._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Marc, you can continue to whine and bemoan my actions, but you're simply wrong. Got it? Good. Don't like it? Tough toenails. Gonna' continue harping on my legal actions repeatedly? That's stalking behavior, and abuse. As we can see, this is not relevant ot travis's thread, which is about people being too serious. Here, Marc is just being childish because I don't do what he wants me to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic_. Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Bailey, �[� Z, you have to be blind to not realize that Marc is expressing the sentiments (and possibly the frustrations) of a large number of people who have posted photographs on this site, but who are too timid to do anything about it. Marc is the only one who has stood up and asked the questions they would like answered. You hide behind "artistic temperament," �legalities of abiding by photo.net rules� and so on. These are just smoke screens. <B>�What�s your game?�</B><P>We know that you�re not a cretin with respect to knowledge of photography, so why do you persist in this obsessive quest that, while not violating the rules and laws of photo.net, is disruptive to the <B><I>spirit of photo.net</B></I>, which is surely the more important variable? Your numerous ratings, without so much as a comment, do not help anyone. If anything, they seem to have aroused contempt for you. Is that what you want, fame? Or do you like being viewed as a major irritant?<P>40,000 ratings equates to 800 per month for 50 straight months, or over 25 per day for 1,500 days straight. I wish I had that kind of discipline for anything! Do you have any tips for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 No game. You don't like it? Okay, don't like it. Ignore it. But it's part of photo.net and ratings are appreciated by those who run the site. Don't like that? Get the rules changed. Got a complaint? Send it to abuse@photo.net If it's not abuse? For someone who's brought this up repeatedly, it just becomes whining. Marc says he's already done something about it. Doesn't seem that way, unless that something is hounding me. If that's *his* game, then that is abusive behavior on photo.net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hans_beckert Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Herr �[� Z likes to critique pictures. SO? I do not. SO? He has critiqued 40,000 pictures. SO? I have not. SO? We have different interests. He has not posted any of his work. SO? I have not posted any of my work. SO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Yes Bailey, I have done something about it whether or not you care to admit it... I did the math others are now also doing. And, I will continue to ask the direct question you keep skirting... HOW can you provide a decent evaluation of anyone's work and crank out 40,000 ratings? It may be legal for you to do so here, but so is challenging the premise by pointing out the mediocrity of mass ratings concerning people's creative efforts. To use your lawyer logic, don't read the thread if you don't like it, because you can't do anything about it... and if you can, it will reveal to everyone that there is indeed a "game afoot". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith_merrill Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 "HOW can you provide a decent evaluation of anyone's work and crank out 40,000 ratings" He can't, so take his rating as a nothing rating. Annoying it is, but so is this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 <i> have done something about ... I did the math </i><p> For you, doing simple division is "doing something about it"? Hehe. Hehehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
octavio bustard Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Just ignore Bailey. It works with kids, why wouldnt it work with him too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 That's the thing, Tim. I posted three serious posts to this thread, whereupon a series of snipes and whines arose that had nothing to do with the topic. It's the whiners who need to get a grip, because while I have not started this, I'm not going away either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Anyone like my bird photo? Wonder what sort of bird it is?<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Hey, do you think Mr Constable would have been jealous of my photo?<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Allen: I don't know about Mr. Constable...it's Mr. AZ you have to worry about. He's jealous of everyone's photographs. Poor guy, maybe we should all chip in and buy him a Leica (or a Zorki) and some lessons. <G> Regards, Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 <i> He's jealous of everyone's photographs. </i><p> Trolling again, Dennis? Try psychoanalyzing yourself for a change, or is that too scary for you to contemplate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 <i> Wonder what sort of bird it is? </i><p> A common snipe, perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 You okay, cupcake? Didn't mean to rattle you.. BTW would you prefer a Fed to a Zorki? <G> Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vic_. Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Herr Hans Beckert, I have to laugh. I clicked on your name and your profile says that you have been on this forum since November 13, 2003, which is just over two months. During this time you have posted 935 times! This must be some sort of record. That's 102 per week, or about 15 a day for 64 days straight. You're obviously in the same league as AZ Bailey when it comes to obsessive traits, though as you say, you have different hobbies! To get back to the issue at hand. Nobody's suggesting that AZ Bailey's breaking any rules or anything remotely close to that. Someone asked him an innocent question as to why he has posted almost 40,000 ratings without offering constructive criticism of any sort, and AZ Bailey cites the rules of photo.net and talks about people attacking him. It's absurd logic. Bailey has knowledge of photography and what is a good photograph, but is not willing to share any of it with those he crucifies with a low rating. Don't you think that people at least deserve a comment on low (or high, or medium) rated photos? People were just trying to engage Bailey in a dialogue, but he chooses to hide behind the US Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hans_beckert Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Vic hat mir geschrieben: "To get back to the issue at hand. Nobody's suggesting that AZ Bailey's breaking any rules or anything remotely close to that. Someone asked him an innocent question as to why he has posted almost 40,000 ratings without offering constructive criticism of any sort, and AZ Bailey cites the rules of photo.net and talks about people attacking him. It's absurd logic. Bailey has knowledge of photography and what is a good photograph, but is not willing to share any of it with those he crucifies with a low rating. Don't you think that people at least deserve a comment on low (or high, or medium) rated photos? People were just trying to engage Bailey in a dialogue, but he chooses to hide behind the US Constitution." People 'deserve' only what they pay for... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 <i> You okay, cupcake? </i><p> I'm fine, p^ssywillow. Your trolling is indicative that you're the one who's troubled, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 <i> he chooses to hide behind the US Constitution </i><p> Is that what I was doing, Vikram? Wow, thanks for explaining. Any particular amendment? [grin] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Jeez....why so angry? Is it something I said? BTW, do you think the Industar 22 lens is superior to the Jupiter 8 in sharpness and contrast? <G> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 <i> why so angry? </i><p> I don't know why you're so angy and trolling, Dennis. I suspect it relates to a post you made on another thread in which, like Marc, you whined about my rating your photos without what you considered due deference. If that's why you're trolling now, it makes you a pretty small fellow indeed, p^ssywillow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 ...and it's obvious you are jealous of everyone's photos. (Is it because you have none of your own?) <G> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
._._z Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 <i> it's obvious you are jealous of everyone's photos. </i><p> I'll say it again: try psychoanalyzing yourself for a change ... or is that scary idea too much for you to contemplate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 Wasn't there another thread somewhere, perhaps now deleted, about how some poor guy pulled all of his photos off photo.net because of you? Am I right? Actually, the guy is a pretty good photographer and I'm sorry to see him go. I would much prefer to see an obviously untalented, frustrated artiste (without any good photos to show) like you leave. While we're at bitching, why don't you tell the folks here how in just the last hour you went back to my site and hit the few remaining photos you had not alrewady rated? Now, AZ, who is trying to provoke whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennis_couvillion Posted January 17, 2004 Share Posted January 17, 2004 P.S. You are extremely jealous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now