Reading mode: Light Dark

MichaelT has been banned!!!

Go to last post
Mike Greer said:
In conversation with Michael, I expressed these very concerns to
him directly. He disagreed with my opinion. So while banning seems
like such a drastic step (especially if no warning went out), the
decision was Michael's. He had to know he was straddling the fence
and has been for a very long time.
Click to expand...
Yes, Mike. Have to say I agree completely. And something's very fishy with the idea that he attempted to buy advertising all of a sudden. Perhaps even he realized that he had crossed the line... a little too late.

--
BryanS
 
You may find it "fishy". I might've, too, except my own experience leads me to believe what Michael says about the attempts to buy advertising.

Did he wait too long to attempt to buy advertising? Probably so.

But I do believe that he attempted to do so, and that Phil (for whatever reason) apparently ignored those requests.

Ignoring requests and banning without any warning (even if none is really required) isn't a very bright thing to do, IMO.

What Michael did perhaps wasn't all that bright, either. However, months of this "subliminal advertising" (as one put it) have been going on, with apparently no warnings from the one that matters, ie, Phil.

Perhaps warnings by you (and others) made Michael feel that he should start to pursue the avenue of buying advertising. I believe that's probably what happened. (No, I haven't been told that - - it's speculation).

At any rate, the bottom line is that I think Phil loses, MichaelT loses, and we all lose with what's happened so far. There's got to be a better solution.

I'd like to see announcements made for (or by) the likes of MichaelT, Fred Miranda, Chris Breeze, etc. about their products, which are (as somebody else pointed out) truly more like shareware than commercial products. Some sort of fee would be appropriate, IMO. I think that would benefit ALL involved.
BryanS said:
Mike Greer said:
In conversation with Michael, I expressed these very concerns to
him directly. He disagreed with my opinion. So while banning seems
like such a drastic step (especially if no warning went out), the
decision was Michael's. He had to know he was straddling the fence
and has been for a very long time.
Click to expand...
Yes, Mike. Have to say I agree completely. And something's very
fishy with the idea that he attempted to buy advertising all of a
sudden. Perhaps even he realized that he had crossed the line... a
little too late.

--
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Davidp Phil is taking heat for not doing reviews fast enough. Know he has to answer email about stuff that is cover in the FORUM RULES. Seems that Phil is very busy and can not keep everyone happy all the time. So banning some one who broke the rules seems ok to me. I dont see how this is a surprise Phil is Phil. This is Phil's site. He wrote the rules. I still do not understand the problem. Micheal broke them he got banned. Why is phil the bad guy, and Micheal the victim.
 
pwc said:
pwc
DavidP said:
Plus, I think MichaelT (like myself) is above such behavior.
Daven said:
why does he just create a new username and come back in?? he could
go by the name Mr. T....well all know who he is..... : )
Or Ice T......Or T bone.........or T and A.............or Ti Ti
Ta.........or the best yet.... " T Ban" thats the ticket!
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
If I was banning people from my website, I would be very carefull about who I ban.

Some people have the ability to shut down a website by flooding it to death. For a site like Dpreview, it would probably only take a few hundred computers to shut it down. (very easy)

Fact is: This Mike T guy probably doesnt give a rats behind. There is life after dpreview and plenty of it.

I do think that if Phil banned this guy because of a few bent rules then he is being a jerk. If the guy was breaking the rules constantly and never helping the newbies then maybe he got what he deserved.

Fact is: Its Phil's site and he can do with as he pleases.

Fact is: Im just a newbie so what the heck do I know :)

Murphy
 
Is that even a world? LOL.

I'm not trying to paint MichaelT as the victim.

Phil's free to do as he pleases. That much is obvious. And I support his right to do as he pleases, as arbitrarily as he pleases.

On the other hand, I think his decision here was a bad one. We can all speculate as to what exactly happened, Phil's reasons, etc. Most of that is immaterial, though.

What it all boils down to, in the end, is did Phil make a decision that was good for him, good for the forum, (and, to a lesser extent, good for MichaelT). In my opinion (for whatever that's worth), the answer is a resounding NO.

Do I support Phil's right to make a bad decision? You betcha. Could he convince me the decision wasn't bad? Possibly, though I doubt he'd really try, either.

In the final analysis, though, I don't think the forum or Phil benefits from Phil's decision. Would you agree or disagree? (Not that either of our opinions matters one bit, mind you).
kevin keller said:
Davidp Phil is taking heat for not doing reviews fast enough. Know
he has to answer email about stuff that is cover in the FORUM
RULES. Seems that Phil is very busy and can not keep everyone
happy all the time. So banning some one who broke the rules seems
ok to me. I dont see how this is a surprise Phil is Phil. This is
Phil's site. He wrote the rules. I still do not understand the
problem. Micheal broke them he got banned. Why is phil the bad
guy, and Micheal the victim.
Click to expand...
--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise
 
Mike,

I think there's a problem with your stance. I am not a "supporter" of Michael Tapes - I'm a user of his shareware. As an owner of a couple of Canon camera's with which I earn a living, I'm very interested in this software which is distributed as "shareware" , bears no resemblance to a traditional product from an established company and can only be marketed and supported at aminimum fee through the freedom of the net. What appears to you as advertising is information to many of us - and could well benefit many more. If you don't like the topic, just don't read the thread - it's really that easy.

