Photo Forum / Film Photography / Large Format / February 2005
Next View Camera conference
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Largformat - 10 Sep 2004 17:01 GMT We have selected Springfield, MA May 20-22, 2005. The trade show is free and the New England Large Format Group will be doing field trips to local sites.
steve simmons
Jorge Gasteazoro - 11 Sep 2004 01:01 GMT > We have selected Springfield, MA May 20-22, 2005. The trade show is free and > the New England Large Format Group will be doing field trips to local sites. > > steve simmons This is typical, you post asking for suggestions and then you ignore them and pick your own, why do you keep bothering everybody here with this question? Couls it be so that once again you get to advertise your conference for free under the guise of "asking for suggestions"? If you think you are being clever, think again!
Largformat - 11 Sep 2004 02:12 GMT Subject: Re: Next View Camera conference From: rossorabbit@hotmail.com (Jorge Gasteazoro) Date: 9/10/2004 6:01 PM Mountain Daylight Time Message-id: <555a3f23.0409101459.16f12b1c@posting.google.com>
largformat@aol.com (Largformat) wrote in message news:<20040910120101.23677.00000487@mb-m06.aol.com>...
> We have selected Springfield, MA May 20-22, 2005. The trade show is free and > the New England Large Format Group will be doing field trips to local sites. > > steve simmons This is typical, you post asking for suggestions and then you ignore them and pick your own, why do you keep bothering everybody here with this question? Couls it be so that once again you get to advertise your conference for free under the guise of "asking for suggestions"? If you think you are being clever, think again!
Springfield was one of the places we mentioned as a possibility early on. I am telling people about a free opportunity to meet with other lf photographers, see equipment, photograph with people from a local area, etc., etc.
steve simmons
Jorge Gasteazoro - 11 Sep 2004 07:44 GMT > Subject: Re: Next View Camera conference > From: rossorabbit@hotmail.com (Jorge Gasteazoro) [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > steve simmons Would you please point to me where Springfield was mentioned, other than by you?
WHat is free about going to a conference and meeting other photographers? is like telling a doctor to go to a conference and that he gets to meet other doctors for free...what a load of crap. Nope you are hoping people will be hooked by this so they attend whatever you have planned for the conferences and pay for it. Please dont try to make it look as if you are doing this out of the goodness of your heart. You are not fooling anybody with this BS. Once again, you thought you were being clever by asking opinions, and true to form just like all the other times, you made a choice which ignored all the other suggestions and got to advertise your conference for free.....once again, you are not being clever, and many of us are tired of this.
Shelley - 11 Sep 2004 12:15 GMT >I am > > telling people about a free opportunity to meet with other lf photographers, Free? I thought the only free parts were looking at the products for sale (i.e. the trade show) and the part where some local photographers took people on a field trip in the Springfield area. Isn't there a charge for actually attending the conference itself, i.e. attending the lectures, getting critiques, etc? IIRC last year it cost something like $150-$200 to attend all the lectures and get a critique. Is the conference itself free this year? If not, perhaps you should disclose that just so people who are unfamiliar with the fee structure of the conference aren't misled.
> > Subject: Re: Next View Camera conference > > From: rossorabbit@hotmail.com (Jorge Gasteazoro) [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > free.....once again, you are not being clever, and many of us are > tired of this. BBarlow690 - 11 Sep 2004 16:23 GMT I, for one, posted Springfield early on as a suggestion, surely earning Jorge's ire for all eternity.
Since then, I have lobbied Steve hard to bring it to the Northeast, specifically to Springfield, and understand what all Steve and the VC folks looked at in evaluating there and other eastern destinations as well, including all the suggestions he received via posts.
I lobbied based on closeness to the Hartford/Springfield airport (that consistently has good service and fares), availability of sufficient conference space, proximity to interesting places to photograph (which I hope to have the Western New England Large Format Photography Group help with outings), and not the least, the Basketball Hall of Fame.
So I'll take some of the rap, gladly, because I'm happy to see the conference come east, and, quite honestly, be in my own back yard, even though I thoroughly enjoye Monterey last April, and always enjoy Santa Fe. Call me a sore winner...
