 5 years I participated on SC. While 'm guilty as charged with regard to not entering a lot of challenges, you can see me 2nd in all-time votes cast (to another SC member), and 5th in forum posts. You'd never believe the latter statistic, unless you know how active I was in SC discussions. It pains me to hear people opine that the SC isn't involved in the day-to-day. You would simply not believe the amount of work that goes on.
I do wholeheartedly agree that changes/improvements are necessary, in fact I exchanged a couple PMs with Langdon earlier in the Fall on just that matter. I've watched paid membership decline for a couple years, from 3000 to under 2000, a 33% loss. Much more, and we will not have the "critical mass" necessary to sustain the site. We have certainly seen some positive changes over the past year, as Shannon stated. What we really need, however, are changes that will drive new membership and continued involvement from seasoned (notice I avoided saying "old"??) members. We should be looking to the most successful photo sites on the 'net and asking ourselves why they are so successful, and how we can equal or exceed their performance. We also need to look at how to market ourselves. |
Kirbic, you hit the biggest thing that should be spurring changes or listening to the members. If 1/3 of my customers(members) or $25,000 left my business I'd be looking at myself wondering what the hell just hit me, what can I do to get it back, what should I do to get more to join? I realize Langdon is busy, he has a new wife and a kid on the way, if it's not here already. But dang man you also have a responsibility to the people who have been putting coin into your business all these years. At least I would hope he wouldn't be taking it for granted.
Matt |
There are a lot of businesses wondering what the hell just hit them in the last year or so. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:12:29 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by george917:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
I agree with much that has been said on both sides here, but one thing really bothers me. Instead of trying to fuel a resurgence in growth and positivity, it truly seems, at least to me, that the SC is always quick to be snippy and defensive anytime SC questions arise. Case in point, this thread. Justine and Shannon, you are two of the most transparently involved SC members around here, and I respect both of you greatly. However, comparing yourselves to Simms to show how much more superior you and other SC members are by looking at your statistics is in very poor taste. You guys accepted these positions and all of the criticism and responsibilities that go along with them. |
Simms specifically called out SC members for their lack of participation. The logical thing to do was to prove otherwise. What better way to prove something than numbers?
Originally posted by ericwoo:
I have mentioned before that I think 'term limits' should be imposed on SC members. Its like administration anywhere. It keeps new thoughts and ideas flowing. Jumping on the defensive when questioned as a whole seems very reactive to me. What would be the harm in rotating 2 or 3 SC members every year or so? Maybe I am missing a large part of the picture altogether. Help me understand. |
Now it sounds like you're attacking certain SC members (not necessarily Justine and Shannon) and saying some of them have been there too long (too arrogant? same rules for too long? same attitude for too long? I don't know the reason...). Remember that this is not a democracy and SC members have to maintain certain standards which Langdon chooses. We could suggest a change in the requirements, but we shouldn't be telling SC members that they've been there too long - unless there's an OBVIOUS arrogance by a certain SC member, we shouldn't be suggesting anything close to that. And if you have a problem with a specific member, feel free to report it - that's one type of request that will definitely be answered. Speaking of which, can we have a "send to Langdon and Drew only?"-type inquiry. Complaints about SC members shouldn't be forwarded to the SC. Not that I have a problem with the SC, I <3 them =D (No, I really do. They do a lot to help this site and I have a lot of respect for them). However, inquiries concerting SC members should really only be seen by the only people "above" the SC - Drew and Langdon. |
I currently have no specific complaints regarding any specific member of the SC. I just don't see how leaving the same people in these SC spots in any way can contribute to new growth, new approaches, and new ideas. Political leaders change. Company CEOs change. Committee chairs change. Its just in line with the whole ideal of growth and change. It really isn't anything personal. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:14:07 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by george917:
can we have a "send to Langdon and Drew only?"-type inquiry. |
Administrative Inquiry tickets are only visible to D&L. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:16:46 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by MattO:
Originally posted by kirbic:
I may be wearing a blue shirt now, but for nearly 5 years I participated on SC. While 'm guilty as charged with regard to not entering a lot of challenges, you can see me 2nd in all-time votes cast (to another SC member), and 5th in forum posts. You'd never believe the latter statistic, unless you know how active I was in SC discussions. It pains me to hear people opine that the SC isn't involved in the day-to-day. You would simply not believe the amount of work that goes on.
