| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/24/2005 11:36:17 AM · #101 |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:36:34 AM · #102 |
Originally posted by lhall:
And BTW notonline, you keep referring to the "other" post as offensive, but I have not seen that anyone was offended but you. |
Its not the point. The point is that my original comment was not threatening and should not have been reomved. If so (as this case may be) then so should the persons who's comment I was offended by. Please read all the pages before commenting. If you did then you should have seen my point and agree that SC shouldn't be hiding things.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:40:34 AM · #103 |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:41:36 AM · #104 |
Originally posted by ldowse:
Can we please move on to more important things before someone breaks out a rake? |
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:42:04 AM · #105 |
Now that I've paid my $25, I'm going to agree with the original premise of this thread. As long as there are no things like personal threats, excessive profanity or blatant commercial uses, if its kept in the Rant Section - let it go. Just like cable TV, we are all free to read or not. It would be helpful however if the other threads are kept somewhat on target.
It is important to remeber that this site is owned by two people - it is not a co-op or democracy. Drew and Langdon get to set the rules. |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:43:24 AM · #106 |
Originally posted by notonline:
I'm simple stating that you shouldn't be deleting/editing/removing or hiding people posts. |
It's part of our job description whether you think we should or not. It's our responsibility to keep the forums civil. Besides, you ASKED us to move a post in the very message you're complaining about. Make up your mind.
Originally posted by notonline:
Why not start a thread for religious debate since thats where your trying to put this. |
From my PM to you several hours ago: "You are welcome to spark a religious debate in another (Rant) thread" |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:43:32 AM · #107 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by ldowse:
Can we please move on to more important things before someone breaks out a rake? |
|
Chit... too late!!!
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:44:55 AM · #108 |
Originally posted by notonline:
If you did then you should have seen my point and agree that SC shouldn't be hiding things. |
Speaking of one sided....
Everything you are saying is 'I'm right, everyone else is wrong and I'm going to argue until the site sees my point and sides with me.'
I'll play your game, I'm taking my ball and going home. Hmpfh! |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:46:17 AM · #109 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by notonline:
I'm simple stating that you shouldn't be deleting/editing/removing or hiding people posts. |
It's part of our job description whether you think we should or not. It's our responsibility to keep the forums civil. Besides, you ASKED us to move a post in the very message you're complaining about. Make up your mind.
Originally posted by notonline:
Why not start a thread for religious debate since thats where your trying to put this. |
From my PM to you several hours ago: "You are welcome to spark a religious debate in another (Rant) thread" |
Your the one trying to invoke a religious debate NOT me. Since this thread started asking NOT to remove the original thread post in that thread but to take awareness in all thread when there is a complaint such as this.
edit: since this is a no win situation for either party why not just lock the thread??? I admit when I'm wrong and all I'm asking for is EQUAL treatment for all. scalvert even admitted in his 4.2 "quote" that religion should not be brought up in a forum blah blah blah etc. So just lock the thread and be done with it. Its obvoiously a no win situation for anybody and I have allllll day to debate it, but I gotta pee.
Message edited by author 2005-08-24 11:50:04.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:47:20 AM · #110 |
Originally posted by tfaust:
Originally posted by notonline:
If you did then you should have seen my point and agree that SC shouldn't be hiding things. |
Speaking of one sided....
Everything you are saying is 'I'm right, everyone else is wrong and I'm going to argue until the site sees my point and sides with me.'
I'll play your game, I'm taking my ball and going home. Hmpfh! |
So you agree with people editing your posts??? then take your ball and be on your way. Have a nice day.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:48:17 AM · #111 |
Originally posted by notonline:
Your the one trying to invoke a religious debate NOT me. Since this thread started asking NOT to remove the original thread post in that thread but to take awareness in all thread when there is a complaint such as this. |
REALLY? Shall we post the comments in question? |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:48:25 AM · #112 |
"Baby to Marge, Baby to Marge. WAHHHH! WAAAAH! Over."
--Homer Simpson |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:49:08 AM · #113 |
Originally posted by Manic:
OK, lemme have a go at explaining this...
The original post that started all this mentioned religion (a relevant bible quote, I think), but it was within the context of the thread. You took offence to this religious comment and posted as such. However, since your comment was offtopic (ie not about the thread's original subject), it was removed from the thread.
My advice would be for you to start a Rant thread discussing your complaint about others posting (on-topic) religious references. |
*bump* seeing as it looks like my post got lost in the flood :o)
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:51:08 AM · #114 |
Originally posted by notonline:
So you agree with people editing your posts??? |
I am not offensive so I don't have the same problem. If I were - I wouldn't have a problem with it.