Bruce Barlow
Jorge Gasteazoro - 11 Sep 2004 23:33 GMT > I, for one, posted Springfield early on as a suggestion, surely earning Jorge's > ire for all eternity. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Bruce Barlow Nope, I could not care less where it is held or how much you lobbbied. Certainly I dont see you as "winning" anything. I do notice you are the only one suggesting this venue, when many more people suggested Las Vegas, Chicago, etc. Cities that IMO would have been much more convenient to many more people. In any case, the bottom line is not having to read about this conference in this or any other forum every two months, that I would like to see. Where is held, is of no consequence to me, as I wont be attending any of them regardless of where is held.
Anonymous - 12 Sep 2004 02:55 GMT Perhaps Jorge and Shelley should go ahead and go to Chicago together. I'd sure they'd have a lovely time together together... LOL
>> I, for one, posted Springfield early on as a suggestion, surely earning >> Jorge's [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > consequence to me, as I wont be attending any of them regardless of > where is held. Shelley - 12 Sep 2004 04:00 GMT Anonymous said:
> Perhaps Jorge and Shelley should go ahead and go to Chicago together. I'd > sure they'd have a lovely time together together LOL Thanks for the suggestion, I like Chicago a lot, great town, nice people, the place where my Deardorff originated. Perhaps you could join Jorge and I in Chicago, the three of us could meet, have a beer together. I'm a big admirer of your posts here, some of them show so much maturity and intelligence.
> Perhaps Jorge and Shelley should go ahead and go to Chicago together. I'd > sure they'd have a lovely time together together... LOL [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > consequence to me, as I wont be attending any of them regardless of > > where is held. Anonymous - 12 Sep 2004 07:14 GMT Well, that certainly shows YOUR IQ level, now doesn't it, Herr Shelley?
> I'm a big admirer of your posts here, some of them show so much maturity > and intelligence. BBarlow690 - 12 Sep 2004 16:29 GMT Let's see.
Springfield, by car, is three hours from New York, maybe two hours from Boston, and a half hour from Hartford. It is seven hours by car from Washington, presuming you don't fly into Hartford/Springfield airport, that is served by Southwest, American, United, Delta, Continental, Northwest, and even Lufthansa, to name a few. I've ridden Amtrak through Springfield from Brattleboro to Washington, and it was delightful.
Yup, Jorge, Springfield's pretty inconvenient to just about anybody. Especially compared to Vegas (hours by car from anywhere, and fails to satisfy a desire on the part of many to have it on the east coast), Charleston (how many hours from Atlanta?), and even Chicago (I lived there for about 40 years -- it's two hours from Milwaukee, I guess...three from Indianapolis, and an hour-plus from Hinckley and Big Rock). I can clearly see how those places are "much more convenient to many more people," as you put it. Perhaps you should look at a map?
I think even Steve has figured out that these are also good places, but just not for next year. Maybe he'll do 2005 on the east coast, and then work his way back across the midwest in subsequent years? Maybe alternating with Santa Fe and Monterey, which are both wonderful places to go, too? That's probably what I would do.
And it also seems that from the message traffic, there a a lot of folks who would love it have it in their back yards, just not you and Shelly, and I'm sure a few more.
Like it or not, Steve's conference is about all we have as a venue to get together and share our mutual passion for LF photography. Yup, Steve probably breaks even on the conference with good attendance, and might actually make a buck or two if attendance is REALLY good, but he doesn't get rich off it. I have no problem with him polling us to ask where we'd like to have it, and then announcing a decision. I won't even mind a reminder now and again.
Springfield. Not to mention that you're forgetting the Basketball Hall of Fame. Not to mention that there are wonderful places to photograph within 20 minutes of the conference site.
Thank you for your positive, thoughtful contribution. We all look forward to attending the LF conference that you put together.
Jorge Gasteazoro - 12 Sep 2004 16:30 GMT I think you dont get where I am comming from, simmons's post is in APUG, largeformatphotography, he would place it a photo.net, but they now erase his posts the moment they see them. Out of the three sites, Springfield was mentioned only once. If you do check all previous posts about the "conference" you will see he asks for opinions and then decides on a venue that nobody proposed. This is nothing more than free advertising for a business venture. I think there is a time when enough is enough. He now has a forum, let him anounce his business ventures there. His "free" stuff, is nothing more than BS. I am a chemist, if I go to a chemical conference, I expect to meet other chemists for "free", the same way I expect to see the latest lab equipment for "free" and if I happ`ne to meet other chemists I get along with, I would most likely go tour the town with them. Where is the free stuff simmons keeps pushing in front of our faces?....Now I have tried to answer to you in a mature manner, I hope you have the same courtesy. Finally, I think you are right, I probably would have a great time with Shelly, at least we both understand the meaning of courtesy.
> Perhaps Jorge and Shelley should go ahead and go to Chicago together. I'd > sure they'd have a lovely time together together... LOL [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > consequence to me, as I wont be attending any of them regardless of > > where is held. CamArtsMag - 12 Sep 2004 21:54 GMT from Jorge
he would place it a photo.net, but they now erase his posts the moment they see them>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Once again you are mispeaking. I have not posted on photo net for years and to my knowledge you can not erase a post that is not made. Once again Jorge comes on and shows truth and accuracy do not matter to him nor does checking things out before he makes a post.
As for Springfield not being mentioned please be aware that not all of the world's communication passes in front of your face Jorge. Lots of e-mails, phone calls and face to face conversations happen that you are not aware of at all.
steve simmons
steve simmons
Ted Harris - 13 Sep 2004 01:18 GMT I usually ignorre these goofy threads but I was another who lobbied strongly for the Northeast and lauded Springfield as a possible venue. Ted Harris Resource Strategy Henniker, New Hampshire
Jorge Gasteazoro - 13 Sep 2004 18:43 GMT > from Jorge > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > steve simmons And once again you come on this forums and state things that are less than true. You dont post in photo.net because as I said, they got tired of your advertising and erase your posts immediately, I guess you finally got the message and stop posting there. I dont need to "check" I have seen it happen. If so, why dont you prove me wrong and try to post there...see how long your post lasts.
So lets see who is posting less than accurate and truthful posts. You say your conference is free..it is not, getting to see the vendors and "meeting" other photographers is free...not the conference. Those two things are nothing more than a "hook" so you can advertise your conference here, same as your "question" about where to hold it. As to the many e mails and phone calls, well we only have your word for that, which from past experiences I know is not worth much.
Once again Simmons comes on and makes posts which abuse the charter of this and many other forums.
Gregory Blank - 13 Sep 2004 20:22 GMT I am not going to defend anyone-anymore, however it sure would be nice if you and a slew of other critics would either regularly post positive information or get the hell off this newsgroup and quit bitching about other people, it gets really frigging old.
Thanks.
> Once again XXXXX comes on and makes posts which abuse the charter of > this and many other forums.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
CamArtsMag - 13 Sep 2004 20:27 GMT Jorge
There is a lot of communbication that you never see. That does not mean it never happens.
I have not tried to post on photo net for years and was never told to stop. More misinformation.
I am telling epople about free activities such as the trade show the field trips and also about the View Camera forum. All free. This is within the guideliens. Give it up. I am following the rules.
steve simmons
Gregory Blank - 13 Sep 2004 22:38 GMT Not to get myself deeper into this, but.....
Steve;
I know you probably prefer not to killfile these people making these inflammatory comments but you really should,.. or just plain ignore them.
These people seldom post on this group other than to attack you. I think once that may have been different, but that's the way it has been as long as I can remember.
PS: I am hoping to make it to NYC to meet Gordon Hutchings & anyone who is interested in PMK and Pyro developers Gordon will be at the View Camera Booth this year.
Thanks Steve.
Take care guys and do lighten up.
> Jorge > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > steve simmons
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
BBarlow690 - 13 Sep 2004 18:11 GMT Thank you for the courtesy of declaring me "nobody," since you did actually admit that Springfield was mentioned in at least one place, but on the other hand "nobody" proposed it. I'll have to change my business cards. As Steve mentions in his post, there were many conversations about location, not all documented in forums such as these. And I don't believe that he is obligated to do exactly, and everything, that people tell him to do. Or ask him to do.
I was unaware that I was discourteous to you, as you now seem to be implying. I apologize for whatever you interpreted, incorrectly, as discourteous.
Jorge Gasteazoro - 14 Sep 2004 17:34 GMT > Thank you for the courtesy of declaring me "nobody," since you did actually > admit that Springfield was mentioned in at least one place, but on the other [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I was unaware that I was discourteous to you, as you now seem to be implying. > I apologize for whatever you interpreted, incorrectly, as discourteous. Bruce, I think you are taking offense where none was intended. I am sure you and a few others recommended Springfield, but in comparison to the other venues suggested which had the majority of the votes Springfield seemed the least popular. This happens all the time, why ask about a venue when in the end one is chosen without regard to those offered as more popular?
You certainly were not discourteous and I have no idea why you thought I was addressing you. Thank you for the polite and courteous response.
jjs - 14 Sep 2004 17:46 GMT > Bruce, I think you are taking offense where none was intended. I am > sure you and a few others recommended Springfield, but in comparison > to the other venues suggested which had the majority of the votes > Springfield seemed the least popular. [...] Oh, is Steve's conference selection supposed to be a democractic thing?
Anonymous - 14 Sep 2004 17:50 GMT Whore-Gay,
Steve is planning, organizing, communicating, arranging vendors, and funding this conference. Who the hell says he has to get anyone's "votes, much less yours?
He can host it anywhere he wants to. Your arrogance and sense of over-rated self-importance is nauseating.
>> Bruce, I think you are taking offense where none was intended. I am >> sure you and a few others recommended Springfield, but in comparison >> to the other venues suggested which had the majority of the votes >> Springfield seemed the least popular. [...] > > Oh, is Steve's conference selection supposed to be a democractic thing? Jorge Gasteazoro - 15 Sep 2004 01:39 GMT > Whore-Gay, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > He can host it anywhere he wants to. Your arrogance and sense of over-rated > self-importance is nauseating. This where you are wrong sh.t head, the people attending are funding it. I might be arrogant, but at least I am not a suck up idiot.
Oh, and BTW imbecil, how about you put your name to your words, or what? you are too chicken.....you f**king looser.
jjs - 15 Sep 2004 02:07 GMT "Jorge Gasteazoro" <rossorabbit@hotmail.com> wrote [...]
Man, please stop responding to the trolls. I don't want to kill-file you for a passing thing. Leave the trolls and come on back here with the rest of us, please.
Jorge Gasteazoro - 15 Sep 2004 15:08 GMT > "Jorge Gasteazoro" <rossorabbit@hotmail.com> wrote [...] > > Man, please stop responding to the trolls. I don't want to kill-file you for > a passing thing. Leave the trolls and come on back here with the rest of us, > please. ok jjs, you are right, I should have remember what someone told me. "when you argue with an idiot, people looking at you dont know which is which"....considered it done.
Anonymous - 15 Sep 2004 07:29 GMT Jorge,
It's spelled "loser", not "looser" <s>
George
>> Whore-Gay, > > Oh, and BTW imbecil, how about you put your name to your words, or > what? you are too chicken.....you f**king looser. b loggin - 21 Feb 2005 21:12 GMT Jorge, why do you always start arguments?
..if you have stopped taking your meds, please start taking them again.
Brian Downey - 13 Sep 2004 22:29 GMT After many years of learning from this group, I finally got tired of all the personal p***ing matches and left it for a while to just take pictures. On returning, I'm disappointed to see not much has changed except that a lot of the participants I fondly remember are also no longer in the group.
This thread may be a good example why. I hope you will permit me a couple of observations.
