What culture is it here??!!

[eikin]

OK, quite a few guys at once, no need to quote for neatness sake. Life is not as simple as A or B, unlike to somebody. So, I can't answer this question, whether I've chosen A initially and now chosen B, its not so simple as that. What it is, is that initially, my stance is that, for those who wanted to critique, its better to show your portfolio here in CS, in order to enforce your critics about an image. But having seen so much furore and rather fervent views on this so far, I would humbly submit that, if you don't want to, its fine, you have a choice. However, that will not change the psychological make up of people, ie, we are creatures of sights , we tend to believe what we see. So whether you or I have the last words about this, it won't change anything towards the natural behaviour of humans.

life indeed is not black and white and usually grey, making quick assumptions is a bad way to deal with life. you make it sound like you're some authority of critique. the issue about whether the critic needs to show the rest his/her pictures had been discussed many times already, whether there's a consensus or not, what i see happening in CS is that more and more people understand that picture making and picture critique are separate activities. you seem to be advocating that because human beings like to judge with their eyes, it's only natural that critics show their works. i see that as regressive thinking as much as this forum is concerned.

whatever it is, if you think that is necessary, you can make a formal feedback in the feedback section, the admin will decide if that is necessary. as it stands now, whoever wants to make a critique in critique corner do not need to show everyone else his/her portfolio.

CS is an open forum that welcomes members who work on photography on different levels, newbies, amateurs, serious amatuers, professionals, artists, all are welcomed. many discussions have gone on about critique culture in CS, and the take is that critique corner shall take on the same spirit, basically keeping participation free from qualification discrimination and providing everyone a good platform for learning. the rules are tailored to help posters, critique seekers are required to make self analyses (self critique) regardless of whether you're a master of photography or inexperienced amateur. critique givers are banned from making overly simplistic remarks, and are required to think more and write more, regardless of whether you're a master critic or layman.

therein lies the fairness, in disallowing discrimination of identity. i've seen forums that have critique corner dominated by ''senior'' members who trample on newcomers like trash. who is to judge that a newcomer is too new to make a critique request? or too new to make a critique even? you can have someone who has worked on photography for many years and is an accomplished artist or photographer but simply is not capable in making critiques. you can have someone who is learned about art and photography and had written dozens of books on that but is unable to make a ''technically properly exposed'' picture. this is the internet, rights of critique isn't limited to those with impressive online portfolios only, in fact the rights to critique is not limited to anyone, this is not Bauhaus. but this freedom comes with a rule inside this forum, that postings will be moderated based on content. posts that are deliberately malicious, off-topic, overly simplistic like oneliners are decided to be disallowed.

this is the critique culture we want to achieve, at least in critique corner.

I will not tell you which sites, I think whoever wants to know, should have the discretion to PM me, and not make an issue out of it here in the forum, I can assure you, that I will respond to your mail, whether its satisfactory or not, I can't guarantee it. The critieria of such sites would require straight off, a strong portfolio, otherwise you are kindly invited to go elsewhere, so I don't think its good for you to go there to check it out, and embarass yourself internationally.

such elitist attitude.

if you think the members here are a disgrace and embarrassing, and are not qualified enough for your international forums, you're always welcomed to ascend into your heavens and excuse yourself from the lowly culture here.

There's no herd mentality in my moves, as some would like to say so, as I do not support your ways and views, even I had chosen the peaceful attitude of handling this forum here, I think this is the wise thing to do. As you can see, I am not swayed by your baseless imposition upon me, but I said, do as you wish, I am not the owner of this site.

Its strange how some can always answer me, why I see things the way I see. After openly and disrespectfully trying to teach me about the things of life through a forum, I think its best that you PM me, and we deal with your unhappiness face to face outside here. I am inviting you not on unfriendly terms, but as a gentleman. And I would like such confrontation with moderators of the site kept in the loop.

Any wise person reading this will know, that I have been an open member, one who shows portfolio and POV, and so, nobody needs to second guess what kind of person I am, whether they support me or not, I won't know. But I think, its better than those who are secretive about showing their works, who are not open and frank, and who deals with affairs in thug-like fashions..

There seems a culture of no respect for the TS of threads here, hijacking of this thread is clearly seen here, and there's always an option for whoever wishes to start a thread anytime they want, fyi.

as mentioned, freedom is the freedom to respect others' freedom. i've quite enough of your name callings and elitist attitude, thinking that everyone else who oppose are either childish and should go back to kindergarten, or gangsters who come in to gang rape your thread. you should reflect on your own attitude, forums are about discussions and discussions are responses.

 

[eikin]

There are obviously individuals who are seeking commercial/business vengeance in CS, especially in this thread, posing as genuine contributors to threads, but actually creating chaos and malice in this environment. Its sad to see some genuine members who did not exercise better judgement and partake of this blood feast. Its pretty obvious from this threads, that some people change identity dishonorably here:

Note change of name

Note change of name

Smurfman = Fotoudavid ??!!

IMHO, I think somebody should put a stop to this by an investigation or lock this thread.

I will be uncovering more from my own research.

yes you need more research, smurfman is fotoudavid, the change of nickname was an authorised one.

why don't you give yourself the same judgement?

 

[fotoudavid]

There are obviously individuals who are seeking commercial/business vengeance in CS, especially in this thread, posing as genuine contributors to threads, but actually creating chaos and malice in this environment. Its sad to see some genuine members who did not exercise better judgement and partake of this blood feast. Its pretty obvious from this threads, that some people change identity dishonorably here:

Note change of name

Note change of name

Smurfman = Fotoudavid ??!!

IMHO, I think somebody should put a stop to this by an investigation or lock this thread.

I will be uncovering more from my own research.

u think i can change nick my own???

 

[garou12]

And why would I do that? There are more eloquent members here in CS who are not participating in this thread, you aren't the best here like you make yourselves out to be, please Don't flatter yourselves lah

If you other places are so great why don't you stay there and post? what are you doing here then?!:nono:

 

[nikontiger]

eh i said you should show it to us. I didn't say that we should go there and start an arguement. I'm begining to think its wrong of you to think that just because you belong somewhere else too that you're automatically better than all of us here. You talk about us going elsewhere and embarassing ourselves don't you think you've been doing that to yourself here as well?:nono:

Ok, my bad. I can see why it makes you feel this way, but it was never my intent to create the impression that I am better than anyone here, so.... I apologise for that.

What I had intended to say was, since you don't agree to a portfolio (where these sites' majority members would jump on such attitudes), you can potentially find yourselve in embarassing situation. By saying this, I am trying to help prevent this from happening, I'm not saying that your photos or knowledge is worse or bad, no, I am not saying that, and if I did make you feel that way, its my fault and I acknowledge it for the wrong choice of words.

 

[nikontiger]

life indeed is not black and white and usually grey, making quick assumptions is a bad way to deal with life. you make it sound like you're some authority of critique. the issue about whether the critic needs to show the rest his/her pictures had been discussed many times already, whether there's a consensus or not, what i see happening in CS is that more and more people understand that picture making and picture critique are separate activities. you seem to be advocating that because human beings like to judge with their eyes, it's only natural that critics show their works. i see that as regressive thinking as much as this forum is concerned.

whatever it is, if you think that is necessary, you can make a formal feedback in the feedback section, the admin will decide if that is necessary. as it stands now, whoever wants to make a critique in critique corner do not need to show everyone else his/her portfolio.

CS is an open forum that welcomes members who work on photography on different levels, newbies, amateurs, serious amatuers, professionals, artists, all are welcomed. many discussions have gone on about critique culture in CS, and the take is that critique corner shall take on the same spirit, basically keeping participation free from qualification discrimination and providing everyone a good platform for learning. the rules are tailored to help posters, critique seekers are required to make self analyses (self critique) regardless of whether you're a master of photography or inexperienced amateur. critique givers are banned from making overly simplistic remarks, and are required to think more and write more, regardless of whether you're a master critic or layman.

therein lies the fairness, in disallowing discrimination of identity. i've seen forums that have critique corner dominated by ''senior'' members who trample on newcomers like trash. who is to judge that a newcomer is too new to make a critique request? or too new to make a critique even? you can have someone who has worked on photography for many years and is an accomplished artist or photographer but simply is not capable in making critiques. you can have someone who is learned about art and photography and had written dozens of books on that but is unable to make a ''technically properly exposed'' picture. this is the internet, rights of critique isn't limited to those with impressive online portfolios only, in fact the rights to critique is not limited to anyone, this is not Bauhaus. but this freedom comes with a rule inside this forum, that postings will be moderated based on content. posts that are deliberately malicious, off-topic, overly simplistic like oneliners are decided to be disallowed.

this is the critique culture we want to achieve, at least in critique corner.



such elitist attitude.

if you think the members here are a disgrace and embarrassing, and are not qualified enough for your international forums, you're always welcomed to ascend into your heavens and excuse yourself from the lowly culture here.



as mentioned, freedom is the freedom to respect others' freedom. i've quite enough of your name callings and elitist attitude, thinking that everyone else who oppose are either childish and should go back to kindergarten, or gangsters who come in to gang rape your thread. you should reflect on your own attitude, forums are about discussions and discussions are responses.

Thanks for your detailed and meticulous reply, that's what I respect about you, despite a few squabbles and exchanges later.

Your views are appreciated by me, especially the one on Seniority Domination of forums (paragraph 4) and I certainly do not wish for such to happen. If by advocating portfolio credentials here will cause this to happen, I humbly subscribe to retracting from pushing my ideas, since you are here with longer history, better platform and experience pertaining to CS than me.

And no, heaven is here on earth for me, so I tend to broom around my premises, perhaps that's why the dust got into other people's houses I apologise to all these people.

 

[nikontiger]

Self love and eltisim? My position is that anyone can comment or critique - I wonder how that is interpreted as elitism since no particular class is favoured unlike your position.

Am I a business competitor? Once again you assume too much - just becuase someone is at opposite with your position makes him a business competitor? I suppose that you view garou12, and Silence Sky as your business competitors.

Wait a second, now that you are tryign to "tear me down", are you my business competitor?

There is no correlation between bitterness (the presence of which is denied) and creativity - I wonder how you came to that. Both are separately independent concepts.

Nice conclusions, though unfortunately, without any basis .

Looking at it from my angle, it seems to be that way, but if that's what you said it is, then so be it. I apologise if its a wrong observation done without any bias.

 

[nikontiger]

yes you need more research, smurfman is fotoudavid, the change of nickname was an authorised one.

why don't you give yourself the same judgement?

Er.. don't quite understand why I should give myself such judgement, but anyway, PEACE

 

[nikontiger]

So you're saying that initially you said "A" and you are also of the view that "A" is correct, but right now you are just saying "B" even though your stand is still A, because saying "A" will cause a lot of furore and therefore in order to not give respect to other users and not to further offend them, you decided to say "B" even though you feel "A".

I'm not too sure why we are talking about bringing this somewhere else or seeing a opposing view somewhere else. Are you trying to validate your position of A in this community by bringing in other people from another community who endorse your idea of "A"?

Vince, to be fair, after reading this again, perhaps my answer should be, Neither A nor B, but would kindly submit C as my answer.Truly in life, I hate MCQs :bsmilie:

 

[Sion]

u think i can change nick my own???

Why?

Smufman is cuter than fotodavid.

Hope that you won't be losing any of your Smufness.

 

[Deadpoet]

Why?

Smufman is cuter than fotodavid.

Hope that you won't be losing any of your Smufness.

I doubt he can ever loose his smurfness

sad if he did ...

 

[Deadpoet]

Er.. don't quite understand why I should give myself such judgement, but anyway, PEACE

because you 1) jumped to conclusion 2) appeared to be setting up another flame bait 3) attacked another member without cause, 4) ... I better stop here ...

btw, can I ask you a question and please answer straight ...

after all said and done where do you stand.

a) critics do not have to show their work nor do they have to be accomplished in that field in order to be a good critic, and more importantly a critic whose critique can be useful.

b) critics have to be accomplished and also show their work before they can critique, nomatter how useful their critique maybe.

Thanks.

 

[Sion]

I doubt he can ever loose his smurfness

sad if he did ...

There have been unsuccessful attempts to de-smurf him.

But he came back smurfer than ever. :bsmilie:

 

[nikontiger]

because you 1) jumped to conclusion 2) appeared to be setting up another flame bait 3) attacked another member without cause, 4) ... I better stop here ...

btw, can I ask you a question and please answer straight ...

after all said and done where do you stand.

a) critics do not have to show their work nor do they have to be accomplished in that field in order to be a good critic, and more importantly a critic whose critique can be useful.

b) critics have to be accomplished and also show their work before they can critique, nomatter how useful their critique maybe.

Thanks.

Normally MCQ got C) None of the above... which in this case C. To answer straight , don't think I can do it, sorry

 

[vince123123]

You seem to be skirting the issue for fear of commiting to an answer. There is no such thing as C.

A is what you said initially at the start of this thread.

B is your revised position because you want to be politically correct as stated in your subsequent and more recent posts.

How in the world a "C" came out is beyond me. Unless you want to switch your position yet again.

Vince, to be fair, after reading this again, perhaps my answer should be, Neither A nor B, but would kindly submit C as my answer.Truly in life, I hate MCQs :bsmilie:

Sounds again like another attempt to sit on the fence. However, if I am wrong and you feel that neither of Deadpoet's options suit your position, then if you wish to state a "C" ie, None of the Above, I believe that it is only appropriate that you state what does "C" mean.

After all, since you love the MCQ analogy, I'm sure that you are familiar with (C) Others, please state here: _____________________________.

Normally MCQ got C) None of the above... which in this case C. To answer straight , don't think I can do it, sorry

 

[nikontiger]

Hello my dearest fellow CSers

I've been a member here for quite a while already, but still considered new, so maybe this is the correct place to post this thread regarding the culture here in CS. After posting a few threads and joining other people's thread, I've come to notice a certain kind of behaviour that's quite accepted here in CS, which in some other places can be viewed as a very ungentlemanly and dishonorable behaviour.

Firstly, I've noticed that there are those "self appointed professional critique", who does not post any photos taken by them at all...I mean, c'mon, let's be fair and put at least one, its not too much to ask right? Its to give the guy/gal being criticised, a chance to verify the qualification of the criticizer. Its always easy to comment and give ideas etc.... when one can't produce what one propose, its unfair to the guy who spend hard work and time posting up, being open and got disappointing critiques by these group of people.

Secondly, there are those who make short and cutting remarks, and when questioned upon for more details, they are no where to be seen...GONE!! It's quite remarkable and unbelievable. And you can see them hopping from one thread to another, obviously ignoring any further questioning.... cyber arsonist

I believe people here are of a certain calibre and intelligence, there's no need for anyone to be embarassed by being reminded of such fundamental courtesy, so I sincerely hope that more honour be brought to this place, and let's be open and learn from each other, myself highly included. As you can see, I've put up quite a number of photos even before I started to participate in commenting about other's photo, so if you see that my photos are not up to standard, then I have given you a chance to ignore what I commented.

What do you all think? Any similar observations? Or maybe its just me :bsmilie:

C) My stance hasn't and will not change from the beginning.

But by my stance, I am not forcing anyone to comply, its a free world. However, I would appreciate it if you do show some photos, be it CS or a linked portfolio, for my viewing pleasure and usage as some form of credentials.

3 scenarios to look at:

1. A photog who agrees with every critics and has no idea who the criticiser is not going to get any better, as he is like a sail boat, blowing in accordance to the wind;

2. A photog who knows which are genuine and which are fake critics, are already good enough to tell even without knowing the criticizer, doesn't need his work posted for critiques.

3. A photog (like most here) who post their pics to be critiqued, genuinely wanting to improve his/her skills in photography, and who doesn't know many people here, will really benefit from some form of validation, as an example, through the member's portfolio or linked works here. That way, they can be more accurate in siphoning out the trashy critics.

Two extremities, if all here are photogs with images, CS abound. If all here are critques w/o images posted anywhere, CS is redundant. This natural phenomenal speaks for itself.

 

[ortega]

There are obviously individuals who are seeking commercial/business vengeance in CS, especially in this thread, posing as genuine contributors to threads, but actually creating chaos and malice in this environment. Its sad to see some genuine members who did not exercise better judgement and partake of this blood feast. Its pretty obvious from this threads, that some people change identity dishonorably here:

Note change of name

Note change of name

Smurfman = Fotoudavid ??!!

IMHO, I think somebody should put a stop to this by an investigation or lock this thread.

I will be uncovering more from my own research.

as far as i know, the account "smurfman" has been changed to "fotoudavid"
so there is no longer a smurfman

not a clones in this instance

 

[Sion]

as far as i know, the account "smurfman" has been changed to "fotoudavid"
so there is no longer a smurfman

not a clones in this instance

But we can still see a trace of smurfiness here.

 

[fotoudavid]

i have promise to be a obedient buy................pls dun flame me, i may be blue, but after burn become black, same as any one here....:sticktong

 

[fotoudavid]

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=290542

i just got warned!!!