Franks ULF Forum

[donald_macklin]

It was the best.I miss it,Anybody else,and why?If you don't care,post photos however lame.

[peter_evans4]

I thought a lot of the political tirades were inane. No doubt the people

who posted them thought my own political tirades were inane, too.

What was remarkable was that most of the political shouting was

good-humored, and even the most apoplectic of (political) foes were

polite and helpful outside politics. Me, I'm just an incompetent Sunday

snapper who for the last few months has been stuck in front of a

computer seven days a week, sometimes going to ULF (or wherever) in

order to prevent himself from going nuts; I don't think I've ever

pretended otherwise (and if I had, surely the pretence would have been

easy to see through); yet Frank, Ralph and others responded to my dumb

remarks most helpfully. I'm particularly grateful to Godfrey DiGiorgi for

his personalized walkthrough of image enhancement in PhotoShop. (I still

haven't bought PS, Godfrey, or had time to fiddle in PSP or similar. But I

did immediately save your page, complete with images, so I can consult

it any time I want.) My thanks to Frank and the participants.

[r s]

It seemed to attract a lot of simpletons that sat around and wanked off to common pet peeves such as Jay and Jay and anyone who may have liked/supported Jay.

<br>

<br>

I thought Frank was a big baby and I can't see why anyone would miss the place.

[donald_macklin]

Say Rich WankSilfer,I've read your posts on Jorges' forum,I think you should confine

yourself and your comments to that ilk.You are not qualified to comment on the

conversations of the ULF as we never shared your excessive enthusiasm for the Leica M3.

[donald_macklin]

In the meantime.'tis the season.Enjoy .<div></div>

[back_alley_.]

I think you should confine yourself and your comments to that ilk.

 

nasty bugger you are!

no need to put down a whole group of people just because you dislike one.

 

joe

[r s]

Donald, too bad Frank's forum is gone - you could have posted your reply about me there and then spent 2 months discussing if maybe I'm Jay.

[donald_macklin]

I liked Jay,and Frank was brilliant, but you Rich ,are a mutt.A leicasycophant to be precise.

[r s]

What's wrong with mutts now?

[donald_macklin]

It's O.K Rich ,nothing wrong.The Ontario Government has just banned the ownership of

Pit Bull Terrier dogs today.May as well ban the ownership of teenagers while they're at

it.Socialist Logic run amuck.

[r s]

Sorry to hear that.

<br>

Here's three photos of my mutt (pitt-mix dog) just 'cause of those sad news:

<br>

<center><img src="http://www.pbase.com/rsilfverberg/image/15994881.jpg"><br>

<i>Walking Into The Picture</i>

<br>

<br>

<img src="http://www.pbase.com/rsilfverberg/image/29802251.jpg"><br>

<i>Reflections</i>

<br>

<br>

<img src="http://www.pbase.com/rsilfverberg/image/34400699.jpg"><br>

<i>Running Down the Hill</i>

</center>

[terry_rory]

Can we assume from the demise of ULF that Frank will be back here soon?

[Alex_Es]

Again. In retrospect, I can only recall how civilized the Underground Leica Forum.

 

The political discussions were straight-open and yet polite, a rare thing these days.

 

As a lot of the discussion was about this forum and Photo.net, I always wondered why all that could not have been said on this website somewhere.

 

I may be the only poster who is indifferent to Jay as an issue. I never had strong feelings about him either way. I never thought he was particularly offensive. At least he did not make sneaky-funny personal attacks like a few people I could mention. He also seemed to know what he was talking about. Pity he never posted any photographs.

[bas1]

Rich,

 

lovely pictures and lovery dog by the way. espcacially the first snap is brilliant.

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

Yes about the pix. They're great.

 

Something had to be done about the Pitt Bulls. I would have gotten up in the legislature and proposed mandatory insurance or a large bond requirement. But then I would have had to get myself elected first.

 

"Socialist logic"= we don't like people getting killed or maimed because soomeone needs to express his ego damage thru ownership of a vicious animal (or gun).

 

BTW I think both the far right Toronto Sun and the police chiefs were in favour of the ban.

 

On the topic of the ULF, I was surprised how boring it was, and how little activity. So many of the "politique" forums were begun with rather obvious trolls by Frank, & people didn't seem to be biting lately.

[michael s.]

Like the dog pics, Rich. Third one, where the puppy seems to materialize out of a cloud of dust, is fun. The others are 'art.' I like them all.

 

Much as I dislike disagreeing with Alex, I must say that far too many recent ulf discussions (as distinct from earlier ones) were patently uncivil. They featured gratuitous taunting and name-calling, and as a dubious "bonus," they were also plagued by the sort of race-slurring and minority-jeering remarks that turned me off to the political discussions there.

