R
ruben
Guest
antiquark said:
No words.
Cheers,
Ruben
Self Censorship: Our Worst Enemy
- Thread starter ruben
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies: Replies 158
- Views: Views 8K
No words.
Cheers,
Ruben
FrankS
Registered User
raid said:
Yes!
How about a dedicated critique gallery where those looking for critique can get it? Or perhaps a comment with an uploaded image stating, "critiques invited"?
M. Valdemar
Well-known
A bullet in the head in some places or getting "banned" from a forum for daring to voice heresy according to the moderators.
Most forums on the internet expect behavior and speech within strict parameters of the existing group-think.
Letting anyone speak their mind or expressing true criticism would be suicide.
Suppose someone posted a picture of their wife or girlfriend and labelled it: "My Lovely Model"
If someone then said: "My god, that is an awfully exposed, out of focus photo of an ugly, obese broad. It has no sense of composition, and it's almost laughable that you would delude yourself into thinking she looked anything like a model"
How would that "free speech" go over?
Most forums on the internet expect behavior and speech within strict parameters of the existing group-think.
Letting anyone speak their mind or expressing true criticism would be suicide.
Suppose someone posted a picture of their wife or girlfriend and labelled it: "My Lovely Model"
If someone then said: "My god, that is an awfully exposed, out of focus photo of an ugly, obese broad. It has no sense of composition, and it's almost laughable that you would delude yourself into thinking she looked anything like a model"
How would that "free speech" go over?
Last edited:
Sparrow
Veteran
foto_fool said:edit
Stewart - there's a crucial difference between my photographs and photography.
- John
Then, John, you are an artist?
raid
Dad Photographer
FrankS said:
Frank,
Some people have been loading up sets of images to be critiqued within the critique Forum. The feedback is not very strong there. Maybe it needs to be revitalized.
The other issue is; can we say "I like the image" and "I do not like the image' or must we limit comments to "well done' and "WOW" and maybe "I see promise". We all like to see praises, but what if someone perceives our images are low quality photographs?
Last week, I received a negative feedback, but others cheered me up. Hurray! Was I looking for cheerleading to be satisfied? Not really, but it did "worry me". I really was happy with my results until I was told that the results lacked somehow. Now, I am happy again.
I like to post an entire roll [after correcting for obvious errors] to document a series of photos. If I did not like the results, I would not have uploaded them for others to look at.
Can we say: : "If you crop from the left the tree branch ...." or maybe say: "I would have maybe taken this image vertically ..."? Are we "insulting" the photographer?
This vagueness makes several people stay away from getting into any critique activities for the sake of avoiding any perceptions of insults or degradation of art or personal vindetta or .....
I somehow doubt it that any new rules will somehow change people around.
Sparrow
Veteran
M. Valdemar said:
Criticism is not about any of that, it is a device whereby the artist may understand his audience
Sorry about the bold type but I feel it is an important point
R
ruben
Guest
M. Valdemar said:
In theory you may be right. Theory is just theory.
In fact, this week Ferider has posted some pics of his wife and daughter, one of them quite spectacular.
Secondly, at my opening post, and along the whole thread we are not talking about moderation at all. No one is questioning it. In fact, the day we change our minds towards less self-censorship, if at all, obviously we will need to protect the forum with stronger moderation (moderator's vigilance).
At the basis of religious thinking, man is bad by nature. To me, the gains of free expression are far beyond the losses of abuse of free expression, which can be controlled by moderators' vigilance.
Cheers,
Ruben
Now Roland, kindly don't tell they are not your wife and daughter.
Last edited by a moderator:
M. Valdemar
Well-known
I'm not talking about anyone's actual photos, just a hypothetical.
What if unbridled criticism was construed as cruelty? Is there a limit?
Maybe not saying anything is better.
If you're advocating stronger censorship and moderation, where is the freedom or benefit of more expression?
What if unbridled criticism was construed as cruelty? Is there a limit?
Maybe not saying anything is better.
If you're advocating stronger censorship and moderation, where is the freedom or benefit of more expression?
M. Valdemar
Well-known
OK, well, suppose that's exactly what the audience thinks. If YOU think a photo is lovely but nobody else does, is it still lovely?
If you're a judge on Major Bowes Amateur Hour or American Idol, and you laugh someone off the stage who can't sing, is the "singer" still good because he thinks he is?
Are there any universal standards, or is every incompetent worthy of merit because he's "true unto himself"?
Ruben, Yassir Arafat??? That's a much older quote. Maybe a thousand years old or more. He's certainly not my hero.
If you're a judge on Major Bowes Amateur Hour or American Idol, and you laugh someone off the stage who can't sing, is the "singer" still good because he thinks he is?
Are there any universal standards, or is every incompetent worthy of merit because he's "true unto himself"?
Ruben, Yassir Arafat??? That's a much older quote. Maybe a thousand years old or more. He's certainly not my hero.
