fun reading on photonet

Oh yeah, make them shoot E-6 for a bit. Not only is everyones work easier to reveiw on a slide table, but you gain some materials for the next day's slide presentation.

While I'm snarking, the IT bozos, (INFO TECH for short), in my department surplused our medium format slide projectors about two years ago. It seems they never heard of the name Rollei.
 
What's wrong with these people?! Huge ego but questionable talent that goes with it!
 
IMO, the guy who started the post (Raid?) did overlook what almost all photography books I have bought say (roughly of course)"It isn't about the equipment, it is about the light and skill that you have." While equipment helps A LOT, it is more being in the right place at the right time. You can go buy a Pro DSLR system and take bad pics, while someone else could buy a Rangefinder or manual SLR and take a lot better pics. Also imo, I have met many teachers who have taught 30 years and still don't know what their doing (also the other way around, been teaching 30 years and are the best teacher you have ever seen). While he may not deserved what he got, he still had some of it coming to him.

I almost forgot to say that the best teacher I have ever had NEVER or RARELY used the book.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you never asked for the opinions of others, for whatever reason, it would be a dull life for all the snarks out there. Supposedly there are no stupid questions only stupid answers from snarky people who should have better manners regardless.

Bob
 
As Mr. Garrison of Southpark fame would say: "There are no stupid questions; just stupid people." I happen to agree with that. :)
 
I wouldn't blame Raid for asking. Granted, the tone and content of his question was strange. As Frank pointed out, if he has that much experience, his question didn't show it.

As for that immigrant antagonist... Seems to be a bit high on caffeine. One of those forum terrorists who go after lambasting, not replying to questions, inquiries or criticism. Sad case... :(
 
I tend to disagree with Frank and others. True, the photography is not about equipment. However, the guy might KNOW alot about the light and photography itself - that's why he's askong about specific equipment stuff in nagoya japan, about which he does NOT know enough.

OTOH, i have corresponded with raid for a while and he's an extremely nice guy.

And that michaela chick just uses the thread to show off with some oversaturated pics (that are not that great anyway, at least not for my taste). She talks about ego/self confidence versus common sense, and tries to prove her right by posting twenty pics of her own. Weird, isn't it.
 
This is one good example of what drives me away from PN.
The street and doc forum is nice but not what the Leica forum once was
 
Anders, I truly haven't a clue what snarky means, but it sounded good on three beers. So, I chimed in.
 
Yeah, some folks there believe that the fact that they bought extra space and critique rights for 25 bucks makes them "more equal".
I became a subscriber after about two years of heavy usage of photo.net, since finally they made it possible to pay via paypal, and, i learned really alot on their site during those two years. But had plenty of negative comments about my non-subscriber attitude in that time.
Ironically, since i am a "subscriber" i spend there much less time. This has to do with the decay of the quality of threads/comments AND the discovery of RFF, of course:)
 
ikophot said:
Amazing, are these people naturally obnoxious or do they attend eveningschool to learn it?
Click to expand...
Is the online society real, or is it a virtual reality? Are other participants real people with real feelings or are they objects to toy with, to one's own amusement? Are they just squiggles on the computer screen that have no real-world existence?

There are all sorts of (real!) people using the internet discussions for interest, learning, and entertainment. Some of these people, to various degrees, have sociopathic tendencies. Some amuse themselves at the expense of others, and for some the web forums are stages for role-playing. For some it's a place to let out their agressions without "real" consequences (but which can turn deadly). Some become online predators.

I think the big distinction here is between those who get pleasure from friendly interaction, helping others and the resulting positive feedback, VS those whose pleasure comes at the expense of others.

When an online forum's social fabric comes to allow anti-social behavior, some members who would otherwise be more civilized may feel themselves free to act badly. Photo.net's Leica forum has deteriorated, and the monitors have been trying to repair it. I don't know if that's possible, but I think the only way is to give a good monitor permission to be arbitrary and back him up. AOL did just the opposite, from what I saw, and removed more and more discretion from the monitors until they were quite powerless to deal with their predators.

RFF is a "golden" place where bad behavior is not the norm, and anyone browsing the forum can see there's little "fun" to be had in bad behavior. And this is largely self-regulating; RFF members are not easily baited. Much easier to KEEP it nice rather than struggle to return it to nice after it's turned bad. Ideal, and I hope it can last as RFF grows!
 
Doug,

Very well said! You've made me feel badly (and rightfully so) about my part in that thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom