Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: David Mantripp on October 13, 2015, 03:54:55 am
-
Tragedy. After maybe 15 years I've been summarily, permanently banned from DPReview, for the heinous crime of writing "switch it off, ffs", in a post commenting on their introduction of autoplay ads on the home page.
I'm not exactly devastated. I gave up hoping for any kind of dialog over there ages ago. But considering the kind of behaviour that goes on on those forums, I am pretty astonished that a mild bit of very naughty language like "ffs" gets a permanent ban.
Of course if it were introduced here, it might make the Adobe Lightrrom Q&A forum a bit less irritating to read ;)
-
Their boards are nuts.
So much rubbish, so little actual knowledge.
-
DPreview, so many thousands of pages saying pretty much the same thing. Is there honestly a camera you wouldn't buy after reading their views upon it? I recommended a P&S to a friend on the back of what they had said, it turned out to be crap. (does that word get me banned here?)
-
Tragedy. After maybe 15 years I've been summarily, permanently banned from DPReview, for the heinous crime of writing "switch it off, ffs", in a post commenting on their introduction of autoplay ads on the home page.
If forums ban swearing, usually masked swearing is seen as the same thing and also not permitted. Which makes perfect sense as people will read masked swearing or acronyms like 'ffs' exactly as if the 'naughty words were in place. Is swearing verboten on DPR?
Personally I find the idea that some people find a word/sound offensive a bit bizarre. Same goes for nudity, how is that or say breast feeding offensive? And how do such people cope with animals wandering around with no clothes on and with all their danglies or what not on show?
Of course if it were introduced here, it might make the Adobe Lightrrom Q&A forum a bit less irritating to read ;)
You can be an offensive muppet without any bad language being used and perfectly pleasant whilst being a potty mouth.
-
There is no place for swearing in online forums, including 'masked' swearing, 'acronymious' swearing or abbreviated swearing.
It makes communal places thoroughly unpleasant.
The fact that one can be unpleasant without swearing is irrelevant, except to illustrate that swearing is not the only reason to ban.
-
There is no place for swearing in online forums, including 'masked' swearing, 'acronymious' swearing or abbreviated swearing.
Nonsense. Define "swearing", then, and do it without recourse to any vague posturing on consensus. There was a furore when Shaw wrote "bloody" for Eliza: it's impossible to imagine anyone seriously taking offence at that word now.
The use of language alters over time. Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis.
Jeremy
-
I know there are rational arguments either way. But the bottom line remains: given a choice of upsetting many readers or not, which do you choose? Forum owners have to take into account that you might be upsetting many people with your 'free' and 'conventional' swearing. And take into account that you freely choose to upset them.
-
I know there are rational arguments either way. But the bottom line remains: given a choice of upsetting many readers or not, which do you choose? Forum owners have to take into account that you might be upsetting many people with your 'free' and 'conventional' swearing. And take into account that you freely choose to upset them.
They freely choose to be upset.
I've often wondered about the worries about nudity. Considering that all of humankind is split into two basic shapes, it remains a surprise that that can be shocking news.
However, as so many of either two types are visually disgusting, I do see a sort of need to protect the other, the 'beautiful' lot, from visual shock, from the bad news of what probably awaits them, too, if they live that long or are not careful enough...
Rob C
-
That's OK. I was banned from Petapixel (oh the shame) for pointing out that they make no attempt to conduct the most cursory proofreading of the articles they publish.
-
They freely choose to be upset.
I've often wondered about the worries about nudity. Considering that all of humankind is split into two basic shapes, it remains a surprise that that can be shocking news.
However, as so many of either two types are visually disgusting, I do see a sort of need to protect the other, the 'beautiful' lot, from visual shock, from the bad news of what probably awaits them, too, if they live that long or are not careful enough...
Rob C
You seem to be one of those rational debaters to whom I referred. That's okay: I understand both sides.
The thing about polite and civil interaction is that even the meek, the shy and easily upset among us are made to feel welcome and comfortable. It might take some self-restraint but it isn't actually hard.
Sent from my HTC_0P6B using Tapatalk
-
I was banned a few months back for challenging editorial decisions.
-
The one thing about LL rules that I wish were different is the bit that says "We advise that you use your real First & Last name as your on-screen or user name. Forum users who hide behind anonymous or false on-screen names and who make inflammatory posts or ad hominem attacks will be banned. Members using pseudonyms will receive stricter treatment than those using their own name." (my bold bits are the bits I disagree with)
To me, that is an unacceptable and anti humanitarian piece of advice.
