Jump to content

joshroot

PhotoNet Pro
  • Posts

    10,835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by joshroot

  1. <p>Nadine was a wonderful photographer and a very kind, enthusiastic, friendly and above all, helpful soul to all of the Photo.net community. I thanked her multiple times for all that she did here, but I somehow doubt that it was ever really enough considering all that she had brought to the site. <br /><br />One of the last projects that she worked on for the site before her health started failing was to help judge last November's wedding photo contest. Knowing now that she must have been exhausted and not feeling all that great, I remain even more impressed at all the energy she had to spare for Photo.net.<br /><br />My thoughts go out to her family and loved ones. And I hope that they can take some small measure of sunlight during a cloudy time in knowing just how much Nadine meant to those of us in this little corner of the internet.<br /><br /></p>
  2. <p>We're always doing some soul-searching up here in the Northwest. Comes from the rain all winter. Nothing else to do but sit inside, process photos, and think....</p>

    <p>Or just gor-tex up and head out anyway!</p>

    <p>Welcome to Photo.net.</p>

  3. <p>It is a reasonable question to ask. The display defaults to either FB likes or votes, I can't remember which. So once some of the photos make it to the top, they are likely to stay at the top, if your theory is correct.</p>

    <p>There are a number of different things we could look at to fix it. The "heats" aspect is kind of interesting. But I don't think we yet have the critical mass of voters to make that happen successfully. But it's something to think about for the future. </p>

    <p>I think for the moment, I will consider reducing to one the number of submissions allowed per user per contest. Then also ask Jin to see if a random display can be the default, with other sorting criteria being options.</p>

  4. <p>I would say that a bit more effort is called for by both the photographer and the viewer. The photographer should make a bit of effort to explain what they were trying to do or say or show with their image, and the viewer should try to imagine a viewpoint (or even experience level) that is different than their own when writing a critique.</p>
  5. <p>Folks,</p>

    <p>I'm not trying to be cagy or disingenuous here. Photo.net is a business. We have to pay our bills or we will cease to exist. That's not a secret and has not ever been a secret as long as I have been running the show. It's not the most enjoyable aspect of the internet, but the "everything on the internet is for free" days of the late 90's and early 2000's are gone. I do my best to keep advertising as photographic-based as possible. </p>

    <p>If you don't want to receive emails like this in the future, I have explained a couple different ways to make sure that you do not receive them in the future. I would encourage you to take advantage of them. </p>

  6. <blockquote>

    <p>photo.net selling email addresses to earn money.</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>Photo.net does not sell email addresses to anyone. NYIP, Blurb, Canon, New Egg or any of the other past or present Photo.net partners do not get any access to Photo.net member information. </p>

  7. <p>Ann,</p>

    <p>You can either believe that there is some sketchy conspiracy here to track your life and steal your information or you can believe that this is just an email sending system used by thousands of companies. It's up to you.</p>

    <p>I would encourage you to use a bogus email for all your internet activity if you are that worried about it. I guess I'd also encourage you to only use anonymous computers in public locations and not have your home connected to the internet at all. I get that this is a big issue for you, your posts have made that clear over the years. I'm not sure why you continue to use the internet when you fear it so much, but that is your choice.</p>

    <p>I've been very clear about what is going on from our end and I have offered multiple ways for users to not receive emails from us. That is as much as I can do.</p>

  8. <p>We use a mailing system (Silverpop) to send out some emails, this improves delivery and (usually) prevents the email as being tagged as spam. I talk about it on the newsletter page as well because we've been using Silverpop to send the newsletter for over 4 years now:</p>

    <p>http://www.photo.net/info/newsletter</p>

    <blockquote>

    <p>Photo.net uses a company called Silverpop to mail out the newsletter. Due to the sheer size of the photo.net mailing list we have to be very careful about the way we send out mail. If we weren’t, all mail coming from the photo.net servers would quickly get tagged as spam. This would be particularly bad because new user email, topic notifications, email requests, and password reminders would all be blocked as a result. This would, understandably, cause a huge logjam of problems. This is where Silverpop comes in. They are used to working with email and internet service providers to prevent legitimate email from being blocked. Silverpop does mailings for companies like Buy.com, Golfsmith, Mazda, and Jetblue. They are a well-respected business working with Fortune 500 companies, not merely a fly by night spam-marketer.</p>

    </blockquote>

  9. <blockquote>

    <p>I don't suppose you'd put an opt-out option in our workspace.</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>Jin is working on that. But to be honest, we're switching mailing providers (away from Silverpop) and it is proving more complicated that we expected. It will appear as soon as we can get it done.</p>

    <p>In the meantime, anyone who has deleted the email and cannot retrieve it should email me at contact@photo.net and I will manually add your email to the "do not send" list.</p>

  10. <blockquote>

    <p>I have disabled getting HTML emails from photo.net. The NYIP email has bypassed that setting. How did that happen?</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>That setting only affects the server sent emails like the forum alerts and whatnot.</p>

  11. <p>If you are talking about the "click here to view" link, no, it's not a photo.net page. It's a Silverpop link. Silverpop is a mailing company that powers a lot of our bulk email (newsletters etc). Their web pages look like "http://links.mkt691.com". If you are talking about any of the other links, they are http://www.nyip.com pages.</p>

    <p>I have no idea why a java plugin would be required. On the other hand, java is required for a lot of stuff these days, so if you do not have it installed in your browser, I can see how you might get that message. I myself did not get any java message on any link.</p>

    <p>And as I said, you can opt out by clicking the opt out link in the email, same as any email photo.net sends.</p>

  12. <blockquote>

    <p>I got the same email. Simultaneously I got an email from Rosco with no reference to PNet. The timing seems to be more than coincidental.</p>

    </blockquote>

    <p>I am not sure what "Rosco" is. Given that fact, it is unlikely that the two emails have anything to do with each other.</p>

×
×
  • Create New...