End of my 'flexible tolerance'

[Tom96127]

Imagaine if every business owner said 'Don't waste any more of my time' With regard to running their own business.
the arrogance!

Don't waste any more of my time.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

 

[mike kobal]

Guys,

It looks like it's time for me to step in AGAIN.

This forum is for the discussion of technical issues regarding
Canon SLR digital cameras and for the sharing of techniques,
information and quality images. It is not a dumping ground for
your latest bikini or semi-nude shot.

Okay. How about we go back to quality cat images. Everyone
loves cats, don't they?

--
God bless our troops!

--
mike kobal

 

[David Birkin]

Imagaine if every business owner said 'Don't waste any more of my
time' With regard to running their own business.
the arrogance!

let's say you're surfing the forum...and as you open a message containing a 'glamour' shot your young child walks in?

or from phils POV...he there are lots of 'glamour' images the site will be added to the banned list of the progs that limit surfing for kids. (i believe this happened once before)

the rules are required since (1) this is a huge site with a high volume of traffic and (2) this is how phil makes a living. he has to safeguard his investment.

think about it!!

 

[Paul Pope]

Na I got a funny feeling that its more aimed at people who post after me like the painted lady guy who posted the other day and Khena etc people see a link to me post and then post themselves but embed the images I never embed a image of my own except when replying to someone elses thread where they have already posted a image ...avoiding embedding is evidently easy you supposedly add a colon to the end of the pics url..

Phil is hard to figure out at times and I try my best not to push
his patience.

Take care,

nt...

--
TonyK

 

[Tom96127]

Let me state first. That your reply is one of the biggest things wrong with forums. YOU did not read my post. Your reply to my post had zero to do with my subject.

Well, my comment was not about the rules. It was about attitude. A business owner Must take the bad with the good.

But when they do not want to be bothered with normal running of the business. It is a sure sign of the start of their downfall.

Lets put the owner in perspective. Photographers are the only people who even know he exists. When he posts his next review. There will be 3 billion people in China who will not care. Greed and ego are the two worst cancers of business.

As far as the rules. There was a link and a warning on the post concerned No photo imbedded.

Imagaine if every business owner said 'Don't waste any more of my
time' With regard to running their own business.
the arrogance!

let's say you're surfing the forum...and as you open a message
containing a 'glamour' shot your young child walks in?

or from phils POV...he there are lots of 'glamour' images the site
will be added to the banned list of the progs that limit surfing
for kids. (i believe this happened once before)

the rules are required since (1) this is a huge site with a high
volume of traffic and (2) this is how phil makes a living. he has
to safeguard his investment.

think about it!!

 

[Paul Pope]

The Canon SLR forum is always the first to be wrapped on the knuckles (ok if you ignore the online mental asylum that the Oly forum has become) for the embedding naughty pics rule ...but on other forums threads like this one below come and go with lots of people embedding different pics not only breaking Phil's glamour rules but clearly breaking the photographers copyright's and causing in effect Dpreview to do so as well. However because its not related to the CDSLRF nothing is ever said ..... not that I paticularly care one way or the other about the embedding issue because it simply isn't a issue worth worrying about but seeing another photographers copyrights violated online and nothing done about it certainly is disturbing.

 

[Paul Pope]

Sorry the thread I was reffering to was ...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1025&message=4779601

The Canon SLR forum is always the first to be wrapped on the
knuckles (ok if you ignore the online mental asylum that the Oly
forum has become) for the embedding naughty pics rule ...but on
other forums threads like this one below come and go with lots of
people embedding different pics not only breaking Phil's glamour
rules but clearly breaking the photographers copyright's and
causing in effect Dpreview to do so as well. However because its
not related to the CDSLRF nothing is ever said ..... not that I
paticularly care one way or the other about the embedding issue
because it simply isn't a issue worth worrying about but seeing
another photographers copyrights violated online and nothing done
about it certainly is disturbing.

 

[Michael Salzlechner]

Paul

i guess it has somewhat to do with the number of people in a forum.

The Fuji SLR forum with 10 people, the Nikon SLR forum with 100, the Kodak SLR forum with 5 and the Sigma SLR forum with 2.

It is a lot easier here where you have thousands of people posting to p i s s somebody off.

