Moderator

[cmphoto1]

Well, aparently there is a line that can be crossed. I am glad that

somebody is watching.

 

Hopefully, this is the first step to mature conversations about Minolta.

 

chad

[scott_lewis3]

did I miss something?

[William Kahn]

Yeah, a catfight. I think it started with the "Sony Alpha Unveiled" post earlier.......

[robert_paul1]

Yes, photo.net, removed a number of posts. Let's hope this type of posters are removed permanently from the forum. There has been way too much uncivilized behavior on this forum lately.

[peterblaise]

.

 

... I dunno ... deleting stuff smacks of censorship, and photo.net subscriptions are down. If we want to take more of my money, then we have to also take my input on how to run the place, turn photo.net into a democracy and let us vote and have a constitution as least as supportive of free speech as the US Constitution where photo.net is based. Quite a challenge, eh?

 

If it's not spam, I say let the kids work it out for themselves, eh? We're grown ups, and mere deleting after the fact hardly educes anything through anyone.

 

How about a link, anyone, if you know of one, so we can see what was removed from the archives?

 

I'm glad I subscribe to each post "Notify me of responses" as early as I can so I can read what's on "the Mind of Minolta" EVEN IF IT'S UNPLEASANT - before some mad moderator deletes the discussion! Hey, we're all entitled to a rant now and again. I believe that we can self sooth and influence each other much better if we can READ each other's posts and not have them disappear before we get to interact.

 

Cleanup can be a messy thing! =8^o

 

If it's not spam, I say leave it alone, let us chat it out and make nice with each other.

 

Hey, what's a moderator for if not to MODERATE?

 

I would expect a "Deletor" fo delete, but NOT a moderator!

 

Geesh!

 

It's the 21st century, and hiding spats and censorship are so 20th century, er, 19th century, er, 18th century, er ... oh, you get my point! ;-)

 

Click!

 

Love and hugs,

 

Peter Blaise peterblaise@yahoo.com Minolta ALPHA Photographer http://www.peterblaisephotogrpahy.com/

[William Kahn]

"...let the kids work it out..."

 

OK, Peter, I'll buy into that, but why not shift them to a new forum, call it "Arena", and let them continue there ("You started it!" "Did not!" "Did too!")

 

Last one standing gets a gift certificate from Broadway Photo....

[cmphoto1]

Deleting stuff smacks of censorship, eh? Well, I guess that makes sense, just like yelling fire in a crowded theater is free speech.

 

It is perfectly reasonable for Photo.net to place rules on conduct. Without rules, you have chaos. Look at this forum for an example.

 

Photo.net pays for the bandwidth. This is something that both you and I use but have not contributed to. The very reason I have held back from contributing is exact chaos we have seen here over the last year plus.

 

chad

[theaudiodoc]

Maybe someone complained? Now, lets just talk photography and Minolta/Sony cameras in a civilized manner -- without the juvenile flaming and name calling! Be it Minolta MC/MD Rokkor, Dynax/Maxxum/ or Sony Alpha! Thank you Photo.net!!!!!

[michael_hohner]

Isn't it funny that the people screaming "censorship" never seem to know what censorship actually is? Hint: Deleting postings that violate the Terms of Use isn't.

[james_frater]

There is free speech, but there is also pointless personal abuse, and it is the later which has been in use on here of late by some.

 

Turning normal posts into a place for some to just throw mud.

[cmphoto1]

Go back and read some of those posts. That wasn't mud.

 

chad

[bill_thorlin]

Hopefully this Forum can go forward and the regular contributors ( including those thinking of leaving ) will remain and maybe some of those who have left will return. Also hopefully any newcomers will be made welcome and will continue to contribute to the benefit of ALL of us.

 

Minolta has a future regardless of what it is called or evolves into ( "a rose by any other name" ) so let this Forum follow suit.

[robert_paul1]

Isn't anyone going to discuss Minolta, Konica-Minolta, or Sony-Minolta cameras and equipment, or has this forum become a water cooler for everyone to stand around and gossip?

[tmhutchins]

I've felt as though there have been some tough comments made to people, but hey, sometimes tough is ok if you can learn from it. Nothing like a good coating of leather skin when posting. I understand the mood though, there has been a lot happening and heaps of changes. I didn't see any of the deleted posts, but it'll take more than a few comments to get rid of me as I'm enjoying Photo.net.

[tmhutchins]

By the way, I'm happy to discuss Sony & KM. I'm really quite excited about the whole thing and after a bit of a worrying start I'm more confident to invest in an Sony Alpha camera now. I also think that Sony will have the smarts to knock Canon back a peg or two and deal directly with the Nikon D200. No water cooler for me, maybe a pressure cooker!!