Large format photography can hardly be described as a "boom" business or tremendously fast growing hobby, yet we do have ONE national-scope conference available to us. What is the response? The silliness witnessed here for the past few days. Isn't it interesting that not one of the "big-bucks" LF manufacturers is putting on such an event, not the film manufacturers, not the photo super-stores -- and not one of the vicious critics in this newsgroup. After all, any one of us could have written the dozens of letters it must take to pull together an agenda we felt was perfect, at a location we wanted, etc. None of us apparently are so motivated, yet some sure are willing to pillory the one guy who does make the time. Yes, it will help his commercial venture - and if we had more than one such national conference to choose from we could get picky about whose commercial venture we were going to support.
I've seen a lot of photo magazines die and I'm grateful to have one that is still around devoted to my favorite area of photography. I'm extremely happy a few companies continue to make LF sheet film inspite of declining sales and profit margins. I'm impressed by the tenaciousness and innovation expressed by Sinar, Wisner, Calumet, Linhof and the shrinking list of other manufacturers who not only keep a product line available but occasionaly expand it. None of these are perfect and I occasionaly complain about all of them, but I also recognize we LF afficianados are an endangered species. With only a few exceptions, we are all to some degree dependent on those who try to make a living manufactuing and selling photo equipment and particularly its supplies. I see our mutual love of LF photography giving us a vested interest in hoping these manufacturers survive - not doing all we can to convince them their customers are a bunch of foul mouthed curmudgeons who can't be pleased and insist on everything being priced below cost.
Of course there is another side to the issue. It is not uncommon for some in the industry or their reps to "take the bait" and respond to some vicious criticism with more of the same. While I can understand the emotions, it is the kind of horrible customer relations that also hurts our group in general and their business in particular. If we can't use common decency then how about a little common sense - there aren't enough remaining in our group for us to engage in the canabalizm often exhibited here. Thanks for listening.
Gregory Blank - 14 Sep 2004 02:32 GMT Well stated sir!!! Please do stick with the group and continue to post.
> After many years of learning from this group, I finally got tired of all the > personal p***ing matches and left it for a while to just take pictures. [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > about a little common sense - there aren't enough remaining in our group for > us to engage in the canabalizm often exhibited here. Thanks for listening.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Anonymous - 14 Sep 2004 05:07 GMT Bravo, Brian! Extremely well put!!!
Perhaps if we have the luck of the Irish and a good wind behind us, the whiny a.sholes, cynics, curmudgeons (and yes, this means you, Shelley, Jorge, et al.) who don't have anything better to do with their sorry little lives will go away. Perhaps for good.
>> After many years of learning from this group, I finally got tired of all >> the [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] >> us to engage in the canabalizm often exhibited here. Thanks for >> listening. Gregory Blank - 14 Sep 2004 13:57 GMT Although I in part agree, isn't better to not mention people by name as it just fans the flames? Unless of course thats your goal,...to make additional ill feelings?
> Bravo, Brian! Extremely well put!!! > > Perhaps if we have the luck of the Irish and a good wind behind us, the > whiny a.sholes, cynics, curmudgeons (and yes, this means you, Shelley, > Jorge, et al.) who don't have anything better to do with their sorry little > lives will go away. Perhaps for good.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Shelley - 14 Sep 2004 14:47 GMT > > Perhaps if we have the luck of the Irish and a good wind behind us, the > > whiny a.sholes, cynics, curmudgeons (and yes, this means you, Shelley, > > Jorge, et al.) who don't have anything better to do with their sorry little > > lives will go away. Perhaps for good.
> Although I in part agree, isn't better to not mention people by name as > it just fans the flames? Unless of course thats your goal,...to make > additional ill feelings? I didn't see Anonymous' original post quoted here since I've kill filed him but I see now he's calling people a.s holes. That goes well with his previous references to Seig Heil and SS troops and your demands that people "get the hell out of this news group" because of the "bitching" that you think gets "frigging old." Or Anonymous' earlier suggestion to Stacey that she "get laid." Simmons' fans have quite a vocabulary. There's an old saying to the effect that you can judge people by who they choose to associate themselves with. I'd suggest that neither you nor Anonymous are doing Mr. Simmons any favors.