The universal and appropriate advice given to anybody who is about to establish themselves a presence on the Internet, is to do so anonymously.
Reasons include identity theft, stalking and bullying, personal threats to safety, and having one's career compromised by the many, many employers who make it their business to Google their employees and have no compunction about treating them with prejudice for simple things, such as the choice of hobbies and interests outside of work.
For LL to discriminate against people who make the right choices for their own safety and for their families, is ridiculous. If site owners and mods have just been lucky, and not (yet) been hurt by using their own name, then don't use that luck as a weapon to make judgments against the intention of other people. I resent it. My advice to anyone joining an internet forum, is to do so anonymously. For their sake and their families'.
Anyhow, members can join with a fake First & Last name, who would know? Yet they get less moderation for it.
-
The one thing about LL rules that I wish were different is the bit that says "We advise that you use your real First & Last name as your on-screen or user name. Forum users who hide behind anonymous or false on-screen names and who make inflammatory posts or ad hominem attacks will be banned. Members using pseudonyms will receive stricter treatment than those using their own name."
That seems fair enough. Some of us would happily do without contributions from those who hide their identity (except for good reasons), but we've had discussions on the topic, there's no consensus, and those posters' greater likelihood to misbehave is reflected in how the forum is managed.
-
I think that LuLa has it about right. Anti-humanitarian? Does anyone actually speak like that in the real world? I thought it the province of the politician and banner-waving street nutter.
It isn't about using your real name as much as about what you reveal. And, of course, just how much important stuff you put out via Internet.
I don't even bank via Internet, depite the banks' repeated requests I do so. Why Not? Initially because of instinctive distrust of the web, and then one day, out of extreme boredom, I actually read the fine print of those proposal forms right through to the yawn-inducing end. And I'm glad that I did! In a nutshell: unless you have installed the best, latest and most effective security shields on your computer, you are swimming in the Red Sea with sharks and dead divers insofar as the banks' willingness to absolve you from sin.
The moment you decide to have a website you are open to the usual nutcase mail that sours the web. Even here on LuLa you'll find the presistent idiot who knows not a lot about much but, unfortunately, isn't aware of the paucity of that knowledge. Make the tactical error of engaging him out of politeness and he will detroy the perceived pleasures of communication. Every stone harbours one such at least; it goes with the territory.
People keep trying to get me to join Fbook etc. and can't understand that I can have zero interest in engaging with people I don't know, that one can, in fact, already know too many people, fail to grasp the fact that I seek nothing from anyone other than the sharing of some few common interests; time is precious and in ever shortening supply for each and every single one of us.
What to do? Logically, you take as much as you feel like taking, try to balance the good with the not so good, and then quit if the weight shifts too far in the wrong direction. As it sometimes does.
Getting banned? There are always at least two sides/opinions to situations and where the truth lies is anyone's guess. Your fate can depend on whether the chap with the key has indigestion when he has your 'case' pushed into his face.
And in the end, does anyone else give a shit; do you, yourself, really care? Man, these little islands on which we float..
Rob C
-
People keep trying to get me to join Fbook etc. and can't understand that I can have zero interest in engaging with people I don't know, that one can, in fact, already know too many people, fail to grasp the fact that I seek nothing from anyone other than the sharing of some few common interests; time is precious and in ever shortening supply for each and every single one of us.
You do realise Facebook is for engaging with people you do know and privacy can be set so that no-one else sees anything.
Yes you can see or interact with other people on public pages like the LuLa FB page, but you do not have to engage. FB is an excellent tool I find for keeping in touch with friends and family I have all over the world or indeed friends I have that are scattered across the UK and I don't have to put up with morons posting their [usually anonymous] brainless/bigoted crap like you do on forums at times.
Like John, I would love to see anonymous people binned from places like LuLa. They are the ones who tend to be the most disruptive and contribute the least.
There is very, very rarely a genuine reason for anyone on a site like this one to hide their identity. It is a site about photographic techniques after all. It is not a political site, it's not risque or anything subversive.
-
The one thing about LL rules that I wish were different is the bit that says "We advise that you use your real First & Last name as your on-screen or user name. Forum users who hide behind anonymous or false on-screen names and who make inflammatory posts or ad hominem attacks will be banned. Members using pseudonyms will receive stricter treatment than those using their own name." (my bold bits are the bits I disagree with)
To me, that is an unacceptable and anti humanitarian piece of advice.
The universal and appropriate advice given to anybody who is about to establish themselves a presence on the Internet, is to do so anonymously.