There are no issues to miss or gloss over unless one makes the extra effort to make an issue of them. John Malloy
Mike Greer said:
Michael Tapes has a lot of supporters in this forum and in this
thread. But his supporters miss or gloss over the issues here.
Click to expand...
 
What's to miss? It seems there are two types of people: Those who know about Michael and his products, and those who don't. The one's who don't won't know where to find him unless they ask a simple question like: is there any software out there I need, I'm new. Or they bump into a discussion thread about Yarc plus or this new archiver of Michael's. Not a biggy. I think off-loading some of the stuff from this forum over onto Michael's is ok.

Now about the warning. My 10 year old daughter told me she was upset because the jerks in her classroom are able to disrupt the class and get only a warning. I don't think either Michael or Phil are jerks. Phil sets the rules and enforces as many of them as he wants, when he wants, how he wants. Those of us who work for an employer know what that feels like. It's not something new. And most of us eat free here at this forum. I don't buy from the advertisers because they charge too much. I don't even like the advertising. I read the news. I read some of the interesting posts. I make note of some of the technical answers. I'm still waiting for Yarc Plus to come out in mac format. Not holding my breath.

My two cents.
Bob
 
Jim Dawson said:
With all the junk that gets posted here, you would think those
subjects would be welcome. I would welcome anything that benefited
my audience.

I suppose that the minority won again, the ones that complained
about Michael's posts.

Jim Dawson
EricF said:
If you do, go to his forum. If you need answers/tech support, go to
his forum. If you want to voice your support, go to his forum.

Look, other good guys like Chris Breeze, Fred Miranda, ..., etc
have long abandoned this board and started their own. And there are
tons of good (better) stuff there.
Click to expand...
--
Canon 1D
Click to expand...
--
Print your photo in Hong Kong with http://www.URphoto.com
We are the best here. 4R@US$0.13 with Frontier

See my equipment experience in my profile.
 
Bryan,

You might think it's "fishy," but unfortunately, you don't have the facts. Given the chance, Michael might discuss the email he sent to Phil six weeks ago that included the reason he was inquiring about advertising for Archive Creator when he did not for YarcPlus. Maybe Phil (the only person who has that email who has access to this site) will explain. I believe that what Phil did was wrong (could you have guessed?), but I believe that he is honest. Thus, as I said earlier, I do not believe that Phil would deny that Michael inquired about advertising six weeks ago, well before he announced the product.

I've expressed my feelings as you've expressed yours, but I don't want to become a conduit for information. I wish that Michael had the chance to set the record straight. But he can't, at least not here.

JC
BryanS said:
Mike Greer said:
In conversation with Michael, I expressed these very concerns to
him directly. He disagreed with my opinion. So while banning seems
like such a drastic step (especially if no warning went out), the
decision was Michael's. He had to know he was straddling the fence
and has been for a very long time.
Click to expand...
Yes, Mike. Have to say I agree completely. And something's very
fishy with the idea that he attempted to buy advertising all of a
sudden. Perhaps even he realized that he had crossed the line... a
little too late.

--
BryanS
Click to expand...
 
We have rules which protect users from sales messages in the forums. Michael despite being a long term user of the forums decided to ignore these rules and posted an advert for his product. FWIW he has apologized and I have removed the ban. What's the point of rules if you don't inforce them.

What goes on between myself and Michael over email is a private matter and I had hoped people here would have more common courtesy than discuss it in public.
JC said:
Yes, Michael Tapes has been banned from posting in all forums on
DPReview.

I was one of the alpha testers for Archive Creator and, like so
many of you, believe this is an extremely useful and valuable
product. I recently spoke with Michael and he informed me that
when he attempted to post in one of the Archive Creator threads, he
was unceremoniously informed that he was banned for “abuse” of the
site. No email from Phil beforehand, no notice whatsoever, no
regard for all that he has contributed in discussions about Archive
Creator and, of course, YarcPlus. Since Michael received no other
information regarding the ban, it is not possible to know for sure
why he was banned. Presumably, Phil banned Michael for violating
the rule against advertising.

The irony of the situation is that Michael has emailed Phil several
times within the past few days in an attempt to purchase
advertising for Archive Creator on DPReview! Phil, however, failed
to respond to any of Michael’s emails. Michael emailed Phil again
after being banned and still no response.

