Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Kevin Raber on October 08, 2017, 07:49:37 pm
-
Enough is Enough! The Coffee Corner has always been a place to share a thought or view not covered in our other forum topics and relating to the field of photography. Lately, it has gotten to be a political and religious platform. This will be no more. There are plenty of other platforms to express your political and religious views. We will also not tolerate the personal attacks on others because of what they say or believe.
From this point on if any political or other rhetoric appears in the Coffee Corner or any topic, it will be promptly removed. If there are personal attacks on forum members then the poster will be banned. There is enough rudeness out in the world today. This forum will not be part of that.
Let’s get back to what this forum is all about - Photography. There is enough going on in this field to have many discussions.
Thank you for being a part of the Luminous-Landscape family. And, thanks for your understanding.
-
Hear, hear!!! Clap, Clap!!!! I'll drink to that.
-
Kevin, my apologies for any part I have played in this. Thanks for all your work on lula past and future.
James
-
Hear, hear!!! Clap, Clap!!!! I'll drink to that.
+1
-
Bravo!
-
Finally.
-
Bravo!
-
...
-
Bravo!
Amen!
-
Glad to see this Kevin. Well done.
-
Great, long live photography on this site 8)
-
Finally.
+1
coffee really tastes better this morning.
-
...
I get that message quite frequently. I've no idea why. It's never yet been true.
Jeremy
-
Good decision.
-
I took to drinking tea rather than wasting nervous energy in The Coffee Corner...way too much Java ristretto!
-
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Murner.Nerrenbeschwerung.kind.jpg/389px-Murner.Nerrenbeschwerung.kind.jpg
-
How about the Climate Change (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=117612.1380) subject?
-
What about the photo art threads?
-
I never got to read the Trump XCIV debate.
-
How about the Climate Change (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=117612.1380) subject?
Pieter's asking a fair question. "Climate change" discussions have little to do with climate change, but a lot to do with politics.
-
How about the Climate Change (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=117612.1380) subject?
That one is still open as of right now.
-
On balance it's probably a good thing those threads are gone and will not be allowed in the future. A lot of the discussion was instructive, and a lot wasn't. I don't think there was anything wrong with them, a priori, but I suppose they don't really belong on this board. As others have said, it's not as if there is a shortage of places to discuss these things.
-
This would be also a good time to ban all long exposure pictures of moving water - it's all fake and too much of it, time to get back to the real photography.
-
Pieter's asking a fair question. "Climate change" discussions have little to do with climate change, but a lot to do with politics.
True. While the "photo art threads" are certainly about photography, which the "Climate change" thread isn't.
-
This would be also a good time to ban all long exposure pictures of moving water - it's all fake and too much of it, time to get back to the real photography.
Half of me wants to call this extremist, the other half wants to agree. :)
-
So split the difference, Robert, and just sort of agree with exceptions.
-
How about the Climate Change (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=117612.1380) subject?
Yes, I left the door ajar. I quote the new Coffee Corner header:
Inflammatory topics will be deleted at Moderator's discretion.
I hesitated on that thread since it is generally civil. However the apparent opinion is that it too should go. Let's see what 24 hours brings.
-
Chris, maybe the answer is to start a new segment titled "Politics and Fistfights." Unlike "The Coffee Corner" that would make clear the purpose of the segment. Then everybody could have at it, including Schewe, and those wanting to avoid nastiness could just stay away from it. It would be the reverse of a "safe space."
-
I can understand that the Trump/ Vegas threads had nothing to do with Photography and let to clashing opinions;
However, I found it very interesting to see how people can judge the same occurrences completely different.
-
Bravo!
+1
Rand
-
I applaud the decision, wholeheartedly. It was interesting while it lasted, if only to underscore how dramatically some individual's world view differs from mine.
-
Amusing that many of those who complained vociferously about the threads were prolific contributors.
-
Amusing that many of those who complained vociferously about the threads were prolific contributors.
Isn't it? :)
-
I'll take care of the climate change topic later today.
-
... A lot of the discussion was instructive, and a lot wasn't...
Which it the cost and benefit of free speech. You can't just get the good part all the time. As Marilyn (that would be Monroe, for the Millennials) would say: “if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best.”
... it's not as if there is a shortage of places to discuss these things.
Like where?
Where else I can discuss such things not with total, mostly anonymous strangers, but with real people who I got to know over the years reasonably well, from their photography, to their musings and writings about photography, from their professional history to their family history, forming a pretty good idea of who they are, and forming a respect for what they did in their life and with their life? Those are the people I am willing to listen to, engage with, exchange opinions, even if we disagree (especially if we disagree). And stay friends even if we politely disagree. Those who can not disagree politely, should be banned and the offending post removed. Not the thread.
If it was not clear from the above, I am strongly against removing whole threads and banning certain subjects.
-
I applaud the owners of this site. I think this will be a good decision. Moderating a forum is a tough job. I think it has been demonstrated that some posters can't be relied to self-moderate.
It is not like there is a shortage of political forums on the Internets Tubes where one can find all the confirmation they seek.
Thank you for taking this difficult decision.
-
Which it the cost and benefit of free speech. You can't just get the good part all the time. As Marilyn (that would be Monroe, for the Millennials) would say: “if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best.”
Like where?
Where else I can discuss such things not with total, mostly anonymous strangers, but with real people who I got to know over the years reasonably well, from their photography, to their musings and writings about photography, from their professional history to their family history, forming a pretty good idea of who they are, and forming a respect for what they did in their life and with their life? Those are the people I am willing to listen to, engage with, exchange opinions, even if we disagree (especially if we disagree). And stay friends even if we politely disagree. Those who can not disagree politely, should be banned and the offending post removed. Not the thread.
If it was not clear from the above, I am strongly against removing whole threads and banning certain subjects.
This is a fair point, I think. Nicely stated.
-
Which it the cost and benefit of free speech. You can't just get the good part all the time. ... Those who can not disagree politely, should be banned and the offending post removed. Not the thread.
If it was not clear from the above, I am strongly against removing whole threads and banning certain subjects.
Noted - and if I had the time, I might choose to selectively edit raucous exchanges. However I do not and unfortunately not all posters share your disciplined restraint.
-
Where else I can discuss such things not with total, mostly anonymous strangers, but with real people who I got to know over the years reasonably well, from their photography, to their musings and writings about photography, from their professional history to their family history, forming a pretty good idea of who they are, and forming a respect for what they did in their life and with their life?
A Private Facebook Group could be a good home for you and your LULA buddies.
-
Noted - and if I had the time, I might choose to selectively edit raucous exchanges. However I do not and unfortunately not all posters share your disciplined restraint.
It is not easy indeed. One suggestion could be to limit the number of posts per topic? It does not make sense to have topics that have been dragging along for months and months. Besides, one can continue to discuss to their hearts content via private messages?
-
So split the difference, Robert, and just sort of agree with exceptions.
Excellent idea.
-
I’m fine with killing off political “discussion” entirely here. The ‘nets are chock-a-block with outlets for ranting & chanting & posturing, which is what all this kerfuffle has descended to. One of my fav guitar sites made such a choice a few years ago, which resulted in a drastic decrease in jerkitude (the jerks bailed) and a corresponding increase in not only relevant but humane conversation.
-Dave-
-
Which it the cost and benefit of free speech. You can't just get the good part all the time. As Marilyn (that would be Monroe, for the Millennials) would say: “if you can't handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don't deserve me at my best.”
Like where?
Where else I can discuss such things not with total, mostly anonymous strangers, but with real people who I got to know over the years reasonably well, from their photography, to their musings and writings about photography, from their professional history to their family history, forming a pretty good idea of who they are, and forming a respect for what they did in their life and with their life? Those are the people I am willing to listen to, engage with, exchange opinions, even if we disagree (especially if we disagree). And stay friends even if we politely disagree. Those who can not disagree politely, should be banned and the offending post removed. Not the thread.
If it was not clear from the above, I am strongly against removing whole threads and banning certain subjects.
Sorry, only just noticed that there was a question directed at me. Truth is I was just assuming that there are lots of places to discuss these things, but I don't actually know any because I have never sought them out. I guess others have answered in the meantime. It's a fair point to enjoy discussions with people you already know something about. I can't give you any advice about how to find any.
I understand your point about not liking the removal of threads or banning certain subjects. But this is a matter for the owners of the board to decide. They are in effect publishers, and like any other publisher they have final say on what they want to publish.
-
It is not easy indeed. One suggestion could be to limit the number of posts per topic?
Please no. That's the kind of silliness found on the DPR forums with a silly 149 'arbitrary' limit to any thread.
-
Like where?
Where else I can discuss such things not with total, mostly anonymous strangers, but with real people who I got to know over the years reasonably well ...
How about down at your local bar, after everybody has downed a few?
-
But be sure you're carrying.
-
A Private Facebook Group could be a good home for you and your LULA buddies.
There was a similar problem back in the day on Photosig during the Gulf war. One solution by a bunch of us from both sides was to start a forum on Delphi and just go there to duke it, no holds bared. It worked very well for a number of years but slowly faded away. Interestingly, a number of us became RL friends and are still in contact and visit while we travel or we have get togethers.
For those of you looking for combat, consider this option.
-
But be sure you're carrying.
Careful, or Chris will have to close Kevin's thread ;)
Cheers,
Bart
-
But be sure you're carrying.
It wouldn't be fair to the barkeep to bring your own sixpack.
Oh! You meant carrying something else! ;)
Maybe that's what makes the Internet (slightly) safer than the local pub. The NRA hasn't yet figured out how to send bullets over the Internet. 8)
-
But be sure you're carrying...
... a camera.
-
... a camera.
+1.
-
But be sure you're carrying.
... a camera.
Ahhh, but what camera? If you thought the Trump threads were contentious . . .
-
Ahhh, but what camera? If you thought the Trump threads were contentious . . .
ANY camera is better than no camera. :P
-
Obviously, the best camera in a bar is a Nikkormat with a Spiratone 400 mm attached. Walk in with one of those and everyone else will show you respect.
-
I’d carry one of those Spiratone-ish 420–800mm zooms. No need for paranoia when you can out-magnify the competition!
-Dave-
-
Please no. That's the kind of silliness found on the DPR forums with a silly 149 'arbitrary' limit to any thread.
The number is up to the moderators, of course. What silliness is worse: 149 posts, or having threads that go on for months with hundreds of (mostly) useless posts after a while?
Another option would be for each thread to have a limited time span, say 2 months.
-
Except the "Touch Of Humor" thread. We would lose a lot of good jokes if it were limited only to 149 posts or 2 months in duration.
-
I have never paid any attention to the political and contentious threads here. I don't think they belong in a photography web site. I applaud Kevin's decision on this.
-
Except the "Touch Of Humor" thread. We would lose a lot of good jokes if it were limited only to 149 posts or 2 months in duration.
Could always start another one...
-
Yes, I left the door ajar. I quote the new Coffee Corner header:
Inflammatory topics will be deleted at Moderator's discretion.
I hesitated on the Climate Change thread since it is generally civil. However the apparent opinion is that it too should go. Let's see what 24 hours brings.
