Who are you?

yes

28 (47.5%)

no

31 (52.5%)

Total Members Voted: 59

Voting closed: September 17, 2019, 02:33:06 pm

[Peter McLennan]

Another forum I frequent has a sub-forum titled "The Danger Zone".  You can "ignore" this forum if you choose and you won't see any posts from it.

TDZ has an explicit warning, both in the forum title and inside the topic site in big red letters: "DON'T COME IN HERE IF YOU CAN'T TAKE IT".

Inside TDZ, anything goes. It is not moderated. It contains much of the same babble as we read in the various political topics here.

Those who want to partake are free to do so. Those who choose to ignore it can make that choice. Quite simple, really.  Just segment the political/religious topics into their own walled garden.

As for the OP's question, there's no doubt that anonymity enables obnoxious behaviour.  Citizen's Band Radio proved that point long ago.  Perhaps presciently, it soon died.

[Jeremy Roussak]

Now, you are really, really exaggerating. Nothing of the sort. For most part, it is rhetorical, just a friendly banter between people with opposing opinions. Theatrics. Most of us are actually rather polite and friendly in email and PM exchanges and would gladly go for a beer.

Irony of all ironies - most surprising statement from this author, whose appetite for insult knows no bounds.

That is exactly the kind of pointless personal attack, contributing nothing but nastiness and spite, which I will no longer tolerate.

Jeremy

[D Fuller]

To the owners, moderators, and the ignorati(*),

The other day I checked the forums without being logged in. By force of habit I clicked "recent posts".
What I saw gave me the impression I have of Reddit. A no-holds-barred-anything-goes, K2 cage fight type of forum about politics. It actually scared me. In the list that you see there is no reasonable way to determine you've just entered a photography forum about the art of photography. It is perhaps useful to think about that impression in terms of a potential new user entering the forum pages and trying to determine whether this is a welcoming place to discuss his/her photographic endeavours.

An existing user can obviously add that part of the forum to their ignore list, but visitors can't. Do with that info what you will...


(*) in this case meaning: those that think it is easy to simply not read what you don't want to read. Whether it might also refer to its original meaning, is left as an exercise for the reader...

This. This is the Lula Forum brand.

[Rob C]

But there's no valid reason why they should.

;-)

Which is where I came in.

I looked in Doc Google's files for old photos of the Regal cinema in Paisley - the Scottish one - and all I could find were a couole of useless vids of its demolition. So depressing; I learned so much in those back seats up there in the sky. Guess many of my generation did. Loved the 50s.

:-)

[Rob C]

If you don't like arrogance then why do you post this crap?

Quote Rob C

It shows yet again that amateur photography is the most difficult branch of all: it has no valid reason why it should interest anyone but the shooter.

Uquote

And it's crap because you tell us so?

:-)

[Rob C]

And what many others dislike is being told that because another poster doesn't enjoy a particular set of threads, they should be closed down.

How incredibly arrogant!

I am not asking for anything to be closed down. I am stating that certain subjects should not posted.

The difference being?

The problem being: you have been drinking the Boris kool-aid where words mean what you want them to mean when you know as you utter them that they are meaningless. Welcome to the world of New Conservatives. Never thought you'd join 'em. Maybe because I finally left?

:-)

[Rob C]

So the question is when will this thread be shut down?

When posters become insulting.

There is a world of difference between getting mad at somebody's flawed argument and breaking into personal abuse.

Some of the folks here with whom I share differences of opinion are actually people I quite like; some are also very accomplished photographers, which makes them even nicer. (Nice is a silly word that means nothing; think about that, and try to offer a definition of the word that holds. But I use it, for the reason that it is all positive things to all people, which is nice, despite meaning absolutely nothing at all. You could say it allows one to accomplish something with nothing. Why am I finding myself thinking of climate change?)

Rob

[Rob C]

Who are you was a good title; sadly, reading all this lily-livered stuff that has cropped up, the question mighy have better been: what are you?

I feel as if the united colours of political correctness are making a play for control of the heart of LuLa. If they beat you guys into inglorious submission, check my tailpipe.


Rob

[Alan Goldhammer]

Irony of all ironies - most surprising statement from this author, whose appetite for insult knows no bounds.


That is exactly the kind of pointless personal attack, contributing nothing but nastiness and spite, which I will no longer tolerate.

Jeremy

Well, you have always tolerated much worse over on the Coffee Corner.  This is another very good reason for shutting that section down.  One cannot post anything there without being attacked in one form or another.  I've pretty much given up on the section other than posting corrections and not responding to troll baiting. 

[vjbelle]

Victor, do you then think of comments on pictures as a club thing, some kind of reward from some secret society within a society?

Many of my snaps receive no comment whatsoever. I accept that as indicating nobody thinks them worth commenting upon. I do the same thing sometimes, regardless of how friendly or otherwise I may be with the author.

It shows yet again that amateur photography is the most difficult branch of all: it has no valid reason why it should interest anyone but the shooter. In commercial life, you get your validation or otherwise pretty damned quickly, so you generally know if you are cutting it or not. An amateur is best off asking his partner...

Sorry for being so late for this but Rob.... this is complete BS.  EOM

Victor

[stamper]

And it's crap because you tell us so?

:-)

Yes. Rob you have lost it. Maybe time for another "holiday"

[Rob C]

Yes. Rob you have lost it. Maybe time for another "holiday"

And you fail to see the irony in your "Yes."

Oy vey, already.

[nirpat89]

When posters become insulting.

There is a world of difference between getting mad at somebody's flawed argument and breaking into personal abuse.