Reasons include identity theft, stalking and bullying, personal threats to safety, and having one's career compromised by the many, many employers who make it their business to Google their employees and have no compunction about treating them with prejudice for simple things, such as the choice of hobbies and interests outside of work.
For LL to discriminate against people who make the right choices for their own safety and for their families, is ridiculous. If site owners and mods have just been lucky, and not (yet) been hurt by using their own name, then don't use that luck as a weapon to make judgments against the intention of other people. I resent it. My advice to anyone joining an internet forum, is to do so anonymously. For their sake and their families'.
Anyhow, members can join with a fake First & Last name, who would know? Yet they get less moderation for it.
If one's family or jobs get compromised by things you post on a website like LuLa, maybe one should really, really consider what is posted.
-
Quote jjj
Like John, I would love to see anonymous people binned from places like LuLa. They are the ones who tend to be the most disruptive and contribute the least.
Unquote
I don't see your real name???
-
Quote jjj
Like John, I would love to see anonymous people binned from places like LuLa. They are the ones who tend to be the most disruptive and contribute the least.
Unquote
I don't see your real name???
I was waiting for the usual idiotic comment like that. Unsurprisingly from an actual anonymous muppet.
I'm not anonymous. jjj is a contraction of a real world nickname and my profile links to my site with my name and contact details.
I'd used it for so long before real names started being used on here, I saw no point in changing it. Particularly as there are numerous others with the same name as myself.
My name isn't that common I find, but nearly everyone I've met with the same name in real life is also a photographer oddly enough [I don't mean hobbyist] and it seems to frequently appear in numerous photography forums but not other places. Weird. :o
-
I was waiting for the usual idiotic comment like that. Unsurprisingly from an actual anonymous muppet.
I'm not anonymous. jjj is a contraction of a real world nickname and my profile links to my site with my name and contact details.
I'd used it for so long before real names started being used on here, I saw no point in changing it. Particularly as there are numerous others with the same name as myself.
My name isn't that common I find, but nearly everyone I've met with the same name in real life is also a photographer oddly enough [I don't mean hobbyist] and it seems to frequently appear in numerous photography forums but not other places. Weird. :o
If you click on my signature you will see a link that states my name so I am not an actual anonymous muppet.
-
My apologies, just a muppet then. ;)
-
Would you like to see name callers binned?
-
Well, that did not take long.
-
You do realise Facebook is for engaging with people you do know and privacy can be set so that no-one else sees anything.
Yes you can see or interact with other people on public pages like the LuLa FB page, but you do not have to engage. FB is an excellent tool I find for keeping in touch with friends and family I have all over the world or indeed friends I have that are scattered across the UK and I don't have to put up with morons posting their [usually anonymous] brainless/bigoted crap like you do on forums at times.
Yes, I do appreciate that, as both my kids and grandkids are on the service, but my resistance to involvement's too strong. I have been through several lengthy withdrawals from LuLa, as it is, and getting back on proves to be ever more a mixed blessing. I hardly need more distractions in my life.
It isn't that I find it difficult to handle as much as it is something that consumes a lot of my time. For example: during my last sabbatical, not only did I manage to shoot a lot of pictures, I found time and energy to put two books onto disc. That they will probably always bring me politely written rejection slips doesn't matter - I didn't do it for any hoped-for money, I did it for the interest in getting two distinct themes down into the most compact and concise form possible whilst at the same time allowing me the pleasure of doing a little research and writing, discovering details about things of which my actual knowledge had been very superficial. In other words, doing it became a pleasant learning experience.
'Social media' so reminds me of addiction. People, even today, rush out from their dining table to have a quick puff and cellphone consultation between courses. A couple of days ago my daughter and I were having lunch, and at the next table sat five girls around twenty years of age. At one stage, only two were left in seated conversation, the others standing in a group outside the door doing whatever one does with a cellphone. Apart from being rude, especially to the two girls left seated, it all smacked of such a pathetic fear of being left out of something... terribly sad, really, and symptomatic of why I resist! Life had always been liveable pre-social media and it still very much is; you just have to ask whether it's relevant to your own life.
My wife was very good at maths and the sciences; she never sent an e-mail. I used to try to coax her but she simply asked the killer question: why? She then went on to say that two seconds into a telephone conversation she would know from the voice whether all was truly well with the family or not. Written words mean whatever the sender choses them to mean, and whatever the reader cares to interpret them to mean. A known voice never fails to tell the truth, whatever it may be saying.
Also, from my own perspective on web communications, it becomes a bit discourging to write about something and receive a reply one short sentence long. The inevitable question one asks oneself becomes: what's the bloody point? It may be heaven for the one-minute mind, but hell on Earth for anyone genuinely seeking stimulating conversation. Perhaps the two are in irrevocable conflict.