And since that thread too is (intentionally?) taking a more strident political tone, it has been removed.
-
The number is up to the moderators, of course. What silliness is worse: 149 posts, or having threads that go on for months with hundreds of (mostly) useless posts after a while?
IMHO, the later. Keep this idea in mind too: “Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it.” Mark Twain (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1244.Mark_Twain)
-
And since that thread too is (intentionally?) taking a more strident political tone, it has been removed.
I think that's the right decision, Chris, even though I greatly enjoy arguing with people who have different backgrounds and views. Let's get on with photography and leave the political arguments to other sites.
-
I think that's the right decision, Chris, even though I greatly enjoy arguing with people who have different backgrounds and views. Let's get on with photography and leave the political arguments to other sites.
+1
-
I am sorry that the Climate Change thread was taken down from view. Unlike the Trump threads, this one was data driven from the first post that Ray made. It's unfortunate that others weighed in much later in the process and turned it into a forum for polemics as opposed to focusing on data and policy choices. We are poorer for this decision as climate change has an obvious impact on photography, both negative and positive.
-
I'm gonna let you get away with that one without comment, Alan, though it's damn hard to do.
-
If it was not clear from the above, I am strongly against removing whole threads and banning certain subjects.
I do in fact agree with Slobodan on this.
The very fact that we are not "into politics" made these discussions very valuable.
I am saddened by the overall trend to close oneself from debate.
Anyway, I can only respect the decision that was taken, but I am not sure what harm was being done as long as these discussions were kept in the Coffee corner section.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
+1
-
I am sorry that the Climate Change thread was taken down from view. Unlike the Trump threads, this one was data driven from the first post that Ray made. It's unfortunate that others weighed in much later in the process and turned it into a forum for polemics as opposed to focusing on data and policy choices. We are poorer for this decision as climate change has an obvious impact on photography, both negative and positive.
Of course I agree with Alan Goldhammer on these points, not surprisingly. ;)
After the removal of the various Trump threads, I was considering locking the Climate Change thread in the hope of preserving it, because many of the links to scientific studies, and the arguments for and against the issue, might have provided some interesting information, ideas and concepts, to future readers.
However, since I had criticized another poster for locking his own thread on climate change skepticism, because the thread wasn't going his own way, I couldn't justify locking my thread. And even if I had locked it, that would have been no guarantee that the thread would not be removed.
As has often been said, everyone can have an opinion, on whatever subject. Expressing an opinion is usually very easy. The real difficulty is in justifying the opinion with reasoned explanations and evidence.
This also applies to all critiques of photographs and camera performance. To simply state that one likes or dislikes a particular image, or that it's 'great' or 'cool', or 'crap' as the case may be, says something about the person making the comment, but nothing about the photo.
I'm also in complete agreement with Slobodan's earlier comment in this thread.
Where else I can discuss such things not with total, mostly anonymous strangers, but with real people who I got to know over the years reasonably well, from their photography, to their musings and writings about photography, from their professional history to their family history, forming a pretty good idea of who they are, and forming a respect for what they did in their life and with their life? Those are the people I am willing to listen to, engage with, exchange opinions, even if we disagree (especially if we disagree). And stay friends even if we politely disagree. Those who can not disagree politely, should be banned and the offending post removed. Not the thread.
If it was not clear from the above, I am strongly against removing whole threads and banning certain subjects.
-
Whilst I of course respect the rights of the site owners/managers/moderators to act as they feel most appropriate, and in having more than a modicum of sympathy for having to wade through a lot of the material as I have moderated discussion boards in the past, I have to agree with Ray and Slobo. Yes, I did actually type that :-)
But it is what it is and that's fine.
-
A good metric would be to keep track of the traffic to this site and compare the traffic to when we had the political threads and after they were removed.
-
A good metric would be to keep track of the traffic to this site and compare the traffic to when we had the political threads and after they were removed.
Yes this would be something good to do. One does have some preliminary data in terms of the number of web pages created by users on each of the three topics (gun control, Trump and Climate Change). Each topic did engage LuLa users to a very strong degree and for a lot of us the sharing of differing view points was certainly interesting.
-
Censorship and democracy are always fighting together in their specific space of time.
Today a platform like Facebook determines for many what is - and what is not - appropriate.
And looking at my television i can choose between lot of serial killers - the latest one even more sadistic than the former… i see on screen an increase in extreme sadistic and explicit violence.
On the other hand nudity and sex -a more normal part of everyones life- is almost completely absent.
In the US often pictures of naked children are considered child abuse while mostly in Europe they are considered just naked children / art.
I saw a documentary about Hugh Hefner and Playboy..
The doc was far more sexual-prudent than the subject…otherwise they cannot sell it to everyone…
I find it a hopeful democratic sign that the site Wikipedia runs very good with contribution from everywhere and without being commercial.
back to this site…
The makers have a right to change the site as they like, and also the forum.
They do not have the responsibility Facebook has because of its relative small size.
Also they clearly intended to make a photographic site targeted at photographers.
I can imagine they want to put at some point a hold on other subjects than photographic ones.
I always think; If you start a bar, you imagine some kind of atmosphere you are looking for.
But you never know what audience will come in and maybe they overtake the atmosphere in a way you never imagined or wanted.
In this case the makers have some means to address that.
-
Pieter, thank you for that thoughtful post which comes closest to reflecting the reality of this issue.
I too enjoyed some of the debates that flowed across the coffee corner and regret the diminished content. The simple fact is that with the recent debasement of public discourse, the tone and temper of the debates in the Coffee Corner rather tended to reflect that reality. The time, patience and judgment necessary to moderate such debates is beyond the resources of three people whose time is better used doing the things that keep this site alive.
-
There are tons of sites on the internet for open political discourse.
I support the decision to set guidelines on the "Coffee Corner."
-
There are tons of sites on the internet for open political discourse.
I support the decision to set guidelines on the "Coffee Corner."
Agreed. And I too prefer to see our moderators spending time doing what they are very good at: creating excellent photography-related material for LuLa's members and readers.
-Eric
-
For what it's worth, I'm inclined to agree with Slobodan on this one (albeit not much else that he posted to the Trump threads):
Where else I can discuss such things not with total, mostly anonymous strangers, but with real people who I got to know over the years reasonably well, from their photography, to their musings and writings about photography, from their professional history to their family history, forming a pretty good idea of who they are, and forming a respect for what they did in their life and with their life? Those are the people I am willing to listen to, engage with, exchange opinions, even if we disagree (especially if we disagree). And stay friends even if we politely disagree. Those who can not disagree politely, should be banned and the offending post removed. Not the thread.
Yup: well said!
-
Yes, I left the door ajar. I quote the new Coffee Corner header:
Inflammatory topics will be deleted at Moderator's discretion.
I hesitated on that thread since it is generally civil. However the apparent opinion is that it too should go. Let's see what 24 hours brings.
The Climate Change thread started weirding me out not because of the typical LuLa political back and forth, but because I started seeing my points about the "Super Fund" issues as priorities after the recent devastating hurricanes being mentioned more on broadcast news media. What I've so far found out is that it's far worse than I thought especially in east Houston and Puerto Rico.
IOW I say it here and it gets answered and/or addressed more on network news TV. Started thinking maybe movers and shakers in the news media are reading LuLa Coffee Corner topics.
And now I come back after being away several weeks from that thread to find it missing and from the provided link in this thread as closed.
I'm all for the clean up of the Coffee Corner, but that Climate Change thread just started to get strange for me at least.
-
IOW I say it here and it gets answered and/or addressed more on network news TV. Started thinking maybe movers and shakers in the news media are reading LuLa Coffee Corner topics.
You sound surprised ... ;)
Or, to paraphrase a recent (fake?) media comment about an obsession with predecessors, related to another closed (series of) thread(s):
Some people may have money but they can't buy class.
Cheers,
Bart
-
You sound surprised ... ;)
Or, to paraphrase a recent (fake?) media comment about an obsession with predecessors, related to another closed (series of) thread(s):
Some people may have money but they can't buy class.
Cheers,
Bart
That's why so many rich people are unhappy and can't retain relationships. Not only can you not buy class, but money can atually make somebody born into class lose it - both the class and the money.
I play the lottery every week in the distant hope of being able to escape the old-age quandry of low-level death duties and how those will affect one's kids. I do not want to win hundreds of millions; I want to win between five and ten. That could perhaps guarantee fiscal sercurity for the rest of my life and the lives of my descendents, too, as they'd instantly get most of it - I don't have the outlets, or the desires, to blow it on myself, in part a product of stage-of-life. I have been friends with people owning many of those millions (earned) and those numbers have not brought peace of mind: they have brought heightened concern and worry about conservation, protection and continuity of said sums. I saw little sense of joy. Not even in the toys or in the homes. If anything, owning vast sums can turn one into a recluse and totally suspicious of every new personal connection that comes along. And that includes the various legal and accountancy companies that suck fees every year.
Really, envy and hatred of the rich is a misplaced political emotion. It certainly provides piles of ammunition for politicians, but deep down, their targets deserve at least a little sigh of sympathy. And yes, there is a difference between rich and criminal.
Rob
-
IMHO, the later. Keep this idea in mind too: “Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it.” Mark Twain (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1244.Mark_Twain)
But LuLa is not telling anyone they can't have steak (political arguments), they are just telling people that they can't have steak (political arguments) on their webpage. LULA is not not restricting anyone from engaging in either steak eating nor political arguing elsewhere.
All of us are free to start our own website and make our own rules about political arguments or the discussion of any topic.... just like the owners of LULA can.
Their site, their rules, their decisions.
Your site, your rules, your decisions.
That's the beauty of the Internets Tubes.
-
I would have thought that a forum centred around landscape photography would have found the greening of our planet from enhanced CO2 in the atmosphere, to be of some relevance, and a topic worth discussing, especially in the 'coffee corner'.
I personally get great pleasure from viewing and photographing scenes of lush vegetation, forests, waterfalls, and so on. That's one of the reasons I post on this forum. It's one of the reason why I'm concerned about the dynamic range of camera specifications, for example. I sometimes like to see realistic detail in the undergrowth, in some of my landscape photos.
Enhanced CO2 in the atmosphere definitely helps green our planet, and any warming effect from enhanced CO2 causes increased rainfall which also contributes to greater plant growth. Hallelujah! ;D
-
Enhanced CO2 in the atmosphere definitely helps green our planet, and any warming effect from enhanced CO2 causes increased rainfall which also contributes to greater plant growth. Hallelujah! ;D
Warning, warning, warning ----------------unsupported political discussion now beginning----------------warning, warning, warning ---------------where is the moderator?
-
Warning because of warming? Warming effect and increased rainfall can lead to foggy conditions in low laying areas.
One way to combat it is to use B+W Light Red filter which cuts through the haze and it also helps to separate various shades of green in foliage.
-
Good for you, Les. That brought the discussion back into the realm of photography.
-
Warning because of warming? Warming effect and increased rainfall can lead to foggy conditions in low laying areas.
One way to combat it is to use B+W Light Red filter which cuts through the haze and it also helps to separate various shades of green in foliage.
