| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/08/2006 08:42:34 PM · #201 |
Originally posted by deapee :
You haven't put in enough time for your opinion to matter to me. |
He's got as much say as anyone here. He was comparing apples to cumquats, but that is beside the point. I'll give him the right to say it. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 08:43:34 PM · #202 |
For some reason, I am reminded of the two old farts on the balcony in The Muppet Show.
All they were there for is bitter comic relief. They hated the show, but they showed up every week, and listening to them bitch was hilarious.
They may have had good points now and then, but the manner in which they relayed them probably won them no friends with Kermit and the gang, but they didn't care either. And so DPC has it's own Statler and Waldorf.. who are usually everchanging, but the basic premise remains.
Heckle as you will Old Men, but the show will always go on.
*singing* It's time to play the music.. it's time to light the lights.. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 08:46:08 PM · #203 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by deapee :
You haven't put in enough time for your opinion to matter to me. |
He's got as much say as anyone here. He was comparing apples to cumquats, but that is beside the point. I'll give him the right to say it. |
I agree, he can say whatever he wants, but like I said, his opinion doesn't matter to me. If you're trying to convice me otherwise, good luck. If you're just trying to say that while his opinion doesn't matter to me, it matters to you, then that's cool....more power to you...don't really care what you think either though. ;-)
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:03:17 PM · #204 |
Originally posted by ursula:
[quote=nsbca7] [quote=ursula] [quote=nsbca7]
As far as I am concerned, neither I nor anyone else on the SC needs to explain anything further here. I also have no interest in saying which way I voted on your image. You have the official explanation. Live with it. |
Wow, this was not something I expected to hear from a Site Council, I am sorry to say it but this was a very poor response for a very valid question.
This whole Disqualification thing that is going on based on rules that are still being rewritten is ridiculus and just plain wrong, finish rewriting your rules but until then you should be disqualifying entries only based on the existing rules.
Of course you're not going to do this, because you don't have to. You will keep DQ'ing entries based on your own taste only because you can. And you will avoid the trouble of providing explainations .. Good for you .. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:29:59 PM · #205 |
| If it is any consolation the Wind filter was applied to the whole image. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:37:03 PM · #206 |
Originally posted by samanwar:
This whole Disqualification thing that is going on based on rules that are still being rewritten is ridiculus and just plain wrong, finish rewriting your rules but until then you should be disqualifying entries only based on the existing rules. |
All photos being disqualified are being done so under the current rules.
Your particular photo (the gulls, right?) was DQ'd because you used a filter in such a way as to create an "impossible" image, which I think enough people found constituted a sufficient breach of the "photographic integrity" section of the rules to warrant a DQ. I personally disagreed with that decision, but completely support those being considered valid grounds -- it is a matter of opinion in a case like this whether any change went "too far" or not.
You may disagree with that opinion while still respecting it ... a strategy I assure you will improve everyone's attitude. There is a significant difference between "I disagree" and "you're wrong" which almost inevitably affects how the person you say it to responds; perhaps you've noticed this phenomenon yourself ... |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:44:29 PM · #207 |
Originally posted by blemt:
Motion blur that's all ready there can be enhanced.
In this case, there was no blur at all, so adding the blur created an element that was not present, hence major element of the shot. |
I don't want to poke my nose but this is sounding rather NAZI esque in enforcing "rules". Who is to say the blur is or is not a "major element". Really, especially if the contest has allready taken place, to change results for something so minor is to be honest with you taking things WAY too seriously.
I like sports but once a hockey games over the winner can't be changed based on a ref call made during the game. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:47:02 PM · #208 |
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is).
Message edited by author 2006-02-08 21:47:48. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:48:37 PM · #209 |
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Originally posted by ursula:
Speaking as a DPC-member |
Er, I'm pretty sure that's not allowed ;) |
To be honest with you, and I'm no law student, after looking at the rules your photo DID NOT break the rules. You used one simple photoshop filter. To kick your photo is ridiculous and unprofessional. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:49:27 PM · #210 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is). |
Really kissing up for that job. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:57:07 PM · #211 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is). |
So the SC's are extremely enlightened being's beyond reproach. Can I get an SC to baptise my younger brother???? I really want an SC to baptise my younger brother. If there are any SC near Calgary, Alberta, please come and baptise my brother.