So where does this leave the Canon SLR forum (and other forums as
well)? Questions and comments about Archive Creator continue to
come in, but the person best qualified to answer those questions
cannot respond. Questions about YarcPlus also will continue to be
posted but, again, Michael will not be able to provide the level of
service and support that he has in the past. To those who would
say that users of the software can still email him, you should
realize that there is a benefit in users posting questions and
getting replies so that all users may benefit, even if they did not
have that specific issue. Moreover, individuals who have not
purchased the software also get to see the strengths and even
weaknesses (such as lack of Mac support) of the software.

That’s the practical argument. Another argument is that the ban is
STUPID! I know it’s Phil’s site and he can do with it what he
pleases. But whom is he helping by banning Michael? And how can
Phil, in good conscience, ban Michael for advertising when Phil has
refused to answer Michael’s emails asking to pay for advertising?
Someone mentioned a double standard exists. But given Michael’s
attempt to purchase advertising, it seems as if there is just an
arbitrary standard. Phil’s apparent hubris helps no one, not even
Phil.

I could on, but I guess you all get the message. A valuable
contributor to the forum has been banned for providing information
about a new product, despite his attempts to purchase advertising
for that product. Now let’s see if I get banned as well, even
without violating any of the rules.

JC
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
 
Yes,

I agree with you very much...of course I haven't read all of michael's posts...but the one I did read (and he replied to me a couple of times too) were never denigratory of competitive products...they were never pointless celebrations of michael's product...

they were always constructive answers, sometimes related to YP, sometimes not...I liked the guy very much...I think it's a stupid decision to have banned him...

I don't know Phil...so I can't really judge him. But once I posted the same message twice by mistake in the same forum (I just thought the first message did not go through)...and I got quite a rude message from Phil about spamming. I thought he could have been a bit more tactful...but since the fault was mine, I replied to him apologising...of course he didn't write back to me...

I just thought that this big brother figure could have been a bit less intimidating...I don't want to be afraid of expressing my opinions, whatever they are!

In any case, it's perfectly feasible for michael to come back if he wants to...getting a new IP is easy, or just use another connection...it's that simple...

I'll let you know if I get banned for this message ;-)

Giacomo
WalterK said:
JC said:
Yes, Michael Tapes has been banned from posting in all forums on
DPReview.
Click to expand...
In a world where software is generally designed by corporations
with very little if any day-to-day interaction with average users,
and the response to bugs is to issue a new version, "available at
the upgrade price," it is refreshing and informative for a software
developer to be available on a forum such as this.

Breeze Browser and YarcPlus are two sorely needed programs.
Michael Tapes has responded to many threads, often having nothing
directly to do with YP. He has shared his experience and
viewpoints. He has also talked about YP, clarifying questions I
and others have obut his program's use.

If I had not read about YP on this forum, and also the back and
forth about RAW files, I would still be cursing at Canon's
converter. I see Michael Tapes as an informed and informative
member of the Canon digital camera community, far from the aloof
position of a Bill Gates.

I would feel very differently about a posting from Gates inviting
us all to try his next bloated program.

Even Canon's rep, Chuck Westfall, was more than welcome on another
forum, engaging in some very useful discussions, at least in my
opinion.

I would not even know there was a YarcPlus if it weren't for this
forum. Michael Tapes has never even tried to boost his program at
the expense of Breeze Browser, and the result is that I use both,
each for different purposes.

I have learned a lot from Mr Tapes on this forum, and feel sorry
that he is no longer welcome.

--
Walter K
Click to expand...
 
Phil,

I appreciate your mild reply...but you can't really expect to ban an important and famous contributor of the forum...and not cause a hard reaction by a few users, right?

I am glad you lifted the ban. Take care.

giacomo
Phil Askey said:
What goes on between myself and Michael over email is a private
matter and I had hoped people here would have more common courtesy
than discuss it in public.
JC said:
Yes, Michael Tapes has been banned from posting in all forums on
DPReview.

I was one of the alpha testers for Archive Creator and, like so
many of you, believe this is an extremely useful and valuable
product. I recently spoke with Michael and he informed me that
when he attempted to post in one of the Archive Creator threads, he
was unceremoniously informed that he was banned for “abuse” of the
site. No email from Phil beforehand, no notice whatsoever, no
regard for all that he has contributed in discussions about Archive
Creator and, of course, YarcPlus. Since Michael received no other
information regarding the ban, it is not possible to know for sure
why he was banned. Presumably, Phil banned Michael for violating
the rule against advertising.

The irony of the situation is that Michael has emailed Phil several
times within the past few days in an attempt to purchase
advertising for Archive Creator on DPReview! Phil, however, failed
to respond to any of Michael’s emails. Michael emailed Phil again
after being banned and still no response.