Can a polarising filter help as well?
-
Sometimes a bit of mist is quite nice. ;)
-
Yes, Ray. ;) And your picture is also very nice.
-
Funny: I remember one English teacher chiding somebody for using the word "nice" because it meant almost absolutely nothing at all - it hardly even managed to signify lukewarm, yet it is a very popular word in photographic circles. Modern dictionaries have attempted to alter that word's worth so as to justify its continued usage... Perhaps it's all about political correctness.
;-)
Rob
-
I had a teacher say the same thing about nice but I find it a very flexible word. It can be used as moderate praise, imply it's all well and good but and other nuance. In fact 'my word that's nice' is quite genuine effusive praise (from me at least).
Teachers had some funny ideas :)
-
I had a teacher say the same thing about nice but I find it a very flexible word. It can be used as moderate praise, imply it's all well and good but and other nuance. In fact 'my word that's nice' is quite genuine effusive praise (from me at least).
Teachers had some funny ideas :)
It's a long-term danger/result of the job: it couldn't turn out otherwise, considering the people they have to be near most of the day!
;-)
Rob
P.S. Today, the main worry is whether or not the pension towards which they pay will actually materialise... On top of that, they face constant "Grand Strategy" plans from the younger people with zero teaching experience, but much networking, quango and theoretical/ideological bullshit behind them. These "kids" come up with new plans that the older teachers to whom these abortions are presented sigh, and if they feel bolshy enough, point out the fact that the same crap, under a different banner, had been touted and had failed twenty years earlier. Why? because nothing planned by technocrats in offices can defeat parental indifference to education. It is a self-perpetuating thing that has broken as many teacher hearts as it has destroyed bright kids lacking the home support that education demands.
-
Some of my teachers had some nice ideas. :D
-
I have nice memories from Nice.
-
My niece visited Nice once as part of a school trip. She thought it was nice.
-
Q.E.D.
;-)
Rob
-
I would be happy if someone called one of my photographs nice.
-
I would be happy if someone called one of my photographs nice.
Not a problem - we are all here to help:
one of your photographs is nice!
(Just kidding - I'm sure that many of them are.)
:-)
Rob
-
;D ;D ;D
-
Hey Ray, your picture is easy on the eyes. Well done.
-
Hey Ray, your picture is easy on the eyes. Well done.
Thanks. Just in case anyone is wondering what that white building is on the left of the photo, it's the World Peace Pagoda.
Here's a closer shot of it, plus a 100% crop, taken from the same position with a telephoto lens on a clearer day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanti_Stupa,_Pokhara
-
This is meant to be The Coffee Corner - can we please keep discussions away from photography......
Actually on a serious note, I did think some of the topics had got out hand. Particularly the Trump tirade. Politics and religion, to name two, are very interesting topics to discuss, but online forums so easily deteriorate. The views of photographers who I admire greatly when on the subject of photography, I find completely at odds with mine on more controversial subjects. Nothing wrong with that, but my real friends I meet with and we have invested time and love in our relationships. You on LL are my 'cyber friends', not that I don't value you, but the main thing we have in common is photography - and that's the way I think it is best kept.
I have learnt much from reading your views on politics, gun laws etc - but they are too emotive a subject it seems to discuss online for long. If Parliament and the Senate cannot agree on the best way forward on subjects like Brexit and Gun-Control, what hope for us to agree or come to a consensus. There are no absolutes in most of these discussions, but some individuals seem to think there are.
The climate change discussion was great - when it stuck to the science.
I do not believe in a god, others do. I don't believe that citizens should have the right to carry guns, others do. Never say never, but these are two subjects I am unlikely to change my beliefs on. I would happily debate the topics, but many of us have deep-seated views on these and many more. I have respect for those who hold opposite views to mine - lots of my best friends are religious (including my wife) - even my neighbour has a licensed rifle (not for shooting people obviously).
I've always thought of the LL forum, which is the only forum I have regularly posted in, as like a meeting place in either a pub or my kitchen. It's a place to exchange views, seek and offer advice etc. I think the discourse should follow the same sort of etiquette. Friendly, sometimes probing, but always with good humour. It's okay to disagree - but say that and move on without banging on over and over the same point.
Not everyone will agree with my view and I'm sure there are flaws in my logic. But It's just my own personal guideline for using a forum - even though I sometimes have been guilty of transgressing.....
Jim
-
....
I've always thought of the LL forum, which is the only forum I have regularly posted in, as like a meeting place in either a pub or my kitchen. It's a place to exchange views, seek and offer advice etc. I think the discourse should follow the same sort of etiquette. Friendly, sometimes probing, but always with good humour. It's okay to disagree - but say that and move on without banging on over and over the same point.
Alas, 'etiquette', 'Friendly' & 'good humour' became qualities in very short supply.
Neither Kevin nor I have the time or inclination to read all posts in order to properly moderate for the absence of these qualities. The result is the arbitrary and swingeing deletion of whole threads. This will continue for the foreseeable future. Thus while the Coffee Corner may contain non-photographic threads, those that inflame will be deleted.
-
Beautifully expressed, Jim. Thanks for posting that.
(But: It's OK to post photographs of coffee, isn't it? :D )
Eric
-
only if they are Italian espresso pictures ! ;)
-
only if they are Italian espresso pictures ! ;)
and no flaming Sambuca!
-
It might also be worth mentioning that Michael was considerably more strict on these points than Kevin or Chris have been.
-
It's good to see talk about coffee in the Coffee Corner.
Perhaps we need an Absinthe Corner for those who want to live more dangerously. :D
-
It's good to see talk about coffee in the Coffee Corner.