Ive been on a million websites with "site managers" "site council" and I usually find that they are immature and abuse the little power they have. I didn't think it would be so on this site because it is so professional and well made, and Im not saying it is so, but any brainless clod can read the rules and understand that the picture is not in violation of any rules. Its ridiculous, and the explanation given is ridiculous "major element" it's cheesey motion blur. I'd say the major element is the JET, the JET is real isn't it????? I love photoshop, Im great with it, not as good with my camera though, and if you can't add a little motion blur in "advanced editing" then what can you add?????? |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 09:57:21 PM · #212 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is). |
Really kissing up for that job. |
I understand that you are really upset and frustrated with us (meaning SC) right now, but please don't vent your aggravations on others. Please. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:01:56 PM · #213 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is). |
Really kissing up for that job. |
I understand that you are really upset and frustrated with us (meaning SC) right now, but please don't vent your aggravations on others. Please. |
Just tired of being told to shut up and eat my porridge. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:03:44 PM · #214 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is). |
Really kissing up for that job. |
I understand that you are really upset and frustrated with us (meaning SC) right now, but please don't vent your aggravations on others. Please. |
Just tired of being told to shut up and eat my porridge. |
Shut up and eat your porridge.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:04:51 PM · #215 |
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is). |
Really kissing up for that job. |
I understand that you are really upset and frustrated with us (meaning SC) right now, but please don't vent your aggravations on others. Please. |
Just tired of being told to shut up and eat my porridge. |
Shut up and eat your porridge. |
I wanted pudding. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:07:00 PM · #216 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Just tired of being told to shut up and eat my porridge. |
Shut up and eat your porridge. |
I wanted pudding. |
If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding! How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?
~Pink Floyd
Message edited by author 2006-02-08 22:08:05.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:08:31 PM · #217 |
just my 2 cents, after reading through this. I think it's absolutely rediculous. The blur is such a moch more critical element in past successful photos.
I see the major elements in the photo in question the plane and the sky, it's about as simple as that.
I'm baffled. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:09:10 PM · #218 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Just tired of being told to shut up and eat my porridge. |
Shut up and eat your porridge. |
I wanted pudding. |
If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding! How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?
~Pink Floyd [/quote]
CJ! Where have you been? Staying out of this one, heh? I don't blame you. If it weren't my image I would have too. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:09:53 PM · #219 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
I have yet to see Manic or Blemt or any of the other SC who participated in this judgment come forth and properly explain their decision.
|
Sorry, as I told you, I had a long shift. Then needed to take the time to read through the thread.
My decision has been consistant over ALL the shots that have been discussed related to motion blur. I consider it an added element that has a significant impact on the image and on EVERY SINGLE ONE, I've voted to DQ.
Now apaprently you want more detail. There's none to give. I'm very sorry that this upsets you to this degree. I'm very sorry that you feel singled out. Not a single thing I say is going to convince you that I truly did not even look at who's image this was. I looked, made the decision, consistant with how I have voted since I've been on SC.
It's unfortunate that this particular part of the major elements rule is cauing a problem right now. Periodically you will have a series of events that hits at just the wrong/right time. As I said, we are working on the clarification. It's not easy, and it's not fast. Trying to find the balance point means creating rules that flex, while at the same time show clear boundaries.
Now, I'm sure that you are going to turn right back around and tell me I'm wrong, my definition of major element is wrong, and SC is evil. That's your right.
You are just as entitled to your point of view as any other member of this site. All I ask is that you all please remember that on the other side of the computer screen is a human being. I will very politely remind you that I stated at the beginning of the day that I had a long shift at work today. When I got home, the first thing I did was log in here to read the thread and reply to you.
I've got stomach flu, I should be in bed, and I have to do a turnaround shift tomorrow for another 11 hours. I have personal obligations that have not been attended to today in order to reply to you this morning and this evening.
I do this KNOWING you aren't going to like my answer. I do this knowing that this is probably a waste of pixels. I told you that I'd reply and I have.
Now with respect, I'm off to bed to enjoy this second bout of stomach flu. Have a good evening. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:10:28 PM · #220 |
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Unfortunately, this is not a hockey game nor are the SC present for every edit done on everyone's photo. Photos are submitted on the honour system and when possible rule violations are brought to the attention of the SC they are reviewed (the alleged violations that is). |
Really kissing up for that job. |
I understand that you are really upset and frustrated with us (meaning SC) right now, but please don't vent your aggravations on others. Please. |
Just tired of being told to shut up and eat my porridge. |
Shut up and eat your porridge. |
I wanted pudding. |
Can I have blue jello if we are taking requests? |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:11:17 PM · #221 |
Originally posted by samanwar:
Wow, this was not something I expected to hear from a Site Council, I am sorry to say it but this was a very poor response for a very valid question. |
I agree...I think they should hold a more 'presentable image' at all times. You don't hear the President of anything say "well, as a person (not as a President), I really dislike that country and think they should all burn." - a bit far-fetched, yeah, but it's the same thing.