So where does this leave the Canon SLR forum (and other forums as
well)? Questions and comments about Archive Creator continue to
come in, but the person best qualified to answer those questions
cannot respond. Questions about YarcPlus also will continue to be
posted but, again, Michael will not be able to provide the level of
service and support that he has in the past. To those who would
say that users of the software can still email him, you should
realize that there is a benefit in users posting questions and
getting replies so that all users may benefit, even if they did not
have that specific issue. Moreover, individuals who have not
purchased the software also get to see the strengths and even
weaknesses (such as lack of Mac support) of the software.

That’s the practical argument. Another argument is that the ban is
STUPID! I know it’s Phil’s site and he can do with it what he
pleases. But whom is he helping by banning Michael? And how can
Phil, in good conscience, ban Michael for advertising when Phil has
refused to answer Michael’s emails asking to pay for advertising?
Someone mentioned a double standard exists. But given Michael’s
attempt to purchase advertising, it seems as if there is just an
arbitrary standard. Phil’s apparent hubris helps no one, not even
Phil.

I could on, but I guess you all get the message. A valuable
contributor to the forum has been banned for providing information
about a new product, despite his attempts to purchase advertising
for that product. Now let’s see if I get banned as well, even
without violating any of the rules.

JC
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
 
When you have to deal with what I do on a daily basis banning someone becomes a way of life.
Giacomo Tognoni said:
I appreciate your mild reply...but you can't really expect to ban
an important and famous contributor of the forum...and not cause a
hard reaction by a few users, right?

I am glad you lifted the ban. Take care.

giacomo
Phil Askey said:
What goes on between myself and Michael over email is a private
matter and I had hoped people here would have more common courtesy
than discuss it in public.
JC said:
Yes, Michael Tapes has been banned from posting in all forums on
DPReview.

I was one of the alpha testers for Archive Creator and, like so
many of you, believe this is an extremely useful and valuable
product. I recently spoke with Michael and he informed me that
when he attempted to post in one of the Archive Creator threads, he
was unceremoniously informed that he was banned for “abuse” of the
site. No email from Phil beforehand, no notice whatsoever, no
regard for all that he has contributed in discussions about Archive
Creator and, of course, YarcPlus. Since Michael received no other
information regarding the ban, it is not possible to know for sure
why he was banned. Presumably, Phil banned Michael for violating
the rule against advertising.

The irony of the situation is that Michael has emailed Phil several
times within the past few days in an attempt to purchase
advertising for Archive Creator on DPReview! Phil, however, failed
to respond to any of Michael’s emails. Michael emailed Phil again
after being banned and still no response.

So where does this leave the Canon SLR forum (and other forums as
well)? Questions and comments about Archive Creator continue to
come in, but the person best qualified to answer those questions
cannot respond. Questions about YarcPlus also will continue to be
posted but, again, Michael will not be able to provide the level of
service and support that he has in the past. To those who would
say that users of the software can still email him, you should
realize that there is a benefit in users posting questions and
getting replies so that all users may benefit, even if they did not
have that specific issue. Moreover, individuals who have not
purchased the software also get to see the strengths and even
weaknesses (such as lack of Mac support) of the software.

That’s the practical argument. Another argument is that the ban is
STUPID! I know it’s Phil’s site and he can do with it what he
pleases. But whom is he helping by banning Michael? And how can
Phil, in good conscience, ban Michael for advertising when Phil has
refused to answer Michael’s emails asking to pay for advertising?
Someone mentioned a double standard exists. But given Michael’s
attempt to purchase advertising, it seems as if there is just an
arbitrary standard. Phil’s apparent hubris helps no one, not even
Phil.

I could on, but I guess you all get the message. A valuable
contributor to the forum has been banned for providing information
about a new product, despite his attempts to purchase advertising
for that product. Now let’s see if I get banned as well, even
without violating any of the rules.

JC
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
 
Robert Burkhalter said:
What's to miss? It seems there are two types of people: Those who
know about Michael and his products, and those who don't. The
one's who don't won't know where to find him unless they ask a
simple question like: is there any software out there I need, I'm
new. Or they bump into a discussion thread about Yarc plus or this
new archiver of Michael's. Not a biggy. I think off-loading some
of the stuff from this forum over onto Michael's is ok.

Now about the warning. My 10 year old daughter told me she was
upset because the jerks in her classroom are able to disrupt the
class and get only a warning. I don't think either Michael or Phil
are jerks. Phil sets the rules and enforces as many of them as he
wants, when he wants, how he wants. Those of us who work for an
employer know what that feels like. It's not something new. And
most of us eat free here at this forum. I don't buy from the
advertisers because they charge too much. I don't even like the
advertising. I read the news. I read some of the interesting
posts. I make note of some of the technical answers. I'm still
waiting for Yarc Plus to come out in mac format. Not holding my
breath.

My two cents.
Bob
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top