I do wholeheartedly agree that changes/improvements are necessary, in fact I exchanged a couple PMs with Langdon earlier in the Fall on just that matter. I've watched paid membership decline for a couple years, from 3000 to under 2000, a 33% loss. Much more, and we will not have the "critical mass" necessary to sustain the site. We have certainly seen some positive changes over the past year, as Shannon stated. What we really need, however, are changes that will drive new membership and continued involvement from seasoned (notice I avoided saying "old"??) members. We should be looking to the most successful photo sites on the 'net and asking ourselves why they are so successful, and how we can equal or exceed their performance. We also need to look at how to market ourselves. |
Kirbic, you hit the biggest thing that should be spurring changes or listening to the members. If 1/3 of my customers(members) or $25,000 left my business I'd be looking at myself wondering what the hell just hit me, what can I do to get it back, what should I do to get more to join? I realize Langdon is busy, he has a new wife and a kid on the way, if it's not here already. But dang man you also have a responsibility to the people who have been putting coin into your business all these years. At least I would hope he wouldn't be taking it for granted.
Matt |
There are a lot of businesses wondering what the hell just hit them in the last year or so. |
Well hopefully all of those business' are listening to their customers who are suggesting what might have caused it or what might help rectify it...........at this point we don't even know if they do know or care.
Matt |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:17:08 PM · #46 |
Wouldn't it make sense that the SC members that participate would be the ones posting on a thread such as this? The concern is about the few SC members who have not entered a challenge in a few years (or uploaded photos) and have not posted in 6 months. Such members of the SC exist. It's possible they are busy little beavers behind the scenes, but how would one know?
Incidently, why do I have 10 threads listed in my "last 10 threads posted to" section on my profile while most SC members only have 4-6? I'm truly asking. Does the script possibly count threads that are posted in the SC only forum which are invisible? |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:27:40 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Probably the "how much money does this site generate?" question is not a helpful avenue for this thread to go down. |
I totally agree with this.. My enjoyment of this site does not hinge on Langdon's profit.. It does however hinge on the CREATIVITY of the site...
I appreciate all of the TECHNICAL upgrades the site has implemented.. But, from a creative perspective, it's well.. about as exciting as it's neutral grey appearance.. The idea that challenges repeat themselves boggles me and has me looking each week to see if I want to enter, only to say, nahhhh, I did that one already.. Or, geez, your kidding me, THIS is the challenge !!! Why ??? Is it really this hard to come up with NEW challenge ideas each week... I've never done it, so I'm asking that as a serious question.. Maybe it's harder then it sounds.. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:30:19 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by kandykarml:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Probably the "how much money does this site generate?" question is not a helpful avenue for this thread to go down. |
I totally agree with this.. My enjoyment of this site does not hinge on Langdon's profit.. It does however hinge on the CREATIVITY of the site...
I appreciate all of the TECHNICAL upgrades the site has implemented.. But, from a creative perspective, it's well.. about as exciting as it's neutral grey appearance.. The idea that challenges repeat themselves boggles me and has me looking each week to see if I want to enter, only to say, nahhhh, I did that one already.. Or, geez, your kidding me, THIS is the challenge !!! Why ??? Is it really this hard to come up with NEW challenge ideas each week... I've never done it, so I'm asking that as a serious question.. Maybe it's harder then it sounds.. |
Best thing to do is try. I know there have been threads in the past. Perhaps start a new thread, title it 'Possible new Challenge Topics' and post about a dozen or so. Then see what everyone else posts.
Gotta remember, topics should be something that can be covered world wide, from the city to the farm to the mountain hideaway. In other words, making the challenge to shoot a historical or famous building would not do well because some people do not have access to such marvels.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:32:11 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by kandykarml:
The idea that challenges repeat themselves boggles me and has me looking each week to see if I want to enter, only to say, nahhhh, I did that one already.. Or, geez, your kidding me, THIS is the challenge !!! Why ??? Is it really this hard to come up with NEW challenge ideas each week... I've never done it, so I'm asking that as a serious question.. Maybe it's harder then it sounds.. |
Nope. Very easy. Start here. |
|
|
|
12/17/2009 04:34:15 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The concern is about the few SC members who have not entered a challenge in a few years (or uploaded photos) and have not posted in 6 months. |
Just like the challenges, not every member is actively participating every week or month. Only 8-10 SC members are active at any given time, and they handle the daily administrative tasks (I think there used to be 6 or 8 total). Some SC might not participate at all for extended stretches, and it's not really a problem. More are added or retired if Langdon feels there's a need.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Does the script possibly count threads that are posted in the SC only forum which are invisible? |
Probably. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 08:43:23 PM  |
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: 04/23/2024 08:43:23 PM EDT.
|