Perhaps we need an Absinthe Corner for those who want to live more dangerously. :D
With a wormwood and gall subsection for the chronically despondent?
Or a Parisian artist subsection for the artsy Bohemians?
:D
Tom
-
LuLa is starting to remind me of my alma mater (Univ. of Chicago), known to students as:
-
LuLa is starting to remind me of my alma mater (Univ. of Chicago), known to students as:
I hope you are still having fun, Slobodan. If not, maybe you need to put some additives in your coffee. ;)
Eric
-
LuLa is starting to remind me of my alma mater (Univ. of Chicago), known to students as:
Slobodan, I think your post should be moved to the "Wormwood & Gall" section. :D
Tom
-
Sounds to me as though the Coffee Corner is now expected to reflect only the completely trivial comments that one often gets from a boring group of so-called 'normal' people; comments like ,"Ooh! Isn't this coffee delicious", "I like this cream bun. I think I'll order another one of these". "I like your shirt by the way. Where did you buy that?"
All serious discussions on major issues that affect us all and possibly the future of our species, that one might expect from a group of intelligent people sitting down for coffee, is now banned, it seems.
-
When you close one venue for people to vent, the pent-up emotions explode in unexpected places. Latest example: one fine gentleman went ballistic on another fine gentleman over... get this... color theory charts (the medium format forum). I felt like I was reading a CNN article on the 45th.
-
Perhaps we need an Absinthe Corner for those who want to live more dangerously. :D
I understand that absinthe makes the heart grow fonder.
-
Sounds to me as though the Coffee Corner is now expected to reflect only the completely trivial comments...
Can't help thinking the mods would have done better banning +1, nice, wow and the like.
-
LuLa is starting to remind me of my alma mater (Univ. of Chicago), known to students as:
My alma mater, University of California Santa Barbara (UCSB) is more commonly known as U Can Study Buzzed. Alas, I don't think anyone made nifty T-Shirts up.
-
Sounds to me as though the Coffee Corner is now expected to reflect only the completely trivial comments that one often gets from a boring group of so-called 'normal' people; comments like ,"Ooh! Isn't this coffee delicious", "I like this cream bun. I think I'll order another one of these". "I like your shirt by the way. Where did you buy that?"
All serious discussions on major issues that affect us all and possibly the future of our species, that one might expect from a group of intelligent people sitting down for coffee, is now banned, it seems.
Can we start a 'new' climate change thread that only focuses on research that is being published? What if you and I write a preface to the thread stating something like that and that any deviation will result in the thread going away? there is a new report from some of your countrymen (University of Melbourne) predicts a 1.3m rise in sea levels unless coal burning power plants are phased out.
-
Can't help thinking the mods would have done better banning +1, nice, wow and the like.
Me 2; +1
Rob
-
Can't help thinking the mods would have done better banning +1, nice, wow and the like.
Wow!
+1.
Nice!
...
the like.
-
I do think, though, that politics and religion are not really suitable subjects for this website. I say this, because despite being fringe matters (regarding LuLa), they also stir up deeply felt emotions, and these can easily spread across into the photographic part of the conversation, creating unspoken, subliminal attitides that really can't do other than colour everything else where opinions are shared. Maybe not such a good idea.
Life has to have a wider gamut that those two terrors!
Rob
-
I say this, because despite being fringe matters (regarding LuLa), they also stir up deeply felt emotions.......
Rob,
Stirring up deeply felt emotions is good, in my opinion. To progress, whether in Photography or any other discipline, we need to examine and contemplate on our deeply felt emotions, in order to avoid errors and to gain insight.
-
Can we start a 'new' climate change thread that only focuses on research that is being published? What if you and I write a preface to the thread stating something like that and that any deviation will result in the thread going away? there is a new report from some of your countrymen (University of Melbourne) predicts a 1.3m rise in sea levels unless coal burning power plants are phased out.
I would be open that, Alan. All my ideas on the subject are based upon what I think and determine makes sense to me, from a rational perspective. I'm always open to alternative ideas and arguments, and will examine them from a logical and rational perspective, to the extent that I understand such rationality and logic.
I'm also always open to a correction to my sense of rationality.
The ad hominem attack merely sends the message that the poster doesn't understand the issues he's writing about, and is projecting his own misunderstanding onto the other person.
-
Rob,
Stirring up deeply felt emotions is good, in my opinion. To progress, whether in Photography or any other discipline, we need to examine and contemplate on our deeply felt emotions, in order to avoid errors and to gain insight.
Yes, Ray, but at the cost of blowing otherwise good relationships?
Nothing that goes down in LuLa is going to make the slightest jot of difference to Trump, Boris, or any other egotripping grandee of the political classes.
The world votes according to the latest bribe or lie to come along. As we saw with Brexit.
If you want to continue to discuss climate change, then that's okay by me, but I don't see it as a political thing - I see it as a reality above politics. But politics will succeed in conflating it with the return of jobs lost for ever and a day in industries already moribund if not currently to be found under the latest tombstone. Again, as in Brexit.
Those themes are pointless in this space as no conclusion can follow.
-
I do think, though, that politics and religion are not really suitable subjects for this website. I say this, because despite being fringe matters (regarding LuLa), they also stir up deeply felt emotions, and these can easily spread across into the photographic part of the conversation, creating unspoken, subliminal attitides that really can't do other than colour everything else where opinions are shared. Maybe not such a good idea.
Life has to have a wider gamut that those two terrors!
Rob
God forbid!
-
All serious discussions on major issues that affect us all and possibly the future of our species, that one might expect from a group of intelligent people sitting down for coffee, is now banned, it seems.