Rob C
-
I was waiting for the usual idiotic comment like that. Unsurprisingly from an actual anonymous muppet.
I'm not anonymous. jjj is a contraction of a real world nickname and my profile links to my site with my name and contact details.
I'd used it for so long before real names started being used on here, I saw no point in changing it. Particularly as there are numerous others with the same name as myself.
My name isn't that common I find, but nearly everyone I've met with the same name in real life is also a photographer oddly enough [I don't mean hobbyist] and it seems to frequently appear in numerous photography forums but not other places. Weird. :o
What is your real name? You don't want to remain anonymous......do you? ;)
-
Like John, I would love to see anonymous people binned from places like LuLa. They are the ones who tend to be the most disruptive and contribute the least.
So attack the problem, not a spurious manifestation of it: ban the people who are "the most disruptive and contribute the least".
Jeremy
-
I think that LuLa has it about right. Anti-humanitarian? Does anyone actually speak like that in the real world? I thought it the province of the politician and banner-waving street nutter.
I agree.
No, of course nobody does.
It is, Rob. They can wave metaphorical banners online as well as real ones in the real world.
Jeremy
-
Is LuLa much more than a form of social media - or perhaps as Rob recently said a cat chat show?
What it needs, Keith, as in life itself, is female input.
A bunch of guys left to their own devices, as seems to happen here, inevitably turn pretty much everything into a pissing contest, as dumb as that may be. For an actual example: I remember at around the age of thirteen or so, standing at the scholastic Duchamp, peeing up into the air beside another, shorter kid doing the same. The traditional winner was the one to hit the higher tiles. Nobody seemed to understand that it all depended upon the height from which the little stream began...
Not a lot changes, it seems.
I'm not suggesting female participation at this level, as I hope everyone understands (but you never can tell), however I do wish more ladies would think of taking part in 'conversations', not only to make the place less likely to erupt into stupid fights, but to add much needed variety of opinion. But, we seem to have discouraged all too successfully the ones who have tried...
;-(
Rob C
-
What is your real name? You don't want to remain anonymous......do you? ;)
It's a click away.
And a couple of posts above too. ;)
-
So attack the problem, not a spurious manifestation of it: ban the people who are "the most disruptive and contribute the least".
Why not eliminate some of the problem early on.
-
Yes, I do appreciate that, as both my kids and grandkids are on the service, but my resistance to involvement's too strong. I have been through several lengthy withdrawals from LuLa, as it is, and getting back on proves to be ever more a mixed blessing. I hardly need more distractions in my life.
It isn't that I find it difficult to handle as much as it is something that consumes a lot of my time. For example: during my last sabbatical, not only did I manage to shoot a lot of pictures, I found time and energy to put two books onto disc. That they will probably always bring me politely written rejection slips doesn't matter - I didn't do it for any hoped-for money, I did it for the interest in getting two distinct themes down into the most compact and concise form possible whilst at the same time allowing me the pleasure of doing a little research and writing, discovering details about things of which my actual knowledge had been very superficial. In other words, doing it became a pleasant learning experience.
'Social media' so reminds me of addiction. People, even today, rush out from their dining table to have a quick puff and cellphone consultation between courses. A couple of days ago my daughter and I were having lunch, and at the next table sat five girls around twenty years of age. At one stage, only two were left in seated conversation, the others standing in a group outside the door doing whatever one does with a cellphone. Apart from being rude, especially to the two girls left seated, it all smacked of such a pathetic fear of being left out of something... terribly sad, really, and symptomatic of why I resist! Life had always been liveable pre-social media and it still very much is; you just have to ask whether it's relevant to your own life.
My wife was very good at maths and the sciences; she never sent an e-mail. I used to try to coax her but she simply asked the killer question: why? She then went on to say that two seconds into a telephone conversation she would know from the voice whether all was truly well with the family or not. Written words mean whatever the sender choses them to mean, and whatever the reader cares to interpret them to mean. A known voice never fails to tell the truth, whatever it may be saying.
Also, from my own perspective on web communications, it becomes a bit discourging to write about something and receive a reply one short sentence long.
Indeed! ;)
-
Indeed! ;)
! ;-(
Rob C
-
It's a click away.
And a couple of posts above too. ;)
Jeremy ..... what?
-
But the girls always won the distance competition.
Lucky you to know! My concentration camp didn't permit girls to compete.
;-)
Rob
-
Banned. Yes.