> Although I in part agree, isn't better to not mention people by name as > it just fans the flames? Unless of course thats your goal,...to make [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Jorge, et al.) who don't have anything better to do with their sorry little > > lives will go away. Perhaps for good. CamArtsMag - 14 Sep 2004 15:21 GMT Simmons' fans have quite a vocabulary. There's an old saying to the effect that you can judge people by who they choose to associate themselves with. I'd suggest that neither you nor Anonymous are doing Mr. Simmons any favors.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
None of these people are speaking for me at my request and you are right, they are not doing me or this forum any favors.
I have complained about this type of behavior for a couple of years. To disagree is one thing but this type of behavior does all of us a disservice.
For this reason I started a forum on the View Camera web site (www.viewcamera.com) and I will monitor the posts and remove anything that is a personal attack, vulgar, or insulting.
steve simmons www.viewcamera.com
Gregory Blank - 14 Sep 2004 21:18 GMT Well you can suggest all you want, since its a "free" and public forum. Since the vulgar language is inappropriate I have used my own suggestion and the suggestion of one of the other posters who I respect and utilized the technology to remove the offensive.
I reaffirm my statement and encourage others to post positive and informative things instead of personal attacks, if that fails I'll killfile and move on.
The only favors I intend are ones that I give to my relatives.
I am not related to Steve or anonymous. I do however believe in the golden rule, as it works for me. That is: Treat others as you wish to be treated."
> I didn't see Anonymous' original post quoted here since I've kill filed him > but I see now he's calling people a.s holes. That goes well with his [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > associate themselves with. I'd suggest that neither you nor Anonymous are > doing Mr. Simmons any favors.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
jjs - 14 Sep 2004 21:27 GMT > [...] I do however believe in the > golden rule, as it works for me. That is: Treat others > as you wish to be treated." Greg! Greg! Quick, scratch my back... a little left... down.... AHHHH! Thanks.
Gregory Blank - 14 Sep 2004 22:16 GMT Glad to be of help.
Now we need to find someone to help you with those hemorrhoids,...that will teach you for sitting on that big backside all day ;^)
Hey if you like Efke 25 give scanning it a try, its virtually grainless.
> > [...] I do however believe in the > > golden rule, as it works for me. That is: Treat others > > as you wish to be treated." > > Greg! Greg! Quick, scratch my back... a little left... down.... AHHHH! > Thanks.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
jjs - 14 Sep 2004 22:22 GMT > Glad to be of help. > > Now we need to find someone to help > you with those hemorrhoids,...that will teach you for sitting > on that big backside all day ;^) I'm a slim, trim, fit, athletic 6', 190 pounds of firm, iron-butt hunk-stuff. Believe it. It's all balanced out by being bald and ugly. And old.
> Hey if you like Efke 25 give scanning it a try, its virtually grainless. I did this early afternoon, but all I have is the Epson 3200 which is not sharp enough and besides, it begins to artifact at 1600 and is completely unacceptable at greater resolutions. In fact, at 1200 all I have is 'grainlike' artifacts that makes it look like 2475 recording film boiled in Dektol. I wish I could afford a real scanner.
But the film's DMax was within the Epson 3200's scope. I can scan and make acceptable 4x5" digital prints. BWAAA HAAAA HAAA. *sigh*
Lloyd usenet Erlick - 14 Sep 2004 15:07 GMT sep1404 from LLoyd Erlick,
>Although I in part agree, isn't better to not mention people by name as >it just fans the flames? Unless of course thats your goal,...to make >additional ill feelings? ...
Absolutely! Those mentions are the feed we are advised not to give the trolls. The problem of the trolls is small, filters in the newsreader make a significant difference.
The larger part of the problem is the responders who perpetuate the material down the posts, one after another. If we just stop fanning the flames we'd have what we want.
Although, speaking of Irish, maybe this is a case of 'what we say we want'. Judging by real-world performance, we do not in fact want to stop fanning the flames.