[peterblaise]

.

 

CHAOS?:

 

Earlier in this thread: "... I have held back from contributing [because of the] chaos we have seen here over the last year ..."

 

Peter Blaise responds: Chaos?

 

If you DON'T WANT to be in this thread or forum, you have no one forcing you.

 

What I object to is if anyone WANTS to be in this thread and someone is forcing us NOT to be here by deleting posts from fellow Minolta enthusiasts.

 

Chaos = from http://www.onelook.com/?w=chaos&ls=a :

noun: (physics) a dynamical system that is extremely sensitive to its initial conditions, noun: (Greek mythology) the most ancient of gods; the personification of the infinity of space preceding creation of the universe, noun: the formless and disordered state of matter before the creation of the cosmos, noun: a state of extreme confusion and disorder

 

You can call this forum "a state of extreme confusion and disorder", but I call it a discussion, discourse, dialog, rather orderly, rather processional.

 

I object to personal, ad homonym attacks, but I not want those people banned nor do I want those posts deleted.

 

I'd prefer if the MODERATORS actually MODERATED and participated in such dialogs and set an example of appropriate posts, rather than merely deleting things as if done by an invisible hand, as if THEY were The God Chaos! That's "chaos" to me, at least according to the origin of the word, by my standards!

 

==

 

CENSORSHIP?:

 

Also earlier in this thread: "..."Deleting stuff smacks of censorship, eh?" ... It is perfectly reasonable for Photo.net to place rules on conduct ..." and "... Isn't it funny that the people screaming "censorship" never seem to know what censorship actually is? Hint: Deleting postings that violate the Terms of Use isn't ..."

 

Photo.net Terms of Use: http://www.photo.net/terms-of-use

 

Peter Blaise responds: While I appreciate that our current "strict" or legal definition (OPINION) of censorship includes "prior restraint", I see the deleting that's been going on throughout photo.net as "constructive censorship" for two reasons:

 

1 - Deleting is a message to others to beware NOT to contribute, and as such, I experience it as a threat from someone in power that is effectively prior restraint, especially when people leave as a result of such so-called "moderator" actions.

 

2 - Once deleted, future visitors cannot read, and for them, it's a passive form of "prior restraint".

 

Let's explore why I may have chosen the word "censorship" a little more:

 

censor = from http://www.onelook.com/?w=censor&ls=a :

noun: a person who is authorized to read publications or correspondence or to watch theatrical performances and suppress in whole or in part anything considered obscene or politically unacceptable,

verb: subject to political, religious, or moral censorship (Example: "This magazine is censored by the government"),

verb: forbid the public distribution of (a movie or a newspaper)

 

censor = from (n.) http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=censor :

1531, Roman magistrate who took censuses and oversaw public morals, from L. censere "to appraise, value, judge," from PIE base *kens- "speak solemnly, announce." Transferred sense of "officious judge of morals and conduct" is from 1592; of books, plays, later films, etc., 1644. The verb is from 1882

 

Gee, no "prior restraint" required in those definitions of censorship. Apparently "prior restraint" is a legal term = opinion.

 

Anyway, as I say, for me, setting an example by deleting one person's contribution here, or by deleting an entire thread, definitely sends a message to others to NOT participate, and to self-censor themselves = constructive prior restraint = constructive censorship.

 

And equally importantly to me, such a discussion is so lack luster. I come here to plug directly into the immense, surprising, challenging and inspiring creative energy of fellow photographers, NOT to read the washed out remnants of passive regurgitated cut-n-paste like the endless "aperture is the hole in the lens", and "jpgs are lossy compressed, raw is not" and such. I want the fire of something I've never experienced before, not a dead photography-glossary thrown at newbies by oldies.

 

And as I mentioned, I find it intellectually and socially immature to DELETE rather than to participate, rather than to actually MODERATE! If the moderators believe there is a better way to dialog, SHOW US! Set an example. Sow up, show yourselves, RISK being part of the discussion. I volunteer.

 

==

 

Also earlier in this thread: "... Go back and read some of those posts. That wasn't mud ..."

 

Once deleted, how can we? How can we learn? How can we set an example? Once deleted that's the equivalent of "prior restraint" for future visitors. Ouch!

 

Is THIS part of the deleted thread:

 

"...WE JUST DO NOT NEED THIS !!! I have thought long and hard about my continued involvement with photo.net, I have thought long and hard about renewing my subscription and I have thought long and hard about posting this -

but here goes. Yes [name deleted], this is addressed to you - What is it in your life and work that makes you behave in this manner? What at first seemed an amusing foible has now gone through being boorish and rude and has become offensive and destructive. You say you are a sales representative - I cannot believe that you behave in this way towards your customers, so why do you deem it fit behaviour to display towards genuine people on this Forum? ..."

