Seriously, Roussak?

[faberryman]

So far, Jeremy's moderation has been stellar on balance. It is an extremely tough job, and he is doing it splendidly. There might have been an occasion or two, this example included, that I, or others, might not see the reason for closing a thread the same way Jeremy does. However, I am happy to live with a living, breathing person's judgment, even if imperfect on occasion.

Reminds me of a scene involving Mr. Potato Head in Toy Story.

[Alan Goldhammer]

So why did he lock your post?

Your guess is as good as mine.

[Alan Goldhammer]

No matter who is moderating, what the issue is, abusive language is not welcome.
Perhaps we need to assess the specific issue of the moderator’s roll and empowerment, if that is indeed the issue at hand.
A little perspective and basic decorum please.
Take a moment.


J

You might want to tell the moderator that something more than a single throw away line is required when a thread is locked. 

[BernardLanguillier]

So far, Jeremy's moderation has been stellar on balance. It is an extremely tough job, and he is doing it splendidly. There might have been an occasion or two, this example included, that I, or others, might not see the reason for closing a thread the same way Jeremy does. However, I am happy to live with a living, breathing person's judgment, even if imperfect on occasion.

+1

Cheers,
Bernard

[Jeremy Roussak]

Thanks to all, in particular Josh and Slobodan.

The thread had deteriorated to abuse and re-declarations of view, with a marked absence of intellectual content. That's why I locked it.

Nothing has gone on behind the scenes. I have had no communication with Molitor and I have no idea why his knickers are in such a twist. We will, of course, not be subjected to any of his posts here for a while. Molitor and Goldhammer have both formed the view that I have some personal animus against them. Molitor has quoted statistics at me which I have shown to him to be entirely wrong.

Let me make it perfectly clear: whatever view I might hold of their politics or the manner in which they frame their posts, I bear no personal animosity toward any member of this forum.

I volunteered to moderate the discussion forums on LuLa a little over a year ago, because having learned a lot here about photography, I felt I should give something back. I neither take nor expect any payment for what I do.

Goldhammer had, I understand, previously been allowed to moderate a sub-section of the forum but had failed to perform the task to the satisfaction of those then running the site. I have had no criticism of my performance, or of any action I have taken, from either Kevin last year, or Josh, this. No doubt if Josh is dissatisfied with my approach, he will make his views known to me.

I am, again, beginning to have second thoughts on the wisdom of allowing political discussions here. I am disappointed, as for the first few weeks most people had seemed reasonably well-behaved. Will I be forced to change my mind once more? Time will tell.

Jeremy

[Alan Goldhammer]

Goldhammer had, I understand, previously been allowed to moderate a sub-section of the forum but had failed to perform the task to the satisfaction of those then running the site. I have had no criticism of my performance, or of any action I have taken, from either Kevin last year, or Josh, this. No doubt if Josh is dissatisfied with my approach, he will make his views known to me.



Jeremy

Roussak, that is flat out incorrect.

[faberryman]

I am, again, beginning to have second thoughts on the wisdom of allowing political discussions here. I am disappointed, as for the first few weeks most people had seemed reasonably well-behaved. Will I be forced to change my mind once more?

I hope so. Trying to run a photography forum in the middle of a Trump rally must be difficult.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Roussak...

Pardon my English-as-second-language ignorance, but wouldn't the proper etiquette, when using a last name, be Mr. Roussak? The way you said it sounds like fighting words, Mr. Goldhammer.

[faberryman]

Pardon my English-as-second-language ignorance, but wouldn't the proper etiquette, when using a last name, be Mr. Roussak? The way you said it sounds like fighting words, Mr. Goldhammer.

Since, Mr. Roussak referred to Mr. Goldhammer as Goldhammer in the immediately preceding post, I am not sure why Mr. Roussak would take offense at Mr. Goldhammer referring to him as Roussak in his response. Was Mr. Roussak using fighting words in reference to Mr. Goldhammer?

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

So far, Jeremy's moderation has been stellar on balance. It is an extremely tough job, and he is doing it splendidly. There might have been an occasion or two, this example included, that I, or others, might not see the reason for closing a thread the same way Jeremy does. However, I am happy to live with a living, breathing person's judgment, even if imperfect on occasion.

+ about 10 by now.

[James Clark]

So far, Jeremy's moderation has been stellar on balance. It is an extremely tough job, and he is doing it splendidly. There might have been an occasion or two, this example included, that I, or others, might not see the reason for closing a thread the same way Jeremy does. However, I am happy to live with a living, breathing person's judgment, even if imperfect on occasion.

I'll add my +1 to this.  Nicely said.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Since, Mr. Roussak referred to Mr. Goldhammer as Goldhammer in the immediately preceding post, I am not sure why Mr. Roussak would take offense at Mr. Goldhammer referring to him as Roussak in his response. Was Mr. Roussak using fighting words in reference to Mr. Goldhammer?