All think bickering back and forth in the past couple of months and even now is definately instigated by them...they need to step back and act as professionals. If they can't, then maybe it's time for some new S/C...it's a shame that people view the "site council" as a whole and that the immature actions and/or responses of a select few unprofessional site council members reflects badly on the whole group...but that's the way the cookie crumbles, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:13:18 PM · #222 |
| There is a picture of blue jello in my PaD, clara. If you can figure out some way to make it materialize, have at it. (But know that it was first red and hue shifted to blue) |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:13:41 PM · #223 |
Originally posted by blemt:
Sorry, as I told you, I had a long shift. Then needed to take the time to read through the thread.
My decision has been consistant over ALL the shots that have been discussed related to motion blur. I consider it an added element that has a significant impact on the image and on EVERY SINGLE ONE, I've voted to DQ.
Now apaprently you want more detail. There's none to give. I'm very sorry that this upsets you to this degree. I'm very sorry that you feel singled out. Not a single thing I say is going to convince you that I truly did not even look at who's image this was. I looked, made the decision, consistant with how I have voted since I've been on SC.
It's unfortunate that this particular part of the major elements rule is cauing a problem right now. Periodically you will have a series of events that hits at just the wrong/right time. As I said, we are working on the clarification. It's not easy, and it's not fast. Trying to find the balance point means creating rules that flex, while at the same time show clear boundaries.
Now, I'm sure that you are going to turn right back around and tell me I'm wrong, my definition of major element is wrong, and SC is evil. That's your right.
You are just as entitled to your point of view as any other member of this site. All I ask is that you all please remember that on the other side of the computer screen is a human being. I will very politely remind you that I stated at the beginning of the day that I had a long shift at work today. When I got home, the first thing I did was log in here to read the thread and reply to you.
I've got stomach flu, I should be in bed, and I have to do a turnaround shift tomorrow for another 11 hours. I have personal obligations that have not been attended to today in order to reply to you this morning and this evening.
I do this KNOWING you aren't going to like my answer. I do this knowing that this is probably a waste of pixels. I told you that I'd reply and I have.
Now with respect, I'm off to bed to enjoy this second bout of stomach flu. Have a good evening. |
See, this is how site council memebrs should act...very good attitude, and I feel you've accomplished more in that one post than anyone has in the past 9 pages.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:15:04 PM · #224 |
Originally posted by karmat:
(But know that it was first red and hue shifted to blue) |
There's an example of a bad response...what good does it serve, I feel as though you're just 'mocking the system' that you, yourself are a part of...making a joke out of something that is obviously not a joking matter to those participating in this thread. Childish if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
02/08/2006 10:15:47 PM · #225 |
Originally posted by samanwar:
Originally posted by ursula:
[quote=nsbca7] [quote=ursula] [quote=nsbca7]
As far as I am concerned, neither I nor anyone else on the SC needs to explain anything further here. I also have no interest in saying which way I voted on your image. You have the official explanation. Live with it. |
Wow, this was not something I expected to hear from a Site Council, I am sorry to say it but this was a very poor response for a very valid question.
This whole Disqualification thing that is going on based on rules that are still being rewritten is ridiculus and just plain wrong, finish rewriting your rules but until then you should be disqualifying entries only based on the existing rules.
Of course you're not going to do this, because you don't have to. You will keep DQ'ing entries based on your own taste only because you can. And you will avoid the trouble of providing explainations .. Good for you .. |
No, I don't think it was a poor response. It was simply saying that an official explanation had been given, and none other is needed here anymore. We were talking about the plane with motion blur picture, not your picture, so don't confuse the issues by throwing your picture in here.
I also think that voting is a private issue. For the record, you have no idea what my voting patterns are, or how I voted on this particular image, or on any other image that came up for disqualification.
And ... anyone who thinks that I or anyone else at SC is disqualifying images based on who they are submitted by, or not disqualifying images based on who requested that they be DQed, is just totally off. I can hardly believe it that anyone would even pay any attention to these claims. It's just plain ridiculous.
|
|
