A Message From Your Moderator

A question was recently posted here ("Would you consider this

statement true?"), that was judged by some participants to be a

"troll" - one that I should delete from the forum. I didn't delete

it, however, but deleted instead those answers that didn't direct

themselves to the question that had been asked. Then I took a day off

from the web to attend to personal business (some of us actually take

photographs) - and on my return found my inbox full of messages marked

"urgent" from forum members, asking, "Where have you been?" <P>

 

Am I back in high school? It feels that way. I step out to go to the

teacher's lounge and, on my return, find that the camera club meeting

has gone to hell, with name calling, spit-ball throwing, identity

theft, and threats of violence. Meanwhile, all the sensible souls

have left the room.<P>

 

First: You are free, of course, to make any judgement you wish about

a question that's posted here. If you decide, however, that a

question is a "troll" or otherwise

pointless, keep the news to yourself. We don't need to be told.

Either answer the question or

don't. Anything other than an answer is a disruption. Imagine

yourself a thinking adult.<P>

 

Second: While I have tried more and more to take a hands-off approach

to this forum, allowing it to assume whatever shape you give it, I

would like to discourage the practice of posting under an obviously

assumed name, or of creating a new name just for the sake of posting a

question or response. Ask yourself: if I'm not willing to post it

under my own name, should I be posting it at all? <P>

 

Also, posting

something under the name of another forum participant will not be

tolerated; this is a formula for getting yourself banned - permanently

- from this forum and from this site.<P>

 

If you're a child in a crowd of adults, prove that you belong there.

And, likewise, if you are one of the adults. Disruption of this

forum, in any form, will <B>not</B> be tolerated.

Thanks, Doug. Welcome back.

It seems to me that a forum is a place where all voices can be heard, whether they be childish or whatever. I am glad I do not participate in the Nikon Forum.

A pointless question is one thing, a provocative question for the purpose of renewing those endless debates such as Canon vs. Nikon is a different problem. And it is so easy to create another member ID to pretent to be someone else. The internet brings us a lot of conveniences, but I guess we have to accept the bad along with the good. I am not sure how you can band those people from posting.

 

As far as moderators go, I think Doug needs some backup or next time he goes on vacation, we may have problems again. I happen to moderate another forum with a few others and the team works quite well. However, we have a more "hands on" approach which is different from Doug's. (And of course, understandably, not everybody likes that approach.) Doug needs a team with a similar philosophy.

 

Bottomline is that we need to maintain the quality of the forum. I (and some others) left Netnews (such as rec.photo) completely because it is totally out of control.

the quality of the forum comes from the members

 

post positive or dont post

Good show, Doug.

 

Cheers,

 

Charlie

<I>It seems to me that a forum is a place where all voices can be heard, whether they be childish or whatever. </I><P>

 

Which is exactly why I didn't delete the purported "tr*ll" in question. All voices can, and should, be heard. And I prefer to err on the side of the questioner.<P>

 

But, anyone who has been on the internet for any time at all, knows that a forum left entirely to its own devices, unmoderated and dependent on the collective judgement of its contributors, soon degenerates into name calling, cliques, plots, and other manifestations of monkey-house behavior - a complete waste of time, in other words. A forum that is over-moderated, on the other hand, becomes sterile and lifeless. I try to find the in-between, where there is enough free reign to keep things lively, but not so much that the place begins to smell too much of the herd.<P>

 

What appears to some people as heavy-handed moderation, appears to others as near-total chaos. There is no pleasing everyone, and finding fault is easy. But as W. Gibson says, the quality of the forum really is its members. Fortunately, most of the members here are, most of the time, top-notch. The moderator intervenes, in my view, only when the atmosphere becomes unproductive, or unpalatable in the extreme. <P>

 

And I know some people would prefer less moderation. Or more. Or a different moderator, perhaps. Tough.<P>

 

<I>I am glad I do not participate in the Nikon Forum.</I><P>

 

That makes two of us, then, who are glad you don't participate. But since you don't, and as far as I remember never have, you have nothing invested, and nothing to complain about.<P>

 

<I>A pointless question is one thing, a provocative question for the purpose of renewing those endless debates such as Canon vs. Nikon is a different problem. </I><P>

 

And as I said, you are free to decide this. But what is tiresome or provocative for one, is not for another. So, if you don't like a question, simply don't answer it. <P>

 

<I>The internet brings us a lot of conveniences, but I guess we have to accept the bad along with the good. </I><P>

 

We don't have to accept everything. Otherwise, what's the point?<P>

 

 

<I>As far as moderators go, I think Doug needs some backup or next time he goes on vacation, we may have problems again.</I><P>

 

I trust that we won't have problems again. Not for some time, anyway. But if we do, I'll deal with them. And I would hardly call 24, 36, or 48 hours a "vacation". <P>

 

<I>I happen to moderate another forum with a few others and the team works quite well. However, we have a more "hands on" approach which is different from Doug's. </I><P>

 

Some people think my approach is already too "hands-on" (see above).<P>

 

<I> Doug needs a team with a similar philosophy. </I><P>

 

Nope. I just need everyone who participates here to be commited to maintaining the fairly high level of discourse that we have.<P>

 

 

<I>Bottomline is that we need to maintain the quality of the forum. I (and some others) left Netnews (such as rec.photo) completely because it is totally out of control.</I><P>

 

Right you are. And I can assure you this will not happen here. Not as long as I'm moderator. Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go back to work. Aloha.

And, btw, thanks for the support and the "welcome backs". I wasn't actually gone for all that long - except for the recent day or two off that I mentioned, I've actually been looking in on things here, at least daily, and leaving well enough alone.<P>

 

In the beginning I was trying to guide the direction of the forum, to make it, as much as possible, like the Leica forum. But then I decided, as I said, to butt out and see how things develop if left alone. It's taken the Leica forum <I>years</I> to become what it is - cohesive, and with a strong sense of community. It will take just as long for this forum to become likewise - but certainly the kernal already exists here.

Well said Doug. I'm with your ideas all tha way. And Kevin, for someone who 'does not participate on the Nikon Forum' you sure are all over the place...

Conny

Thanks for the support Conny. I'm just glad this forum is back to normal. Anyway, I don't mind being called "smartass" - there's some truth in it. And there are worse things to be. Or be called. Cheers.

Hey folks, please not get childish again.

<P>

This really is our (all the participants') forum, but Doug goes through the trouble to create it and maintain it. While I might have some different ideas, I'd try to support Doug as much as I can. But again, the bottomline is the quality of the discussion. If you really want to contribute, contribute with good questions and good answers.

Well said, Shun. Your sentiments match my own. That's exactly the point I wanted to make. Now folks, let's get back to photography discussion, shall we?