[godfrey]

<center>

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW4/large/sc-wharf-in-

fog.jpg"><br>

<i>Wharf in Fog, Santa Cruz, CA - Konica Minolta A2</i><br>

</center><br><br>

<i><b>Peter Evans:</b><br>

... I'm particularly grateful to Godfrey DiGiorgi for his personalized

walkthrough of image enhancement in PhotoShop. (I still haven't

bought PS, Godfrey, or had time to fiddle in PSP or similar. But

I did immediately save your page, complete with images, so I can

consult it any time I want.) ... </i>

<br><br>

Thank you very much for the compliment, Peter. I'm glad to have helped.

<br><br>

I found the ULF fun and entertaining for a bit, but over time the activity became somewhat

slow paced other then the political discussion forum, which I quickly tired of. My interest

was to discuss photography, not political philosophy, as what little competence I might

have in photography is a mastery compared to my ineptness in political debate. I also took

exception to continuing participation when it became apparent that being a part of the ULF

forum could imply assent to a particular political stance. That's when I stopped

participating. It seemed to fold shortly afterwards.

<br><br>

I'd like to invite any other folks who would like a discussion of photography to consider

joining a mailing list I created a few years ago called "SeePhoto". The point of the forum is

to discuss photos, cameras, whatever as pertains specifically to photographic endeavor,

but without restraint as to what kind of camera or process is used. No politics, personal

effrontery or commercial advertising is allowed. I am the owner and list admin, I made and

enforce the rules, and I generally try to do as little as possible. ;-)

<br><br>

It's purely an email list, and does not allow HTML or binary attachments of any kind. No

spam emanates from it. You post pictures to whatever web server you prefer and then

send a URL if you want people to look and comment. The traffic is modest but usually

interesting.

<br><br>

If this piques your interest, you can go to

<a href="http://www.micapeak.com/lists/seephoto/"><b>

http://www.micapeak.com/lists/seephoto/</b></a>.

There is a link to the mailing list's Info/FAQ document there as well as

the tools to subscribe. I hope to see some of you subscribe and participate.

<br><br>

best,<br>

Godfrey

[chip l.]

I too enjoyed the banter over on ULF. Yet of late some had seemed to have gone off meds

or whatever. Lack of censorship in most cases was a nice respite too.

[patrick smith]

Frank is permabanned from PN in general at the highest level; I know that for a fact. I suppose I was a "major player" there right at the very end, so perhaps I have some valuable opinions (I doubt it though). I'll miss the place, and perhaps he is going to get something else going soon. However, as T.S. Eliot said, "The last temptation is the greatest treason: To do the right deed for the wrong reason." I warrant that it was time to scrap the then-current ULF, but doing so because no one (myself included) supported the ultra-right wing ideology Frank had recently adopted strikes me as a bit hollow. It was his party and he could do as he pleased, but there were better reasons to terminate the project.

As a soon-to-be-deleted aside, the last time Jay figured prominently was a couple (maybe more) months ago.

[__hank_boneroneo1]

Ding ding, the bastard's gone.

[godfrey]

<i><b>Patrick J. Smith:</b><br>

..."I warrant that it was time to scrap the then-current ULF, but doing so because no one

(myself included) supported the ultra-right wing ideology Frank had recently adopted

strikes me as a bit hollow."...</i>

<br><br>

I'm not sure I understand your comment here. Only Frank had the power to close it down,

other than the service provider who controls the server in general. So for whatever reason,

he chose to close it down. The shutdown happened shortly after I felt I could no longer

participate due to the conflicts in intent and ideology it represented, and stated such on

the board, but I consider that as coincidence.

<br><br>

Why are Frank's actions "hollow"?

<br><br>

Godfrey

[patrick smith]

He stated the lack of support for his political beliefs as the reason for shutting it down. However, interest in all the fora, even the political ones, had waned. Things had gotten nasty (I'll take some of the blame for that). Finally, the topics of discussion had become repetitive and cyclic. Those were three good reasons to terminate the forum. Doing so simply because no one agrees with you is probably not the best reason to do that. At best, he was looking for an excuse he could rationalize, and at worst, he did so out of childish spite. I certainly prefer to think that the former was the reason.

[godfrey]

Thanks for the clarification. I was no longer participating when Frank stated his intent to

shut it down so I never saw that message. I would agree that shutting down the board in

the way you state seems somewhat lacking.

 

Godfrey

[__stu_evans]

<lack of support for his political beliefs > and <because no one agrees with you> are pretty benign ways of describing the malicious moaning that incessantly pounded a few points while failing to recognize the impact of driving away others who may have contributed. His most notable point was the divisive mood of this election and it's capacity to destroy friendships.

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

I found Frank [Hank?] fairly reasonable on this forum; right-wing, but not a baiter or too personal in his attacks. I missed whatever he did to axe himself.

 

On his own site however, he planted absurd post after absurd post that seemed calculated only to piss people off, only no one seemed to take the bait. Maybe that's why he shut it down-he was bored.