Of course i much rather see the boring cat pictures go (that goes for dogs too)

Havent seen a behind the scenes from you in a while. Really enjoyed seeing that part also allthough it was sometimes hard to concentrate on the scene ...

--
Michael Salzlechner
StarZen Digital Imaging
http://www.starzen.com/imaging

photos at http://www.salzlechner.com/photo

 

[jonlg]

Michael Tapes got a big rap over the knucles for announcing Archive Creator, probably the biggest non camera related news in the digital world last year.
You should have been up for that one PhilA, tisk tisk.........

The Canon SLR forum is always the first to be wrapped on the
knuckles (ok if you ignore the online mental asylum that the Oly
forum has become) for the embedding naughty pics rule ...but on
other forums threads like this one below come and go with lots of
people embedding different pics not only breaking Phil's glamour
rules but clearly breaking the photographers copyright's and
causing in effect Dpreview to do so as well. However because its
not related to the CDSLRF nothing is ever said ..... not that I
paticularly care one way or the other about the embedding issue
because it simply isn't a issue worth worrying about but seeing
another photographers copyrights violated online and nothing done
about it certainly is disturbing.

 

[Tom96127]

It is almost as if 'C' corp. is running this forum.

The Canon SLR forum is always the first to be wrapped on the
knuckles (ok if you ignore the online mental asylum that the Oly
forum has become) for the embedding naughty pics rule ...but on
other forums threads like this one below come and go with lots of
people embedding different pics not only breaking Phil's glamour
rules but clearly breaking the photographers copyright's and
causing in effect Dpreview to do so as well. However because its
not related to the CDSLRF nothing is ever said ..... not that I
paticularly care one way or the other about the embedding issue
because it simply isn't a issue worth worrying about but seeing
another photographers copyrights violated online and nothing done
about it certainly is disturbing.

 

[William C]

If you do not stop it early when forum turbulence starts it only turns
into a very ugly storm of replies. Cannot be flexiable at all! There are
always someone looking to cross the line where the rules are set or
out do someone else’s contentious thread.

Maybe you should reduce the number of messages that came be
reply to a thread to maybe 50. It seems after the 50 message
the replies are being restated again and the insults always start late in
thread.

My Two Cents

Bill

--
“What actually happens in the real world is what photographers needs to know.”
Michael Reichmann – Luminous Landscape

 

[orlandoom]

It is almost as if 'C' corp. is running this forum.

That would explain why end of "Flexible tolerance" was only
applied to this forum and no others.
Next thing you know, cats and dogs will require underwear.
Orlando

 

[Brian Kennedy]

Guys,

It looks like it's time for me to step in AGAIN.

This forum is for the discussion of technical issues regarding
Canon SLR digital cameras and for the sharing of techniques,
information and quality images. It is not a dumping ground for
your latest bikini or semi-nude shot.

Our posting rules have been static for almost two years and are
VERY clear.

"Glamour / Nude / Bikini pictures - Please do not embed such images
in your messages, while we understand that such pictures
(tastefully shot) are a big part of commercial photography we do
have a worldwide audience and wide range of paying advertisers. If
you wish to bring a gallery of such images to peoples attention
then please just post a link. We will not allow nude / semi-nude
pictures of children or links to such galleries."

Having already spoken to a well known poster on this forum I'm sure
he clearly understands these rules and I expect him to lead by
example.

This is the end of my tolerance of this kind of image in messages,
it lowers the tone and doesn't contribute one bit. From now
onwards I will be deleting and banning (without return) anyone who
breaks the above rule or any others. Read carefully:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/rules.asp

Don't waste any more of my time.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

--
Brian Kennedy
http://www.briankennedy.net/

 

[Peter Bendheim]

I keep coming to this website is for the user forums. The reviews are VERY sparse compared to the products coming out almost daily, news items are infrequent and there seems to be considerable product bias.

It's the USERS that make this website viable NOT the owner of the site. And it is the CRITICAL MASS or VOLUME of users that make the comment valuable. I don't come here for the owner provided info - there is not enough of it. That has clearly deteriorated makedly in recent times.

Remember, Phil, your site is only viable as long as your user base remains loyal.

PB

It is almost as if 'C' corp. is running this forum.

That would explain why end of "Flexible tolerance" was only
applied to this forum and no others.
Next thing you know, cats and dogs will require underwear.
Orlando

--
http://www3.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=2145

 

[Nigel Pond]

Douglas, as Ann Robinson would say "You are the weakest link, goodbye!"

And I think it's B.S. you sell out to advertisors and prohibit
bikini photographs.

I respect your rules, I'll grant you that, but I DO NOT agree with
them -- you'll find this is the case for most of the people here
that generate ad revenue for you.

Guys,

It looks like it's time for me to step in AGAIN.

This forum is for the discussion of technical issues regarding
Canon SLR digital cameras and for the sharing of techniques,
information and quality images. It is not a dumping ground for
your latest bikini or semi-nude shot.

Our posting rules have been static for almost two years and are
VERY clear.

"Glamour / Nude / Bikini pictures - Please do not embed such images
in your messages, while we understand that such pictures
(tastefully shot) are a big part of commercial photography we do
have a worldwide audience and wide range of paying advertisers. If
you wish to bring a gallery of such images to peoples attention
then please just post a link. We will not allow nude / semi-nude
pictures of children or links to such galleries."

Having already spoken to a well known poster on this forum I'm sure
he clearly understands these rules and I expect him to lead by
example.

This is the end of my tolerance of this kind of image in messages,
it lowers the tone and doesn't contribute one bit. From now
onwards I will be deleting and banning (without return) anyone who
breaks the above rule or any others. Read carefully:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/rules.asp

Don't waste any more of my time.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

--
Nigel Pond
SMR Group ( http://www.smr-group.co.uk )
SMR Home Theatre ( http://www.smr-home-theatre.org )
SMR Forums ( http://www.smr-forums.com )
SMR Archive ( http://www.smr-archive.com )
HighFidelityReview ( http://www.highfidelityreview.com )

 

[Stan29286]

I would prefer that cat pictures also be banned. Have you noticed that almost all such pictures show nude cats? Given that bestiality is not all that uncommon a perversion, do you want to encourage the perverts?
Next thing you know, you'll be photographing sheep :> )
Stan

Okay. How about we go back to quality cat images. Everyone
loves cats, don't they?
--

God bless our troops!

 

[TonyK_in_Texas]

Sorry to disagree, a history instructor has had cat and says it is stringy. Too much muscle tissue and not enough meat.

Dog on the other hand...

Cats taste like chicken.

--
TonyK

 

[TonyK_in_Texas]

I know and acknowledge you never post an embedded image yourself. You are the only poster I am aware of in the Canon SLR forum that closest met Phil's comments.

And I usually enjoy your posts. The ones I don't, I don't have a need or desire to comment on. It amazes me how many people will chime in when their input will not help. Its like they just want to hear themselves talk.

Na I got a funny feeling that its more aimed at people who post
after me like the painted lady guy who posted the other day and
Khena etc people see a link to me post and then post themselves but
embed the images I never embed a image of my own except when
replying to someone elses thread where they have already posted a
image ...avoiding embedding is evidently easy you supposedly add a
colon to the end of the pics url..

--
TonyK

 

[TonyK_in_Texas]

And comparisions between Fuji, Canon, Nikon, Oly, etc.

I agree. How about an Equipment Shopping Forum?

Phil could get rid of the noise by creating a "equipment shopping"
forum. That forum could house all the Dell and Ritz posts on the
latest released camera.

--
TonyK

 

[TonyK_in_Texas]

I am an escapee of the Oly SLR forum when I purchased a D30 and sold my E10.

The Canon SLR forum is always the first to be wrapped on the
knuckles (ok if you ignore the online mental asylum that the Oly
forum has become) for the embedding naughty pics rule ...but on
other forums threads like this one below come and go with lots of
people embedding different pics not only breaking Phil's glamour
rules but clearly breaking the photographers copyright's and
causing in effect Dpreview to do so as well. However because its
not related to the CDSLRF nothing is ever said ..... not that I
paticularly care one way or the other about the embedding issue
because it simply isn't a issue worth worrying about but seeing
another photographers copyrights violated online and nothing done
about it certainly is disturbing.

--
TonyK