Some posters have remarked that they enjoy the call to respond in kind, and view it as a call-to-arms which is their right and obligation. So they just help perpetuate the troll-posts. I filter their names, too.
regards, --le
 Signature ________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto. voice: 416-686-0326 email: portrait@heylloyd.com net: www.heylloyd.com ________________________________
Jorge Gasteazoro - 14 Sep 2004 16:46 GMT Ah assholemus...it takes one a.shole to know another one you sack of sh.t...
> Bravo, Brian! Extremely well put!!! > [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > >> us to engage in the canabalizm often exhibited here. Thanks for > >> listening. Anonymous - 14 Sep 2004 16:50 GMT More evidence of Whor-ge's level of intelligence!
> Ah assholemus...it takes one a.shole to know another one you sack of > sh.t... [quoted text clipped - 93 lines] >> >> us to engage in the canabalizm often exhibited here. Thanks for >> >> listening. Anonymous - 14 Sep 2004 16:50 GMT Or is it perhaps Whore-gay?
> More evidence of Whor-ge's level of intelligence! > [quoted text clipped - 102 lines] >>> >> us to engage in the canabalizm often exhibited here. Thanks for >>> >> listening. Jorge Gasteazoro - 15 Sep 2004 01:42 GMT Just getting down to your level moron.....hijo de tu puta madre, seguro que eres tu el putito que se la pasa mamando verga......
> More evidence of Whor-ge's level of intelligence! BBarlow690 - 15 Sep 2004 13:07 GMT Well, speaking for myself, I'm thrilled to have it in Springfield, because it's right in my own backyard, about an hour and a half from home for me.
May here has wonderful weather, usually... (snow's gone, bugs are back).
I lobbied for it because of its proximity to me, personally, and also on behalf of our Western New England Large Format Photographers group (email us WNELFP@yahoo.com) because I believe our members would enjoy having it close to their homes, too. We have about 100 on our list, so while all of them may not care, I'll still claim "proxy rights" for their votes on the location, since it costs them nothing for me to vote for them even if later they choose not to attend.
As I've said before, Steve's all we've got, and this conference is pretty much all we've got. I know Steve's working on getting speakers out of New York and Boston that I'd like to meet, so things are working out well, for my interests.
And, lastly, there's enough action and folks milling that for someone to come for only a day, hang out, visit the vendor area, and meet folks, it's a day well spent and free. In Monterey my best conversations happened in the "free zone." An enticement for folks from New York, PA, and New Jersey who might not otherwise be able to come for the whole thing.
Yup, it would be nice if the whole thing were free, but hotel conference spaces cost money, speakers cost money, food costs money. Who would underwrite a conference about large format photography using mostly traditional processes? Ilford? Kodak? Maybe Jack Deardorff or Ron Wisner? The Department of Homeland Security? Unlikely. Therefore, aspects have to be fee-based, and that's better than having nothing, which would certainly be easier and involve less abuse.
Bruce Nobody
Lloyd usenet Erlick - 14 Sep 2004 14:56 GMT sep1404 from Lloyd Erlick,
>Well stated sir!!! Please do stick with the group and continue to >post. ... ( well stated material snipped for brevity)
I agree! Please do stick around!
I've noticed recently that the very few trolls and persons of ill will are more than balanced off by quite a few new names posting interesting and intelligent material. In my view the quality of rpd and rplf is improving, overall.
The noise level can be controlled quite effectively by filters, I've discovered. I never bothered with them before in my copy of Forte Agent, but in the last few months I've set them up and found that the largest proportion of bad posts is very easy to eliminate in such a way that I never see them at all. It's a big improvement! (If only legitimate posters would stop quoting them!)
To the long-term legitimate posters I'd just like to say that the noisemakers are irrelevant and easily quieted to a pleasantly low level. They are definitely not a reason to stop participating in this very interesting newsgroup.
In economics they say that 'bad money drives out good money'. It's understandable, and it's also understandable that people don't want to take part where they see bad behaviour. But the bad actors can be segregated by software; they are as nothing.
regards, --le
 Signature ________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto. voice: 416-686-0326 email: portrait@heylloyd.com net: www.heylloyd.com ________________________________
|
|
|