 

I don't know, I can't read it in the archives, in context anymore, can I?

 

==

 

SEPARATE FORUM FOR FIGHTING?

 

Earlier in this thread: "... why not shift them to a new forum, call it "Arena", and let them continue there ..."

 

Peter Blaise responds: Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. I built a place back in 2001 for such extended discussions off the main lists:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MinoltaListRules/

 

While SOME people ARE willing to participate off the main list, out of the spotlight, mostly, people WANT to do their hashing and thrashing in full view of everyone. I cannot blame them. We like the audience, and off list, it feels like we're "protecting the kids" or something inane. We're all grown up enough here to handle some mud slinging. What I object to is the lack of skills shown in handling, cleaning up and preventing mud slinging, and so on.

 

As I wrote in a recent thread on Yahoo Groups:

 

"... [the group front page states:] PC and G rated - "Polite and Courteous" and "General audiences". Read the archives immediately without waiting, however, first posts are moderated and may be delayed to keep us virus, spybot and spam free, then post freely afterwards. FS For Sale and WTB Want To Buy also permitted here. See other Konica and Minolta and DiMage Yahoo! Groups at

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/search?query=konica&submit=Search [63]

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/search?query=minolta&submit=Search [123]

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/search?query=dimage&submit=Search [29]

 

Those searches bring up as many as 63+123+29=215 other places to chat just on Yahoo Groups! No one is limiting our Minolta sharing possibilities HERE! There ARE four "Minolta" groups that have practiced banning, and it has done NOTHING for them - they have stayed large or small regardless, but their banning often caused competitive groups to erupt in response, and now we have many, many choices on Yahoo Groups, and of course, the web is open elsewhere for other Minolta sharing venues ..."

 

The most open Minolta forum with what I think are excellent examples of dealing with ornery posters is:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/manualminoltafree/

 

No banning, no deletion. The chat goes on, and errant participants are treated like real people, respected, and included, just heavily reminded that "we don't do that here" when they transgress. A shining example, with ~15,000 posts in 5 years.

 

And the group is all the more strong because of their openness and accepting attitude.

 

And they have the history to prove it in their archives - which are NOT sterilized by some censor's standards.

 

==

 

THANK YOU to everyone pitching in their ideas and opinions here. I truly appreciate your contribution, even when I disagree. I WANT dialog. Please keep it up, please keep this place alive, please send a message to the so-called moderators, if there are any, that we want a vibrant Minolta community with no banning and no censorship, but we'd appreciate creative moderatorship that INCLUDES everyone, EXCLUDES no one, and inspires.

 

Your thoughts?

 

Click!

 

Love and hugs, <<-- My how that line aggravates some people! ;-)

 

Peter Blaise peterblaise@yahoo.com Minolta A through DiMage A1 Photographer http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/<div></div>

[peterblaise]

.

 

From a recently deleted discussion:

 

"Sony dSLR announced"

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GOEO

 

Someone concluded: "... Ask Letsgodigital if it's OK what you're doing. And read the Terms of Use. Just assuming anything is dangerous ..."

 

==

 

Peter Blaise responds: DANGEROUS?

 

Let's look up THAT word ... oh, never mind! ;-)

 

I included and attributed a press release and an image on which LetsGoDigital had stamped their copyright logo on EVEN THOUGH IT WASN'T LETSGODIGITAL'S PICTURE! It was a Sony press release picture of a Sony camera, for pete's sake! (Who said THAT first, "for pete's sake"?!?)

 

Yet, in photo.net's own rules at http://www.photo.net/terms-of-use

 

"... include brief quotations and thumbnail images in your submissions that are permitted under the copyright laws as "fair use", provided you correctly attribute these to their authors ..."

 

Apparently everyone has a different OPINION about the interpretation of copyright laws and who should inflict them on each other. It's the copyright owner's responsibility to enforce their own copyright, NOT for each other to inflict our own personal interpretation of fear and loathing on each other!

 

WHO KNOWS why the thread is gone now? Moderation is apparently done by anonymous gnomes!

 

Click!

 

Love and hugs,

 

Peter Blaise peterblaise@yahoo.com Minolta Enthusiast, and Minolta Photographer Enthusiast - I LOVE my fellow Minolta Photographers - oh, yes, love and hugs, to ALL! http://www.peterblaisephotography.com

 

PS - I'm so glad I subscribe to "Notify me of responses" ASAP since I at least get PRIVATE copies of posts and threads that get deleted!

 

"Photo.net - a place to temporarily discuss photography!"

 

Quite a slogan!<div></div>