Bullying as a substitute for Argument

[eronald]

Well argued, Edmund!  

It's always a pleasure to provide some oxygen when a fire threatens to go out

Can we now go back to people bashing cameras or people bashing politicians rather than people bashing other people?

Edmund

[stamper]

An all too human frailty, not an indulgence.


I post URLs to things I find interesting or thought provoking because they may be of interest to others, period.

No problem with that Isaac but you then create a spiders web where everyone's opinion is commented upon without you stating your own. That is the problem. When anyone asks for your opinion then you become hostile. Don't feed the Trolls is your favourite riposte. That can be taken to be bullying. Earlier in the thread you commented on Peter Ait's civil post to you. Did you take it on board?

quote

Isaac - to be frank your (almost) only contribution to pictures on this site cannot be real evidence that you are an active photographer any more than somebody quoting only one sentence from their unpublished novel could be considered a novelist.
You may take photographs or you may not - I'm not overly concerned.  But if you do it seems only reasonable to post them sometimes or give a link to them.  Your posts are still perfectly valid without you needing to contribute photographically, but you have to appreciate that they will be very undervalued by anybody who actually is a photographer.  Perhaps you have dug yourself into a deep hole about this over the years and you now find it impossible to post pictures in case they are overtly criticised.  If that is the case - I wouldn't worry - some of the best, most knowledgable posters on the forum are average to mediocre photographers - in my opinion.

Jim

unquote

[BernardLanguillier]

...you now find it impossible to post pictures in case they are overtly criticised.  If that is the case - I wouldn't worry - some of the best, most knowledgable posters on the forum are average to mediocre photographers - in my opinion.

This being said, we all stand somewhere on a learning curve, have different aesthetical preferences, cultural backgrounds, art history knowledge, objectives and constraints.

Leaving aside a few poorly mannered photographers roaming around, I have rarely seen occurrences of harsh criticsm at LL. I would personally be more concerned by indifference than by negative comments but the only way to find out is to submit images to public comments.



Cheers,
Bernard

[muntanela]

I think that to show or not to show photographs on the web tells more of the personality of the photographer than of the quality of the photographs. Both are perfectly harmless behaviours.

[AreBee]

muntanela,

I think that to show or not to show photographs on the web tells more of the personality of the photographer than of the quality of the photographs.

In each case, what do you consider it tells about the personality of the photographer?

[LKaven]

In each case, what do you consider it tells about the personality of the photographer?

In your case I can tell, among other things, that you are willing to work as hard as necessary to get the picture.  Probably you like to climb mountains anyway.  But even after climbing, you're willing to work for it.  And you know when you've got it.  If I aspired to do this kind of work, I'd be taking notes from you. 

In other cases, I can tell when, for example, a photographer does not understand a modernist aesthetic.  When the conversation gets around to street photography for example, I can tell from someone's attempts at street photography whether they understand the aesthetic tradition they are working in or whether they don't.  And that can put their commentary into context.

[Phil Indeblanc]

I'm not sure why ther eare so much ref to coaching...This analogy doesn't translate well. coaching a person on what to do, and most often, to just do it, and explaining technicals are very different. Sorry just doesn't translate in my opinion.

The entire reason why the quote "A picture is worth a thousand words" should be applied here.

[Isaac]

Earlier in the thread you commented on Peter Ait's civil post to you.

No I did not. I did point to Jim Pascoe's demonstration of civility.

No problem with that Isaac but you then create a spiders web where everyone's opinion is commented upon without you stating your own. That is the problem.

Nobody compels you to read what someone else posts.

Nobody compels you to opine about what someone else posts.

As before, my opinion is that the things I post URLs to are "interesting or thought provoking".

[LKaven]

Actually, Isaac, I think you tend to be Socratic.  Sometimes you are thought-provoking.  But one always feels one is on the defensive.  At times it comes across as aggressive in what would otherwise be collegial discourse.  I'm usually happy for the challenge, but prefer a more collegial approach.

Just as a social norm, critiquing photographs is a reciprocating activity.  This is just how humans reckon it.  We open ourselves to criticism by another in a close setting with the understanding that that person will reciprocate and do the same for us.  Otherwise, as we compute it socially and morally, we are left vulnerable to harm where the other person is protected.  It is a one-sided trust, and our brains reject that. 