Bollocks! - just be civil ))
-
I would be open that, Alan. All my ideas on the subject are based upon what I think and determine makes sense to me, from a rational perspective. I'm always open to alternative ideas and arguments, and will examine them from a logical and rational perspective, to the extent that I understand such rationality and logic.
I'm also always open to a correction to my sense of rationality.
The ad hominem attack merely sends the message that the poster doesn't understand the issues he's writing about, and is projecting his own misunderstanding onto the other person.
I'll start a thread along with a warning. Why don't you and I 'moderate' this and insure that 1) the discussion is focused on what the scientific findings are and 2) that it is civil. If either of these break down, we can notify Chris ASAP to shut things down (I don't know if one who starts the thread has the power to lock it; I'll need to check).
-
Bollocks! - just be civil ))
We will see the other post I just made.
-
Can we start a 'new' climate change thread that only focuses on research that is being published? What if you and I write a preface to the thread stating something like that and that any deviation will result in the thread going away? there is a new report from some of your countrymen (University of Melbourne) predicts a 1.3m rise in sea levels unless coal burning power plants are phased out.
Sounds like an eminently sensible idea. We will need to have you and probably another moderate the discussion. Are you prepared to do that?
-
Sounds like an eminently sensible idea. We will need to have you and probably another moderate the discussion. Are you prepared to do that?
Just started it and Ray and I are up to the task!!!
-
Just started it and Ray and I are up to the task!!!
Cool
Both you and Ray are now given Moderator status within the Coffee Corner
Chris
-
Cool
Both you and Ray are now given Moderator status within the Coffee Corner
Chris
We will justify your faith in us!
-
Okay, so is there also a way to filter that thread out of the "recent posts" list?
-
Okay, so is there also a way to filter that thread out of the "recent posts" list?
No, but you can always use the 'Ignore' function for those Members whose posts you do not wish to be bothered by
Chris
-
Actually, there is a way to Ignore whole Boards such as the Coffee Corner. I will post here and on About this Site when I have fgured the settings and use of that.
Chris
-
Okay, so is there also a way to filter that thread out of the "recent posts" list?
There is now the ability to modify your user Profile (see Profile in main menu) to ignore selected Boards and Members. So if you don't want to see the Coffee Corner you don't have to!
Simply check the appropriate Ignore Board Options check box under your Profile/Modify.
There is also the ability to ignore defined Members so that you do not 'see' their posts
-
Chris, why is everybody suddenly a moderator?
-
Alan Goldhammer & Ray volunteered to look after the Coffee Corner - specifically the Climate Change discussion
-
Okay. Good on 'em.
-
Alan Goldhammer & Ray volunteered to look after the Coffee Corner - specifically the Climate Change discussion
anyone they don't like gets silenced and anyone that agrees with them can prattle on?
-
anyone they don't like gets silenced and anyone that agrees with them can prattle on?
No, that's Farmer's role ;)
-
Does that mean Alan can moderate Ray's posts and vice versa?
-
Stamper, it's going to be fascinating!
For some unknown reason it strikes me that we are witnessing the start of a new form of online conversation: it's going to be a multi-tiered system of sub-contracted responsibilities and we will be able to grow our own elective powers by "liking" one leader more or less than we might do another.
You see? Come the moment come the men. But wait, this is now an equal opportunities society and the quota system has to be observed. Due to the lack of females standing for office, I think that just as with Madrid v. Barca, we are going to have to recognise this entire exercise in self-selected/elected power as null and void.
Nice to see you posting again - some pix would be cool, too.
Rob
-
Ah! volunteers?
Rob? Robert?
-
anyone they don't like gets silenced and anyone that agrees with them can prattle on?
Not one person has been silences: not one post has been deleted. We are trying to keep the thread focused on science issues and discussion about that. Participation is strictly voluntary. You don't have to read the thread if you don't want to.
-
I think that just as with Madrid v. Barca, we are going to have to recognise this entire exercise in self-selected/elected power as null and void.
The really interesting thing about the Catalonia secession if it does happen is that Barcelona will be kicked out of La Liga and the big match between them and Real Madrid will cease. The big question is what UEFA then does in terms of recognizing a Catalonian Soccer Federation. This would really be bad news for Barcelona as they could not make much a league with just Catalonian teams.
-
Gosh, I wonder if it's possible to ignore one of the new moderators?
-
Ah! volunteers?
Rob? Robert?
Chris, I may be doddery but I'm not yet crazy!
;-)
Rob
-
Gosh, I wonder if it's possible to ignore one of the new moderators?
I think that it is, Keith, but you have to start a new old thread first. Then, that accomplished, you can decide to ignore everybody by not returning to it after locking it at the decisive moment, which makes it a legitimate photographic consideration, if not event. I think.
Rob
-
The really interesting thing about the Catalonia secession if it does happen is that Barcelona will be kicked out of La Liga and the big match between them and Real Madrid will cease. The big question is what UEFA then does in terms of recognizing a Catalonian Soccer Federation. This would really be bad news for Barcelona as they could not make much a league with just Catalonian teams.
No, no! As with the artist formerly known as Prince, they will embrace change; in their case they will simply follow the money, e.g. the Barcelona banks, and transfer the HQ to Madrid (what a cheek!) and as Catalonia will still be seen as Spain, the loyal fanatics fans won't need to show their fake passports at border control. Do I sense the creation of a new, imaginary, southern European Wall?
-
No, that's Farmer's role ;)
You're still talking, Slobo :-)
-
I think that it is, Keith, but you have to start a new old thread first. Then, that accomplished, you can decide to ignore everybody by not returning to it after locking it at the decisive moment, which makes it a legitimate photographic consideration, if not event. I think.
Rob
Rob, I tried ignoring myself but the software wouldn't allow it.
:)
-
Rob, I tried ignoring myself but the software wouldn't allow it.
:)
Keith, you've gotta use green electricity!
Rob
-
Not one person has been silences: not one post has been deleted. We are trying to keep the thread focused on science issues and discussion about that. Participation is strictly voluntary. You don't have to read the thread if you don't want to.
Moderator laying down the law already?
-
The really interesting thing about the Catalonia secession if it does happen is that Barcelona will be kicked out of La Liga and the big match between them and Real Madrid will cease. The big question is what UEFA then does in terms of recognizing a Catalonian Soccer Federation. This would really be bad news for Barcelona as they could not make much a league with just Catalonian teams.
This thread is about .... CHANGES in the Coffee Corner ... and you are posting about another subject???
-
Stamper,
My personal take on the art of Internet chat is this: the more closely it can follow natural conversation the better it is, and the more likely to retain involvement. I can't remember any real conversation where anyone stuck to a plot or script - well, maybe estate agents trying to lower your expectations so they can get a quick sale and boost to their bottom line whilst trying to convince you the while that you are their main concern...
It's the same (for me) with all those interviews with photographers where they spout statements of extrasensory magic; thanks, but not really: I want to see snaps and learn about their real lives, not their phoney PR junk. Wiki can do all of that already. The interest is in discovering what made them the people they became; whether they were different in themselves or just blessed with lotsa parental clout or whatever. An interesting example to follow in the years to come is David Bailey's son who is also a photographer (just as is Brian Duffy's lad, too...).
Alternatively, this may interest absolutely nobody but moi. Which simply proves yet another thing about life. Oh - wait! It's the national anthem: show's over - time to leave the cinema! No, your bra's not lost, honey - I think you put it in your handbag when we came in.
;-)
Rob
-
This thread is about .... CHANGES in the Coffee Corner ... and you are posting about another subject???
I was responding to Rob; go blame him.
-
At least this thread has some harmless entertainment value. ;)
-
Grumpy old men, trying to self-moderate their grumpiness. Nah, not a chance 😊
-
I was responding to Rob; go blame him.
That's right! The ultimate whipping boy!
:-) (I think?)
Rob
-
That's right! The ultimate whipping boy!
:-) (I think?)
Rob
Only if you are a Real Madrid supporter! ;)
-
Only if you are a Real Madrid supporter! ;)
Truth to tell, I don't do sport at all. That said, if had to choose, I think I'd opt for golf. It would have been nice to be a wonderful player and roam this world making millions and, best of all, it would all have depended on oneself! No clients to find, no models to get to do something great... all your own work!
-
Truth to tell, I don't do sport at all. That said, if had to choose, I think I'd opt for golf. It would have been nice to be a wonderful player and roam this world making millions and, best of all, it would all have depended on oneself! No clients to find, no models to get to do something great... all your own work!
Ah, Rob. Now I begin to understand the Higher Calling of Mankind. It must be this: endlessly trying to put a small round ball into a slightly larger cup from great and increasing distances. Sounds sort of Buddhist to me.
-
Dawson City in Yukon boasts the northernmost golf course with greens. The best thing is that the golfers get a 9 months winter respite.
-
Ah, Rob. Now I begin to understand the Higher Calling of Mankind. It must be this: endlessly trying to put a small round ball into a slightly larger cup from great and increasing distances. Sounds sort of Buddhist to me.
Well, Eric, it has to be admitted, man is a simple creature: ask any woman.
But (as always there is one - the so-called alternative perspective held by the same enquiring mind), the positive spin to put on the "sport" in question is this: that little cup also represents the fabled pot of gold, whose quest is eternal; so yes, perhaps the Buddha was onto all of this eons ago. I didn't, however, suspect golf was that ancient - I'd imagined it to have started on a cold, Scottish field soon after a retreating river flood had left the thistles flat and smooooth in the mud when a young oaf accidently banged a little stone with his crook and was amazed at how far it could fly without wings!
Rob
-
Ah, Rob. Now I begin to understand the Higher Calling of Mankind. It must be this: endlessly trying to put a small round ball into a slightly larger cup from great and increasing distances. Sounds sort of Buddhist to me.
Trying to put one round thing into another is the reason of life... the sadness of the metaphor of golf is the proportion of time trying for so little putting.
-
Trying to put one round thing into another is the reason of life... the sadness of the metaphor of golf is the proportion of time trying for so little putting.
😀😀😀
👏👏👏
👍👍👍
Bravo! The smartest thing I've read on LuLa in a while!
-
That's why I have never played the game. However, in its favour - as compared with most other outdoor sports - it does free one from dependency on others that team sports inevitably impose. Hell, if you liked, you could play it all alone and still have the pleasure - inasmuch as solitary ball games permit - and even break records! Isn't that what games are supposedly about? But in my original championing of it - the game - the point was that it would allow success or failure to depend on the self. I like those odds; always have. Suppose I'm slightly anti-social somewhere deep down, not that anyone would notice, of course.
Furthermore, it also provides a pleasant view as one exercises, which beats working out in gyms, not that I do that either, I have to own.
Rob
-
If I played golf, any time I didn't get the results I wanted I would put the blame on Adobe! Or maybe Canon, Nikon, or Sony. ::)
-
If I played golf, any time I didn't get the results I wanted I would put the blame on Adobe! Or maybe Canon, Nikon, or Sony. ::)
If you were a professional golfer, you might have a point, what with all of those non-rangefinder alternatives churning and grinding and whirring away so distractingly in the wings. Bring back the Big Bad M, I say!
Rob