Edit: I should say, I don't have a history of being offensive.
Message edited by author 2005-08-24 11:52:26. |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:52:17 AM · #115 |
Honestly notonline, the only reason I picked up on this thread at all was because of your name. I know nothing of you or your past except that I have only made a handful of threads here.
My thread was a question about my camera. I asked people who also owned the same camera to comment. I was clear that I already understood that non SLR cams had limitations.
You were the first to reply to my post and basically derided my choice of camera. You said nothing positive or constructive or helpful at all to me, merely stating that I should just spend more money (which obviously everyone has an infinite supply of at any given time) and get a real camera.
I replied and you posted further insulting my intelligence and choice.
I was personally offended albeit only mildly. I don't actually give a rats @ss about what you think about my camera, so I didn't make an issue of it.
I have since noted your penchant for spouting unhelpful opinions and attitudes in various threads with merely the intent to get stuff off your chest or present your view. While there is lattitude for a certain amount of this kind of thing in public forums (goodness knows I tend to brush up against the borders of helpfulness myself frequently), I feel it may do you good to consider more carefully what you are trying to say when you post.
I am male too, so I find it a bit tough to think before I speak/type/act, but when I do, I nearly unfailingly benefit from it.
There exists a just a fine line between the two drastically different concepts of trying to help and being helpful.
If you say something and it comes out in such a way as being deemed offensive to some groups, feel free to consider a different way of phrasing it and repost.
If the person's purpose in starting a thread is served by someone else, then the goal has been accomplished and learn to accept that sometimes someone else CAN say it better than you and drop it.
If you are offended by something, it means you are accepting something to lower your personal self-worth. If you let others shape your view of self-worth...... You might want to work on that before it gets to be a problem.
If someone removes your expression and doesn't have the same opinion on it's value or effect as you do, do something positive about it.
Negativity is a poisonous pill. Keep it to yourself. Better yet, throw it in the garbage where it belongs. |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:52:53 AM · #116 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by notonline:
Your the one trying to invoke a religious debate NOT me. Since this thread started asking NOT to remove the original thread post in that thread but to take awareness in all thread when there is a complaint such as this. |
REALLY? Shall we post the comments in question? |
lol yea ok. If you feel you have to then go right ahead. You've obviously deleted the post for reason and now you want to post them??? Do you not think I would have posted them if I wanted to spark a debate like that in a thread which was started for something else??? isn't this YOUR point about my comment in that thread???
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:54:04 AM · #117 |
Originally posted by tfaust:
Originally posted by notonline:
So you agree with people editing your posts??? |
I am not offensive so I don't have the same problem. If I were - I wouldn't have a problem with it.
Edit: I should say, I don't have a history of being offensive. |
Neither do I but SC (whoever it may have been) does or seems to think so and that is my point.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:55:09 AM · #118 |
I didn't read the whole thread but:
I'd say that the fact that this is a private site which requires membership or registering and has rules gives them the right. D&L have chosen these people to use their judgement on iffy situations. If they feel something is amiss they have complete authority to change it, no questions asked. If they are out of hand, I'm assuming they will lose their seat on the SC and be replaced.
Message edited by author 2005-08-24 11:55:41.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 11:55:20 AM · #119 |
Originally posted by notonline:
Neither do I but SC (whoever it may have been) does or seems to think so and that is my point. |
You do have a history since YOU have stated that this happens to you frequently, whereas it does not to others. That speaks volumes. |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 12:00:57 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by notonline:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by notonline:
Your the one trying to invoke a religious debate NOT me. |
REALLY? Shall we post the comments in question? |
If you feel you have to then go right ahead. You've obviously deleted the post for reason and now you want to post them??? |
I deleted your posts because they were out of line in that thread. I haven't posted them in this Rant thread out of consideration for your privacy. If you would like the world to see this "great injustice," I will be more than happy to oblidge. |
|
|
|
08/24/2005 12:02:46 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
My thread was a question about my camera. I asked people who also owned the same camera to comment. I was clear that I already understood that non SLR cams had limitations.
You were the first to reply to my post and basically derided my choice of camera. You said nothing positive or constructive or helpful at all to me, merely stating that I should just spend more money (which obviously everyone has an infinite supply of at any given time) and get a real camera.
I replied and you posted further insulting my intelligence and choice.
I was personally offended albeit only mildly. I don't actually give a rats @ss about what you think about my camera, so I didn't make an issue of it. |
Actually I said the camera sucked and that was my opinion. I did hold the camera, didn't find it limiting but found the performance lacked that of even my G2 which I still use. I never insulted your intelligence as you claim whoever you asked for OPINIONS about a camera to which I had litterally just had in my hands. So what your saying is you cannot take feedback in anyway??? No, what your saying is YOU didn't like what I had to say. I didn't suggest you go out and spend a lot of money on a different camera. If you remember I said my friend asked me to review a camera and I'd post sample shot at YOUR request. Does this sound unreasonable??? Cuz to me it sounds like maybe someone offering to show some sample shots of what he had to work with in the location he was at. You elected to take it the wrong way. Well, thats not what this thread is about o feel free to go back to that thread and post your concerns there and I will more then gladly follow up there as I have that thread marked because I thought it important enough to follow up. Thanks for calling.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 12:03:25 PM · #122 |
Minor sidetrack...but how does this happen? I just took a peek at your profile and here is your voting history.
Votes Cast: 1
Avg Vote Cast: 6.0000
Thought the system wouldn't allow less than 20% voting on a challenge?
Originally posted by eschelar:
. |
Left quote in place for reference to whose profile I was talking about.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 12:05:22 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by tfaust:
Originally posted by notonline:
Neither do I but SC (whoever it may have been) does or seems to think so and that is my point. |
You do have a history since YOU have stated that this happens to you frequently, whereas it does not to others. That speaks volumes. |
Actually, the first tie it happened I didn't notice it and as I was reading the forums I could swear I replied to a thread. Now paying more careful attention to it I noticed that I did reply to it and the message was hidden. Probably happened to you without you realizing it. Its that subtle.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 12:11:16 PM · #124 |
Well, normally I don't get involved in these heated debates (except for the occasional silly comment) but I can't sit and keep quiet any longer on this one.
notonline, I seriously don't believe you don't understand this. It would seem to me that you are seizing the opportunity to make a beg stink, which, 4 forum pages later, you've obviously succeeded there. I'll reiterate a little of what I said in our pm correspondance, I hope you don't mind. The post that you say offended you was spot on topic, and personally hard for me to comprehend how anyone could find it offensive in the context of that thread. It certainly was not offensive to the OP (me).
On the other hand, your response to it, and requesting that it be moved to rant, and especially the wording that you used, in my opinion was "tacky, inappropriate and offensive" especially in the context of that thread. It's easy to say that others are trying to spark a religious debate when it's not 'public' knowledge of the origin of this whole thing. To go back to that original instance, I think it would be clear that in fact, you were seeming to want to 'spark a religious debate'.
It's my opinion that SC did the right thing, and tried to just keep the incident isolated and prevent from starting a whole big 'thing'. You can't deny that it is you, that started it and kept it going strong. Of course, maybe I have a biased opinion because it was 'my' thread, but I would hope that if the facts were brought to light, most would tend to agree.
The take that I get on things like this, is that the person screaming about 'groups' being offended, couldn't really give 2 hoots about the real issue and is just stirring up the hornets nest and fighting for the sake of the fight. That bugs me.
It would be fine with me to bring the 'post's' in question to light. I guess it would be up to the 3 people involved, myself, you(notonline) and the actual poster of the post.
Like I said, I did find it tacky and unappropriate, kind of like going to a wedding, or funeral or christening or something and making a stink out of it because of their religious content.
All this is of course, my opinion, feel free to disagree, it is your right. Just don't try to quell my right to believe in what I believe in.
|
|
|
|
08/24/2005 12:12:26 PM · #125 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by notonline:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by notonline:
Your the one trying to invoke a religious debate NOT me. |
REALLY? Shall we post the comments in question? |
If you feel you have to then go right ahead. You've obviously deleted the post for reason and now you want to post them??? |
I deleted your posts because they were out of line in that thread. I haven't posted them in this Rant thread out of consideration for your privacy. If you would like the world to see this "great injustice," I will be more than happy to oblidge. |
This isn't a rant thread, its a general discussion. I'm not spouting off merely discussing and by moving it to a rant threat would jut be making more of a point about abuse of power. Even if its not you personally who moves it there we all know SC is connected one way or the other and conveys my point again. This thread hasn't become hostile or beligerant right??? so why move it to the rant??? The way I see it is your just mad cuz you made my point back when you quoted 4.2
Look instead of being pissed off or mad about things why not just gracefully say I understand your concerns and we (as a collective) will try to be more understanding (not forgetting its NOT just about todays deleted thread post).
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/13/2025 06:46:01 AM EDT.