You might be right. However, I also see the difference: it was the use of the direct, second-person approach - [You] Roussak... sounds impolite to me. Again, as a non-native speaker.

[JaapD]

Well, I’m definitely not one of the fanboys.

“… with a marked absence of intellectual content. That's why I locked it.” => so now all of a sudden there is a requirement on ‘intellectual content’. Is that for Jeremy to decide? Beware what you’re requiring, as intellectual content cannot be found in that many posts (including this one).

“… I neither take nor expect any payment for what I do.” => This is beside the point and is not relevant since nobody is questioning this. An administrator or moderator should still have a (basic) skill set, especially for a quality site like this one. And I don’t see it here. Think: defining all kinds of rules and requirements by yourself in splendid isolation, very likely not aligned with and supported by the site owner.

“Goldhammer had, I understand, previously been allowed to moderate a sub-section of the forum but had failed to perform the task to the satisfaction of those then running the site”. => Very inappropriate and way out of line. There is absolutely no need at all to share this kind of info with the community here. This is way too personal so keep this to yourself, independently whether or not it is true. Also patronizing on the “been allowed to….” as this statement is not coming from the site owner but from an administrator/moderator. Since Alan was addressed by ‘Goldhammer’ and not ‘Mr. Goldhammer’ Alan is fully entitled to reply by ‘Roussak’.

“I am, again, beginning to have second thoughts on the wisdom of allowing political discussions here” => looks like a good thing to have no political discussions on a photography site like this one. As an observation; before questioning others ‘intellectual content’ first look at your own ‘wisdom’.

As mentioned by somebody else, is being a moderator an extremely tough job? In general, if after so much time a job is still extremely though then one should question his capabilities. One may not be the right person for the job on hand.

Regards,
Jaap.

[jeremyrh]

Well, I’m definitely not one of the fanboys.

“… with a marked absence of intellectual content. That's why I locked it.” => so now all of a sudden there is a requirement on ‘intellectual content’. Is that for Jeremy to decide? Beware what you’re requiring, as intellectual content cannot be found in that many posts (including this one).

And certainly not in the writing of Rod Liddle.

[Manoli]

More ‘sang froid’ and less pomposity woudn’t go amiss.
From a tribute to Michael Reichmann on dpreview

Michael was a towering figure in the North American photography press, and a natural writer. His humility and sense of humor shone through his work on Luminous-Landscape and made him wonderful company. He'd seen it all before, and didn't take any of it - certainly not himself - particularly seriously.

[LesPalenik]

From a tribute to Michael Reichmann on dpreview

The link points to www.preview.com, instead of www.dpreview.com

[Manoli]

The link points to www.preview.com, instead of www.dpreview.com

fixed, thanks!

[Jeremy Roussak]

Pardon my English-as-second-language ignorance, but wouldn't the proper etiquette, when using a last name, be Mr. Roussak? The way you said it sounds like fighting words, Mr. Goldhammer.

That's fine, Slobodan. I work in an environment where the use of unadorned surnames is common, indeed in many circumstances considered correct. In any event, I understood it to be fairly common practice in the US. I remember being referred to as "Roussak" in an article in BYTE magazine a good many years ago. It didn't bother me then, and it doesn't bother me now. If it did, I wouldn't have indulged in the practice myself.

Think: defining all kinds of rules and requirements by yourself in splendid isolation, very likely not aligned with and supported by the site owner.

As I indicated, Josh has given me no indication that he disagrees with any single decision I have made while moderating the forums and the assertion that those decisions are "very likely" unsupported is both unsupported by any evidence and false.

As mentioned by somebody else, is being a moderator an extremely though job? In general, if after so much time a job is still extremely though then one should question his capabilities. One may not be the right person for the job on hand.

On the assumption that both instances of "though" are intended to read "tough", you misunderstand the origin of the difficulty, which is the nature and personalities of those permitted to post. I moderate with moderation and intend to continue to do so.

Jeremy

[LesPalenik]

That's fine, Slobodan. I work in an environment where the use of unadorned surnames is common, indeed in many circumstances considered correct. In any event, I understood it to be fairly common practice in the US. I remember being referred to as "Roussak" in an article in BYTE magazine a good many years ago. It didn't bother me then, and it doesn't bother me now. If it did, I wouldn't have indulged in the practice myself.

Jeremy

That BYTE reference brings good old memories, Jeremy.
I wrote a few articles for both BYTE and KILOBAUD in their first years. I kept all their issues and at my last move I put them all to the curb for recycling. Then I found out that the first issue of BYTE sold on eBay for $600.

[JaapD]

“….. of those permitted to post”. You have a strange way of expressing yourself Jeremy. Do we now need to get permission to post?

Regards,
Jaap.