"Shooting in public toilet" thread missing?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sherm and I both concluded that we over-reacted and we apologize to the rest of the RF community for having to read our rant.
 
Furthermore............ when this get's started anew in the morning I promise not to jump back in.

Apologies..........

Sherm
 
In case anyone's interested ... my Rollei 35 jammed today, after scrambling and climbing three hours to the top of a spectacular waterfall, taking the last frame of the magnificent view and having the film break when I tried to rewind it.

Now that's 'pissy' :bang:
 
CameraQuest said:
No, I did not say Jon was a sicko. I did say a thread about photography in a public rest room is.
Click to expand...

It's sick to talk about that? It's sick to give advice something like this?:

If I was going to shoot in public toilet I would

1. ask permissions beforehand from the owner of the
building or someone who takes care of the building (sorry I don't know the correct english term).

2. I would use friends in those pictures - NOT just
random people.

3. NOT HIDE MY CAMERA! It should be clear to EVERYONE in that particular toilet
that I have a permission to shoot there and authorized
to be there doing my job - be it a job assignment or
personal project.

Without 1,2 and 3 I wouldn't shoot at all.
Click to expand...

Maybe we have some cultural differences here, but if I would have a project that needed shooting in public restrooms and didn't know how to act / how to shoot I would consider it "sicko" NOT TO discuss this. Not to ask ideas and advices. Like we saw on that original thread -- the OP had a real project but he approached it in a totally wrong way (IMO)...sneaking with your camera, someone told him to hide cameras etc.. Noooo way!!! I hope he doesn't get arrested because censorship kills the discussion (can't give him advices how to deal with this difficult real-life shooting situation).

But this is a "private forum" and talking about this seems to be against the rules, so...I'll respect that and leave this topic now.
 
The second post of the owner of the forum shows no sign that he has taken any of the suggestions offered here seriously.

He has explained that calling the thread "sicko" doesn't mean he thinks the one who has thought it up is "sicko". I didn't think the argument was convincing, but I'm sure he was sincere.

But why not acknowledge the apparent need (as shown throughout this thread) to let the community know a thread has been deleted? There have been enough ways suggested to do this properly, yet not a word about it. It seems he hasn't read this thread entire either, which is too bad, because it has mostly been civilized discussion (again)
 
CameraQuest said:
Upholding RFF Rules is not Censorship
Click to expand...
Well, I guess there we disagree. Maybe it isn't censorship in your eyes, but it is certainly perceived as such, especially when the threads disappear as if they had never existed. (And no, spam is not the same thing; I think there's been sufficient discussion on this elsewhere, e.g. whether spam is protected speech or not, and since even US courts agree on this, I think so can we) What would it need to be censorship then in your eyes, does it have to be a law enforcement agency doing it?

CameraQuest said:
But in the long run we will hopefully end up with a better more civilized forum which stays focused on photography, not flames, not arguments, not pissing contests.
Click to expand...
OK, let's better not get hung up on the whole censorship debate then. Instead, in the interest of a civilised way to deal with this situation, here's a suggestion. Rather than deleting the whole thread without a word, how about locking it, deleting all the posts save the first, and editing the first to give a clear message why this thread was deleted, and in what way it was considered offensive to RFF rules? That would be a lot more upfront and civilised in my opinion than just deleting it and leaving people to ask for it and wondering about censorship.

I've seen some moderators (notably, Kim) do this in a number of threads where the discussion had become rather political and personal, and it's the best way to treat this IMHO. If a thread of mine got deleted, I would definitely like to know why.

Philipp
 
Man, I think my name has been mentioned as many times as Jon's now!!

But please, I don't wanna have to get a life. I quite enjoy taking photo's and sitting here laughing at this thread because it's too windy to sit in the garden stripping paint from a 60 year old field camera.

Stephen I think we all must realise YOU are making the rules here and YOU are deciding where the line is drawn. This isn't a public forum, but it is. It's not publicly owned but it's used by the public.

Citing the rules you had above, if that was posted at the end of a locked thread THAT is a helluva lot more effective than total deletion where we get near-100 posts of bitching and whining.


But hey, what was that about Jenna Jameson? what did I miss!?!?!?
 
But hey, what was that about Jenna Jameson? what did I miss!?!?!?
Click to expand...

You must have been the only one who missed it. I think 13 people reported the spam, but I wonder how long they looked before they clicked!!!;)
 
rover said:
You must have been the only one who missed it. I think 13 people reported the spam, but I wonder how long they looked before they clicked!!!;)
Click to expand...

I looked and didn't report the post as spam. :p

BTW, the links went to a site that asked you to download some new codec. Bad news. Those so-called new codecs are usually old codecs with some sort of virus/ trojan/ whathaveyou build into them. I hope no-one here went the whole hog to watch those vids.... :eek:
 
I guess the bottom line is ... Stephen can huff and puff all he wants about thread content and a lot of us will continue to climb down his throat every time he does something that irks us ... such as delete a thread because he regards the thread subject as 'sicko.' (what a word ... it implies so much and says so little)

When he cops a blast like this over these types of issues, the temptation to toss us all out of his sandbox must be overpowering! :D
 
it's early morning in Los Angeles, and I am out the door on my way to a camera show.

for those of you who are not aware of it, the FAQ RFF rules were set up by Jorge and have been more or less the same at least for the last two years or so since I have been aware of them.

as for the best way to handle things on the forum, a basic problem is that regardless what is done or not done, someone in this large a group is going to be unhappy. the old adage about not being able to please everyone really applies. Yet trying to find the best ways is definitely my goal.

Stephen
 
I am a serious photographer making serious photographs and hoped that other like-minded people could guide me on a tricky assignment.

Our art is sometimes about pushing the limits.

I am not 'sicko' and my photos are not 'crappy'. At least my friends tell me that's true!
 
Stephen, can I suggest then, instead of deleting a thread without explanation, (sort of like Big Brother vapourization), delete all but the first post of the thread (or delete that too, if it itself is offending) and replace it with an explanation about why it was deleted. As photographers/artists we are naturally generally against censorship, but can understand that this is a privately owned forum with rules we need to follow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom