Suggestion: Code of Conduct for Lingerine and Nude Organised Shoots

[obfuscate]

to be fair,

one does not need to be able to do something or replicate what he/she suggests. the crux here is whether the suggestion is feasible or not.

Where I come from, people are valued on how they live up to their own words.

Of course she needs to be able to do what she preaches, how else would anyone believe her? If she can't even do what she is suggesing, it simply tells us that she is just full of hot air.

 

[night86mare]

i'm not oozing anything but contempt and doubt on her motivations because its quite apparent she didn't do what she did for the sake of altruism. It's been very apparent she's got a chip on her shoulder.

i believe in innocent until proven guilty

what do you believe in?

 

[night86mare]

Where I come from, people are valued on how they live up to their own words.

Of course she needs to be able to do what she preaches, how else would anyone believe her? If she can't even do what she is suggesing, it simply tells us that she is just full of hot air.

living up to her words;

so tell me. how do you propose that our dear girl here lives up to her words? because frankly speaking, all that i have seen are challenges for her to organise a shoot based on her own expectations. does no one else find that ludicrous in terms of any semblance of an argument? or lack thereof.

 

[TheQuestion]

i believe in innocent until proven guilty

what do you believe in?

the problem with the fallacy of that logic in THIS situation is that she is far from innocent. notice i am not calling for her blood or her head on a platter but i am saying her motives are suspect.

 

[AverRal]

Please stop, there is no point arguing.

Please offer constructive feedback instead, if you think it is not feasible, explain why and suggest new alternatives to the solution. It will be greatly appreciated.

 

[night86mare]

Not again? Do you want me to repeat my previous comments to you on this issue? Do you ask anyone with comments on legal issues on their qualifications? Or just decided you have nothing better to do but say it each and every time? When you make a comment on legal issues, should I then ask you for your qualifications?

If you are so hung up on qualifications, take it to pm and I'll gladly arrange a meeting with you in my office to clarify any doubts you may have. If not, dont post flamebaits further and OT ONCE again.

Stop trolling please.

no, but i ask people who offer without fail to comment on legal issues whether they have sufficient experience AND qualification to serve up such nonsensical offers.

everyone knows that a qualified lawyer would not do such a thing. because a qualified lawyer actually has a responsbility to dispense proper, trained advice. a non-qualified quack has the license to spout postulations based on limited understanding, and then go on to absolve himself of liability later on.

this ISN'T about qualifications. it is about responsibility, and you have displayed an alarming example of that all along, and i would urge every single person who decides to take up your offer, anytime, to exercise that offer with extreme caution.

if you call me a troll one more time, i will make this an issue. with way more maturity than you display, in the past, at present, and i suppose, in the future.

 

[night86mare]

the problem with the fallacy of that logic in THIS situation is that she is far from innocent. notice i am not calling for her blood or her head on a platter but i am saying her motives are suspect.

like you've said so many times already

can you play a new lute? or do you have nothing else to offer?

 

[TheQuestion]

Please stop, there is no point arguing.

Please offer constructive feedback instead, if you think it is not feasible, explain why and suggest new alternatives to the solution. It will be greatly appreciated.

problem is averal u did what you did to open a window for dialogue. now that you've not gotten what you wanted but its blown up in your face you're trying to change the subject?

 

[sORe-EyEz]

would some folks here, i highly doubt these farce will encourage more suggestions of any kind in future, least they get shot down & dragged through mud.

i think the TS should locked this thread up & start a new one on a clean slate. dun wait for mods to step in for damage control.

 

[vince123123]

People are free to rely on what they want - at the end of the day, it is who is more convincing and is able substantiates their statements

There are many lawyers who post comments in forums - this goes to show that you are not aware of what is happening. There is no need for liability in a free-forum simply because any advice is given gratis. If you want to find someone liable, you need to pay for it.

Start a new thread on this if you want to comment further on qualifications. I will not fall for your flamebait and OT in this thread.

If you raise baseless accusations one more time, or insinuate anyone is a quack, I will make this an issue.

no, but i ask people who offer without fail to comment on legal issues whether they have sufficient experience AND qualification to serve up such nonsensical offers.

everyone knows that a qualified lawyer would not do such a thing. because a qualified lawyer actually has a responsbility to dispense proper, trained advice. a non-qualified quack has the license to spout postulations based on limited understanding, and then go on to absolve himself of liability later on.

this ISN'T about qualifications. it is about responsibility, and you have displayed an alarming example of that all along, and i would urge every single person who decides to take up your offer, anytime, to exercise that offer with extreme caution.

 

[night86mare]

People are free to rely on what they want - at the end of the day, it is who is more convincing and is able substantiates their statements

There are many lawyers who post comments in forums - this goes to show that you are not aware of what is happening. There is no need for liability in a free-forum simply because any advice is given gratis. If you want to find someone liable, you need to pay for it.

so mr vince123123,

are you going to clairfy once and for all if you are a lawyer? this isn't trolling, it's a challenge to be responsible and state facts. that's all i want from you. instead of the usual shadowboxing and flitting around and dodging questions.

i agree that not everyone needs to be a lawyer to dispense what they view as "sound legal advice". i do believe however, that it is only responsible that if one is not a lawyer, one should give that qualification so that there is no backlash, not only to the people who take the advice at face value, but also to the person dishing out legal advice.

referring to documents available online, need i remind everyone here, does not make anyone a lawyer.

 

[obfuscate]

I do know there has been experienced photographers holding their workshops, somehow, I don't see them around nowadays because they don't want to be associated with the type of organised shoots there are currently.

We have to bring them back to the community, they will be the ones who will mould the next generation of aspiring photographers. In order to do so, we have to have guidelines that makes it conducive for them to start courses..

You are free to do this if you think you can. Don't generalise, tell us specifically how you intend to do this.

I would love to organise professional photography workshops once the guidelines are implemented, and I am sure there are others as well.

I can't see any reason, except your personal ones, that should stop you from doing what you feel strongly about. Nothing on this site is stopping you.

 

[vince123123]

If I say I am, how do you prove so? If I say I'm not, am I lying?

Hence, I then return my challenge to take it to pm and meet up. Or is there some reason you don't want to face up?

so mr vince123123,

are you going to clairfy once and for all if you are a lawyer? this isn't trolling, it's a challenge to be responsible and state facts. that's all i want from you.

 

[TheQuestion]

If I say I am, how do you prove so? If I say I'm not, am I lying?

Hence, I then return my challenge to take it to pm and meet up. Or is there some reason you don't want to face up?

for one thing he ain't in sg!

 

[night86mare]

If I say I am, how do you prove so? If I say I'm not, am I lying?

Hence, I then return my challenge to take it to pm and meet up. Or is there some reason you don't want to face up?

typical of you.

if you say you are, i will give you the benefit of the doubt. i am that gentlemanly. and of course, do note that if you state that you are, every word that you write regarding legal issues will have both positive and negative connotations to your very self. of course there is reason for you to flit around like a butterfly.

it is of course, easy for you to issue such challenges, when you know it is not humanly possible for me to do so. of course, if you want to sponsor a winter trip back to singapore, you're more than welcome.

 

[TheQuestion]

You are free to do this if you think you can. Don't generalise, tell us specifically how you intend to do this.



I can't see any reason, except your personal ones, that should stop you from doing what you feel strongly about. Nothing on this site is stopping you.

to add to that averal no one likes to be preached at by someone who thinks they know better when they haven't got a clue.

 

[obfuscate]

living up to her words;

so tell me. how do you propose that our dear girl here lives up to her words? because frankly speaking, all that i have seen are challenges for her to organise a shoot based on her own expectations. does no one else find that ludicrous in terms of any semblance of an argument? or lack thereof.

No, I do not find it ludicrous. She has made suggestions, she will have to find her own way. There is nothing for me to propose.

 

[night86mare]

No, I do not find it ludicrous. She has made suggestions, she will have to find her own way. There is nothing for me to propose.

because based on your logic, if you do not agree with her,

then you also should prove why you do not agree. according to the logic being preached here, you should also have a competing organiser shoot.

it's not so nice when your standards are applied onto you, are they?

 

[vince123123]

I'm sorry, I don't know that you are or are not in Singapore, I don't keep track of everyone's whereabouts unlike you.

I'm sure you will return to Singapore at some point - feel free to pm me and we can meet up. This is also not the first time that I've asked you to meetup, and you have decided not to do so. That despite one occassion where you were clearly in Singapore and had even pm-ed me on another issue.

I'm not sure who is flitting around like a butterfly in response to a real life meetup as opposed to mere words in an internet forum.

This will be my final post on this matter, no more OTs and stop baiting me into one. Start a new thread.

typical of you.

if you say you are, i will give you the benefit of the doubt. i am that gentlemanly. and of course, do note that if you state that you are, every word that you write regarding legal issues will have both positive and negative connotations to your very self. of course there is reason for you to flit around like a butterfly.

it is of course, easy for you to issue such challenges, when you know it is not humanly possible for me to do so. of course, if you want to sponsor a winter trip back to singapore, you're more than welcome.

 

[obfuscate]

because based on your logic, if you do not agree with her,

then you also should prove why you do not agree. according to the logic being preached here, you should also have a competing organiser shoot.

it's not so nice when your standards are applied onto you, are they?

My suggestion is posted on another thread, and it is not in the form of a shoot. I can live with my suggestion. If CS wants to take my suggestion up, I am happy to chip in and do it the way I have suggested.

Now that I have replied to you, can you tell me where your suggestions are?