No Words forum

Discussion in ' Site Help' started by Tony Parsons, Mar 26, 2021.

  1. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    Well, I seem to have started quite an 'animated discussion' here ! ​

    As has been said, discussion of images can easily take place via other, clearly defined, avenues. Locations, species etc identification and other relevant comments By The OP, On The Original Post are catered for in the Forum introduction, as kindly pointed out by Samstevens, and using this to justify the bending, manouevering or breaking of the guidelines is unacceptable, in my view.

    Evolution has been mentioned - as I understand it, Evolution is the adaptation by a species to meet changing conditions. This surely is the opposite of the current situation - we are attempting to discuss whether the aforementioned conditions require changing.

    There is also the aspect that 'No Words' is a forum wherein the images can be posted to stand by themselves (not, of course, that it would ever happened in such a polite, well-regulated community as Photo.Net, but this does mean that any irrelevant personal comments are not posted), which I feel may be one of the reasons for the Rules / Guidelines / Restrictions (delete whichever you wish), to let the less-confident among us post images they wish to share, with no risk of adverse comment.

    Do not, also, forget the 'Like' facility, which enables encouragement to be given to the OP, whether for the subject matter or the technique of the image.
  2. Thank you, my good man.:)
    This is true, but incomplete. It is not limited to the OP. Any participant may say a few words about their own photo, by way of giving certain types of introductory information. Note how often that’s been done and it’s not a problem. The problem is responding to or commenting on others’ photos. The relevant guideline, in living color this time.

    “A sentence or two regarding how you made the photo, the technique, or about the subject is permitted, however discussions and comments about the submissions are not allowed in this forum.”

    ... or as a knee-jerk reaction, or to let everyone know you’ve been there, or to get a few in return for yourself, or to exclude folks you don’t like regardless of their photos. So many options and then some, but, yes, LIKE is an available response mechanism.;)
  3. Poor ol’ Sammy, still hung up on LIKES.

    Ring any bells, Sam?
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2021
  4. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    @samstevens said :

    Sorry, @samstevens, mayhap I was unclear in my comment, or my interpretation of the rules. I intended to indicate that comments by the OP of that particular image, at the time they made the post (or within the edit window) were acceptable, and indeed often essential, for explanation or other relevant purposes. By its very nature, this must surely apply to, and be limited to, the OP of the image in question, not the originator of the thread in the forum.

    Apologies for any unintentional obfuscation.
  5. Ahh, got it. I generally think of OP as the person who starts the thread. Thus, my misunderstanding. Thanks for the clarification.
    Tony Parsons likes this.
  6. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    Perchance thou canst explain the reasoning behind thy objection, prithee ? Egad, milady, 'tis interesting, instructing and informative to view results obtainable with equipment dating from prior to mine own natal day. If 'twere not for this demonstration of skills and ability, much would be treated as mere dusty museum pieces, given a brief glimpse prior to moving on - and none of the 'modern' items we now use could exist without the technology and knowledge base upon which to build.

    'C'est magnifique, mais ca n'est pas Daguerre'.
  7. The thread is equipment based (old camera or old lens) which is not allowed (allegedly)

    Hope this helps.
  8. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    OK, I take your point - thank you for the explanation. However, since no specific equipment is a requirement, merely its age, I feel this may be a grey area where a little leeway can be allowed. No doubt the Moderation team will make any changes that they deem fit - mayhap it could be moved to the 'Retro' forum ?

    If you are not comfortable mentioning this to Walt, would you like me to do it, mentioning no names of course ?
  9. I would let sleeping dogs lie, there is plenty of wiggle room. After all what is "old" to some, is pretty new to others. My newest DSLR is over ten years old, which might be regarded as "old", particularly by people who are nowhere near as "old" as I am.
    mickeysimpson likes this.
  10. As the self appointed Inspector Knacker, I leave it up to you.

    But, please, try and realise restricting posts to old (or new of AF or MF) stuff is a restriction. NW is about ideas not kit.

    Edit: This is in reply to Tony
  11. Fixed Focal Length Friday appears to be quite popular - despite the quite severe restriction.
    Monochrome Monday - that a restriction too?

    Let's not try to fix what isn't actually broken.
  12. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    'Eye' see.

    But, as others mention, there are various 'restrictions' in both NW and other Forums (Fora ?). Is this one, which seems to be quite popular (currently 15 posts) any different ?

    This is the end of my 'contribution' to this particular portion of the discussion,
    which seems to have strayed somewhat from my original intention.

  13. Tony, instead of PMing the naughty NW miscreants and pointing out your concerns about too many comments, you kicked this nonsense thread off so don’t act all innocent if your stupid thread goes AWOL.
  14. I wholeheartedly agree. See my first post in the thread (storm in a teacup). My subsequent posts were tongue in cheek.
  15. I hadn’t noticed :oops:
  16. Who's going to have the last word, Tony P made his point a long while back.
    Tony Parsons likes this.

  17. The very last thing I'd want to do would be to provide "explanatory information" to make my " pictures meaningful and interesting" to the viewers of No Words They're on their own. A recent pic of mine in No Words in the thread Dog Walkers, if I did want to provide provenance and explanation, I'd do that in Street and Documentary. After posting the pic I thought about the taking of it. I think the explanation for its existence would require about 800 words.
  18. One of the reason I quit attending a local photo club.

Share This Page