Some of the folks here with whom I share differences of opinion are actually people I quite like; some are also very accomplished photographers, which makes them even nicer. (Nice is a silly word that means nothing; think about that, and try to offer a definition of the word that holds. But I use it, for the reason that it is all positive things to all people, which is nice, despite meaning absolutely nothing at all. You could say it allows one to accomplish something with nothing. Why am I finding myself thinking of climate change?)

Rob

Hi, Rob:

It's not about being insulting or abusive.  I was alluding more to the fact that the thread has devolved into a discussion of whether there should be political discussion on the forum or not.  As a matter of fact, there were perhaps no more than handful of people who answered OT's intended question about using real names or not.  If I understand correctly, the problem is not if people are rude on The Coffee Corner (if you go there, and like to butt heads with other people with strong opinions, it should be par for the course) but for the other photography related mainstream sub-forums that get less than polite at times (unless there is a spill-over behavioral effect from those discussions that I am not aware of.)  Or at least that's how I figured.  When the thread digresses dominantly into another side discussion, I feel it becomes counterproductive and should be moderated back to the main topic at hand.  If the question about political discussion is important enough (which it looks like from the animated responses on both sides here) may be there should be a separate survey/thread.

All my opinions, of course.


:Niranjan.

[jeremyrh]

Now, you are really, really exaggerating. Nothing of the sort. For most part, it is rhetorical, just a friendly banter between people with opposing opinions. Theatrics. Most of us are actually rather polite and friendly in email and PM exchanges and would gladly go for a beer.

This. Plus lots. Behind the masks worn on the CC forum there are a lot of friendly faces and metaphorical (for now) beer glasses held.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Warning: off-topic.

Not about first and last names, but about photography, or more specifically interest in photography, from a personal experience perspective.

When I was much younger, back in the '80s, I had a small group of friends very much into photography. All Canon guys. Two were what we would call gearheads, one was more of a classical artist, oil painting and graphics. The gearheads had all kind of exotic glass (at the time), like 17mm super-wide angle and 300/2.8 telephoto. Most of their photographs, if they were bothered to shoot, were to demonstrate a particular advantage of the lens. But I digress. The point I am trying to make: it was hard to get hold of those things in then-socialist Yugoslavia. Yes, we had a Canon representative office, but prices were astronomical, due to import duties. So, how did we get all those? Classifieds. It was surprising what you could find in those. And how cheaply, sometimes. You see, having a good camera was the flavor of the day, a matter of prestige, object of desire, so those who traveled abroad would buy it and bring it back.  And then, sort of suddenly, the supply via classifieds dwindled significantly. Amateur video cameras showed up, and became all the rage. Classifieds were full of them. True photography remained a niche domain. For diehards.

Something similar is happening today. Digital isn't new anymore. Once again, video is getting more popular than stills (arguably). But it isn't just the popularity of video. We are simply drowning in photography. Gazillions of bad photography, average photography. But also gazillions of good photography, spectacular photography. We've become desensitized to it. Even to the spectacular ones. Especially to the spectacular ones. What is left to say, in terms of commenting on published photographs, after seeing so many similar photographs? Iceland was initially all the rage, due to its novelty, and since then it has been inundated with tourists, and we inundated with images of it. The same with Antarctica. Or Cuba.

The skills necessary until recently to deliver a decent (technically) photograph, not to mention spectacular, have shifted from photographer to the camera (or even phone). What took me days in Photoshop earlier can now be achieved in a single iPhone shot. It is not even "f/8 and be there." It is just "be there" these days. All it takes for Instagram "influencers," whatever that is, is to be there, at an exotic location, or in a stupidly daring activity. They don't even know what f/8 is, nor they care. Perhaps rightly so.

Once again, it is diehards only.

[jeremyrh]

I completely disagree. No. Just kidding. It’s true - but it leads to some introspection that may be valuable. Why am I pressing this button? Do I want another Peter Lik-style image? Or do I have something unique to say(even if nobody else hears or cares?)

[petermfiore]

 Hi all,

If your saying it's all been done, your right. So what is left? The individual, making a personal statement. Subject matter need not always be what things look like.
Learning how to have something to say about the world we inhabit. Having a point of view. So that when some one looks at the work, they can say very well who this might be.

Very few photographers use the element of time to tell a story. Time is such a wonderful thing to play with. It can take you into other realms. Yes I'm talking about the fine art of photography. Not Pro work, that has a whole other entire set of needs.


the individual needs to go beyond the craft of the medium. And the big secret is, everyone here has a camera that is more capable than their needs. It was never really about the camera. Was it?

Instead of thinking where should we go today. Instead read a novel, poetry, philosophy, et cetera and to help expand yourself to think differently. Which is  discovering who you are.

In the painting world we call this a "wrist in search of an idea". I never wanted to be the wrist and wasn't.

Peter

[KLaban]

The day I believe that cameras are key will be the day I hang them up.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Thank you Slobodan for redirecting this mostly somewhat childish thread into something that might be of interest to at least some of us. The topic might now be something like this:

"Where did we come from, where are we going, and what, if anything, should we be doing about it?"

[BJL]

I am on the side of the current approach of moderation, warnings, suspensions, bans and such. Merely asking for real names would not necessarily get them; demanding evidence of ID (the LL Border Patrol?) like links to a personal website would be a significant barrier and deterrent to new participants, the problem is not so great as to need it ... and the most recent obnoxious behavior I know of involved a "real name" participant.

For a touch of paranoia, it has happened elsewhere that angry people and trolls exploit real ID information in internet forums to harass "enemy" posters elsewhere. (Worst case: swatting.)

Yours,

    "Bruce" Jun-fan Lee (maybe)