Photo.net banned me permanently for using the letters "BS" in response to a member's argument. I cannot even remember the substance. Model Mayhem banned me permanently for being a professional scout...they felt someone legit telling people the truth about their potential as an agency model killed the party vibe. But they keep my page up and will not let me access it/ remove it. DPR suspended me for a week for writing if I woke up with an urge to cut my junk off I'd surely have lost my mind. They thought that was disrespectful to the guys who did not think they had lost theirs. Diversity is not a two way street.
I use profanity generously, deadpan black humor and observational sarcasm face to face with people all day long. Comparatively I am bleached white shortbread on forums. I never wave a Confederate Battle Flag. There is nothing I write online that someone I know has not heard before or would be a bit surprised by. I have a portfolio online and cannot be anonymous nor my opinions secret from anyone. It is what it is.
If someone does not want to interact with me because I sound like Samuel Jackson reciting Tarantino dialog it's OK. I don't want to spend my time in a real life version of a Hallmark Xmas movie either. it's a win win.
I'll skip posting a nude this time. I'll wait for a gross fat people are beautiful thread.
-
If you get banned, just make another account.
That's what I did after having spent an evening of drinking and typing.
They do not mind, they live on clicks and ads.
No clicks, no ads.
-
I'll skip posting a nude this time. I'll wait for a gross fat people are beautiful thread.
They are to some people. I knew someone who didn't fancy a girl "unless she was 5'2" and at least 16 stone" That's 224 pounds/101kg. ??? Last I heard of him it was that his partner was told to lose weight or probably die. Yikes!
Then there are women who are not fat but are deemed to be 'plus sized' models, because they are not underweight.
-
Bear in mind that no one can see your clever body language or intuit from your facial expression that you are being sarcastic. The BBS / blog open commenting format is a limited form of communication.
I just keep in mind that there's such a thing as an internet way-back machine, that stupid things that one shows or says stick around for a long time thanks to the magic of archival sites. No such thing as privacy on the internet. I am semi-anonymous by habit, having been on a variety of unregulated BBSs and fora for a while. Anonymity isn't too important on a photography forum, no crazed Nikonista will threaten to rape me. (I am not implying that owners of particular camera brands are crazed, but I do assure you that there are some crazed holders of certain social opinions out there). I can see some reason for an amateur to either be anonymous or to be discreet when discussing equipment and vacation plans etc. I generally think it is a bad idea to put it out there that you have valuables and will not be home for a while.
-
I can see some reason for an amateur to either be anonymous or to be discreet when discussing equipment and vacation plans etc. I generally think it is a bad idea to put it out there that you have valuables and will not be home for a while.
I tend to only mention travel stuff online, after the fact. No big deal then.
-
Tragedy. After maybe 15 years I've been summarily, permanently banned from DPReview, for the heinous crime of writing "switch it off, ffs", in a post commenting on their introduction of autoplay ads on the home page.
I'm not exactly devastated. I gave up hoping for any kind of dialog over there ages ago. But considering the kind of behaviour that goes on on those forums, I am pretty astonished that a mild bit of very naughty language like "ffs" gets a permanent ban.
Of course if it were introduced here, it might make the Adobe Lightrrom Q&A forum a bit less irritating to read ;)
It is annoying, it feels unfair to not be able to defend yourself, and it does make it look like internet sites are not about furthering democracy or knowledge, but rather about generating money by e.g. pleasing some loyal ad-reading community. I was banned from canonrumours for (in my, granted, biased view) making uncontroversial claims about Canon DR. Seems that some vocal members of that community did not like what I had to say and the guy running the forum did not either.
But it is not the end of the world. "Take your business elsewhere" and try to learn from and teach some other community instead.
I don't even know what a "ffs" is. But learning to behave in a civil manner*) is good advice no matter where we go. More so when we are disagreeing and the temperature gets high.
-h
*)Not sure that it can be strictly defined, but most of us have some well-developed gut-feeling, just like we have a feeling for what is "good" photography and what is not. Incidentally, in both cases, our sense of good and bad seems to be at its worst when we are judging our selves :-)
-
That seems fair enough. Some of us would happily do without contributions from those who hide their identity (except for good reasons), but we've had discussions on the topic, there's no consensus, and those posters' greater likelihood to misbehave is reflected in how the forum is managed.
I am here to teach and be taught. For this exchange of knowledge I have to share some details about myself. I am not here to make friends.
I tend to think that my statements should stand on their own without appealing to me possibly being a nice guy or a knowledgeable guy. Of course, if I am rude or misbehaving the proper action would be to ban me, no matter if I used my full name or not.
-h