[spidermike]

As before, my opinion is that the things I post URLs to are "interesting or thought provoking".

Without knowing the full background to this particular part of the discussion, to my mind the 'value' of a link as a point of interest is enhanced by the OP explaining they think it is interesting enough to post the URL. We all at some point link (or quote) something without doing so but if done repeatedly can, for me, become irritating. It is rather like someone walking into a room, making a contraversial comment then walking out when the discussion kicks off.

[stamper]

Without knowing the full background to this particular part of the discussion, to my mind the 'value' of a link as a point of interest is enhanced by the OP explaining they think it is interesting enough to post the URL. We all at some point link (or quote) something without doing so but if done repeatedly can, for me, become irritating. It is rather like someone walking into a room, making a contraversial comment then walking out when the discussion kicks off.

Yes. I pointed this out to Isaac but he doesn't want to take it on board. I strongly suspect he will carry on as "usual"?

[AreBee]

Luke,

Thank you very much for your compliment.

...I can tell, among other things, that you are willing to work as hard as necessary to get the picture...even after climbing, you're willing to work for it.  And you know when you've got it.

You seem certain. What makes you consider that the above is not more than educated guessing?

...I think you tend to be Socratic...one always feels one is on the defensive.  At times it comes across as aggressive in what would otherwise be collegial discourse.

Although not addressed to me, while I do not dispute the above, I would comment that socratic is an effective method to preserve independence of the questioner from the person being questioned, and in so doing maximise the value of the response received.

EDIT: For the avoidance of doubt, my non-dispute should not be interpreted as agreement that Isaac "tend to be Socratic".

[spidermike]

Although not addressed to me, while I do not dispute the above, I would comment that socratic is an effective method to preserve independence of the questioner from the person being questioned, and in so doing maximise the value of the response received.

'Effective' for the questioner may be, and can be a great way to challenge preconceptions. But as a social discourse (which is, after all, the purpose of many a forum) this is by far a minority of situations. The 'Socratic' approach was a form of philosophising, not community discussion and having someone stand back and merely 'observe' can in small doses make them appear either sage and wise ....or done to excess be tedious [not passing judgementon any particular person or event!!]

[synn]

Let's add a little perspective to this: Should a football coach (be that American also) or a boxing coach be able to play the sport well to prove its worth? Or are the art critics renowned for their work? Just saying.

Those who can, do.
Those who can't, teach.

p.s. There are some who can do both, but they are the exception, not the rule.

[armand]

Those who can, do.
Those who can't, teach.

p.s. There are some who can do both, but they are the exception, not the rule.

While what I mentioned earlier has plenty of caveats what you are saying is no better. Let me know when somebody past their prime age can do. And while I'm at it how many great soccer coaches (that's what I'm more familiar with) were also great players.

Obviously photography is different but I think there is some value in some comments even as their posters are not great photographers.
Comments should be taken on their own and only if they make no sense or it's about a technical issues (eg. Photos with great dynamic range, etc) should ask about credentials.

[AreBee]

spidermike,

...having someone stand back and merely 'observe' can in small doses make them appear either sage and wise ....or done to excess be tedious...

Yes, I can appreciate that.

[stamper]

Quote Spidermike Reply#99

'Effective' for the questioner may be, and can be a great way to challenge preconceptions. But as a social discourse (which is, after all, the purpose of many a forum) this is by far a minority of situations. The 'Socratic' approach was a form of philosophising, not community discussion and having someone stand back and merely 'observe' can in small doses make them appear either sage and wise ....or done to excess be tedious [not passing judgementon any particular person or event!!]

unquote

Well said and I heartily agree.

[eronald]

Those who can, do.
Those who can't, teach.

p.s. There are some who can do both, but they are the exception, not the rule.

I'm sure you're both a great bully and a photographer Synn, so it is possible to combine skills.

Edmund.

[synn]

Not what I was going for or the context of the discussion, but I'll take that as a compliment.

[LKaven]

Thank you very much for your compliment.  You seem certain. What makes you consider that the above is not more than educated guessing?

It is certainly educated guessing.  You could have used a helicopter.  Basically I put my bet down that you climbed the mountain.  Was I right?

I'm a little more certain when trying to "read" the photographer when it involves someone posting their best example of street photography.