nj1

<p>In the recent implementation anonymous rating seems to be odd and unfair but it doesn't bother me much - it's not why I'm here, but seems like it's an issue popping up several times a month in the forum. Discussion is over and over and even "consultants" are not in position to come up with a move.<br>

On my side I would tend to agree with the anonymous ratings under condition that PN will show the rater scoring patterns - a statistic of # of ratings received and scored and average ratings for both as one can find in a member profile. No account or name need to be given just the stats. It should eventually give us a feel are those 3/3 and hidden lows coming from "some anonymous idiot" or fair raters.<br>

Cheers,<br>

NJ</p>

Hi,

I just wonder, for those who are still in disputing mood, what it would be right a "logical" naming classification for the "analog" slides and negatives scanned for the purpose of storing, printing or distribution. Are we still in analog domain?

NJ