Sparrow said:
Sparrow
Veteran
M. Valdemar said:
It is the artist’s choice to exhibit
no?
antiquark
Derek Ross
I was thinking about things like:M. Valdemar said:
- does God exist?
- are wars a good way to solve problems?
- is homosexuality evil?
- etc.
Now, on those issues, I am NOT AFRAID to voice an opinion! (and my answer to all the above is "no").
Sparrow
Veteran
M. Valdemar said:
I do not think there are universal standards, why should there be we are all individuals and each has an opinion
M. Valdemar
Well-known
Absolutely, it's the artist's choice to exhibit.
Once he does so, he should not be offended at anything the audience expresses about his "art".
Once he does so, he should not be offended at anything the audience expresses about his "art".
Sparrow said:
M. Valdemar
Well-known
Then you will be worshipped by all the Atheist Pacifist Homosexuals. If I were you I would run for President.
antiquark said:
Sparrow
Veteran
antiquark said:
I don’t think we have a theology forum yet, but I’m sure that will be a perfect contribution when we do
R
ruben
Guest
M. Valdemar said:
Hi Valdemar,
Talking hypothetical can both be endless and lead us to crazy assumptions. If you happen to understand I am advocating stronger censorship, you have first to point where have you found censorship at RFF, and then we will be able to maintain a concrete exchange of ideas.
The widest freedom is for normative use of freedom, repression is for the cases of abuse of freedom. Normative use of freedom is the one within the framework. Abuse of freedom is the one targeted to destroy the framework. Who decide what is what are the moderators.
Above all it seems to me you should read this thread from its very begining.
Beyond all this, taking into account what you have dealt with, the only way I can get a notion of your argumentation is by assuming you feel a great fear of your own self, as if there is there some kind of danger to control.
In case you have expressed in this thread all what you think, I don't see any real indication you may mis-behave. On the contrary. You can have a rest
You don't need self censorship, your common sense and judgement are ok.So why all these theories and hypothesis identifying self freedom with misbehaviour ?
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
Sparrow
Veteran
M. Valdemar said:
Agreed..,,,,,
gb hill
Veteran
ruben said:
It's just simply that I am not satisified with my work and eventhough I suppose I have no set goal, I do hope to improve and I don't consider myself a fighter. I think i'm too laid back to be a fighter. (not in the literal sense of course) but I do admit of getting down almost to the point of becoming depressed but I keep reminding myself to enjoy myself and just go with the flow.
M. Valdemar
Well-known
You've somehow made the leap that I fear myself for my own dangerous thoughts.
Absolutely untrue.
However, by experience, one must control what one says in any group until he knows the mindset and conceptual limitations of that group.
Among like-minded, libertarian friends (for lack of a better word), one can say anything without fear, but in a group of strangers, one has to be aware of what's considered heresy.
It's a fact of human dynamics.
Ruben, you tend to get tremendously obtuse and vague when you're searching for an answer.
PS: I'm aware of MANY people who have been banned for expressing heresy on RFF, which to my mind was not trolling. One is a nutjob who set up a website to talk about other RFF members. I think he's insane, but should he have been banned? His posts were entertaining.
Absolutely untrue.
However, by experience, one must control what one says in any group until he knows the mindset and conceptual limitations of that group.
Among like-minded, libertarian friends (for lack of a better word), one can say anything without fear, but in a group of strangers, one has to be aware of what's considered heresy.
It's a fact of human dynamics.
Ruben, you tend to get tremendously obtuse and vague when you're searching for an answer.
PS: I'm aware of MANY people who have been banned for expressing heresy on RFF, which to my mind was not trolling. One is a nutjob who set up a website to talk about other RFF members. I think he's insane, but should he have been banned? His posts were entertaining.
ruben said:Hi Valdemar,
Talking hypothetical can both be endless and lead us to crazy assumptions. If you happen to understand I am advocating stronger censorship, you have first to point where have you found censorship at RFF, and then we will be able to maintain a concrete exchange of ideas.
Above all it seems to me you should read this thread from its very begining.
Beyond all this, taking into account what you have dealt with, the only way I can get a notion of your argumentation is by assuming you feel a great fear of your own self, as if there is there some kind of danger to control.
In case you have expressed in this thread all what you think, I don't see any real indication you may mis-behave. On the contrary. You can have a rest
So why all these theories and hypothesis identifying self freedom with misbehaviour ?
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
"Your image has a feeling of depression attached to it. I cannot feel happy by looking at the image. Maybe this is the message. It is a fine image."
Is this an acceptable critique? Is it kosher to express one's feelings when inspecting someone else's image? Was I wrong in stating what I did [above]?
I am still not sure why I was not allowed to sense "depression" while the photographer may have sensed "beauty". Why can't we both have our own feelings?
Is this an acceptable critique? Is it kosher to express one's feelings when inspecting someone else's image? Was I wrong in stating what I did [above]?
I am still not sure why I was not allowed to sense "depression" while the photographer may have sensed "beauty". Why can't we both have our own feelings?
Last edited: