Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: RG invites back all banned members  (Read 59023 times)
RolandBaker
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


WWW
« on: April 22, 2006, 03:48:25 PM »
ReplyReply

deleted.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2006, 08:00:21 PM by RolandBaker » Logged

Best regards,

Roland
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9312



WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 22, 2006, 04:37:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
1) All formerly banned users are invited back by the new owner
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Name one.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #2 on: April 22, 2006, 05:32:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Name one.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63411\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think he meant Carol Steele.

Andrew, you would make a damn good moderator at RG but my gut feel is you would rather stay here and help those of us lesser beings of the color world?
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9312



WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 22, 2006, 05:43:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Andrew, you would make a damn good moderator at RG but my gut feel is you would rather stay here and help those of us lesser beings of the color world?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63414\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yup. And again. I'm not going to let them have access to my 2500 posts for paying subscribers without a fight.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
RolandBaker
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2006, 06:06:13 PM »
ReplyReply

delete
« Last Edit: April 30, 2006, 07:59:18 PM by RolandBaker » Logged

Best regards,

Roland
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9312



WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 22, 2006, 06:16:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You put your soul into RG.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63419\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I woudln't go that far but thanks for the kind thoughts.

If Drew decides to go ahead and charge for users to read posts I made in an open forum, I'll do my best to find out if his ISP has any copyright rules and bring this to their attention. This worked with articles and posts made to Imaging Revue by the "experts" remained after we resigned and demanded our posts and articles be deleted. Now this is kind of a different situation and I don't know what I actually agreed to when I signed up for Rob's forums way back when. I may not have a leg to stand on. But I'll sure make as big a stink as I can.

If this Drew wants to delete all my 2500+ posts, cool. Since I can't log in, I can't do this myself. That might be the one issue I have my side to make a legal point since I'm locked out of the site. If they reinstate me so I can delete all my posts (a huge job but that's not the issue), that's fine. So Drew can keep his archives but he better either delete my posts or let me in the door to do so.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2006, 06:17:31 PM by digitaldog » Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2006, 08:01:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Getting Drew, the new owner, to agree that all banned users should be invited back was the best I could do.

No one has been able to convince Drew to keep old content free and open. It is a shame and I completely understand how you feel Andrew. You put your soul into RG.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63419\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Big deal, what does one gain by being 'invited back' ? I appreciate your effort, but anyone possibly interested can as well set up a new account, he's being charged either way.

As for the archive, Drew paid money for it, thus doesn't want to make them accessible for free.
This makes perfect sense, if you think they are rightfully his in the first place ....
Logged
dtrayers
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 44


WWW
« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2006, 08:02:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If they reinstate me so I can delete all my posts (a huge job but that's not the issue), that's fine. So Drew can keep his archives but he better either delete my posts or let me in the door to do so.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63421\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Even if he did let you in I don't think you'll be able to delete your posts... I just tried to delete a post I made on Apr-15-2006 and I got this message:

This post can no longer be edited because the maximum edit time has expired

Maybe I couldn't find the delete button, but I think it would be under the edit screen.
Logged

- Dave
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4260



« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2006, 03:28:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Getting Drew, the new owner, to agree that all banned users should be invited back was the best I could do.

No one has been able to convince Drew to keep old content free and open. It is a shame and I completely understand how you feel Andrew. You put your soul into RG.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63419\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I don't think this is good enough. The color forum and the MF forum were both destroyed by Rob's banning - in particular most of the experts are simply gone from the color forum, and inviting us to pay to give advice is not exactly helpful.

Let's face it, for people like Andrew and me,  giving  forum advice is a sympatico way of advertising your abilities and the fact that you are easy to work with,  but getting charged to be  allowed to do so is a bit over the top. Paying to be in a forum as an expert is a bit like paying to be a club stripper in the hope that you will then get custom for private dances  !

It may be time for us to draw the consequences of Rob's actions - I think it's time we thought about why we should be building value for the new owners, and what we expect from them.
Corporations who sell stuff (eg Adobe, Microsoft, Hasselblad) may find it worthwile to sponsor  the new RG forum as after-sales provided it has restrictive rules .

Last not least,  there is the matter of author's rights, as distinct from copyright - in europe we have this concept- I agree that RG had the right to sell access to posts, and license those rights to access or reproduction, but he did not have the right to remove banned author's names from posts as he has done. Would you agree to posting pictures submitted by banned members as "former member's image"  ? Inviting members back is nice, but the new "owners"  should first stick their names back on the stuff they authored.

Edmund
« Last Edit: April 23, 2006, 04:59:26 AM by eronald » Logged
bwpuk
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 23, 2006, 07:08:36 AM »
ReplyReply

It's now clear that by banning certain members, RG removed from them the ability and right to remove their previous posts. It's also now clear that the value of the forum to another buyer was indeed in the archive. Members will have to pay a fee to view their previous posts now, am I right in thinking this? What I would like to know is is this legally allowable considering our intellectual and authors rights?

Maybe this was sharp practice on the administrators part and their hidden agenda, maybe not, but this behaviour does not lift the dark cloud and bad feeling that exists over the RG forum in my opinion. Also as for granting a 'clean slate' and amnesty for banned members, this assumes that they did something wrong in the first place ! These guys gave all their time and information for free to help other photographers and now somebody has sold it all.

If RG found the forum too expensive to run he should have asked for donations. I for one would have willingly gave much more than the asking membership fee that's being asked for now. This I will not pay, ever. Some things are sacrosanct, and one of them is ownership of one's own  work, words or pictures.

Come back guys all is forgiven ?  I don't think so, and I'm still a member !

Barrie Watts
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9312



WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2006, 09:19:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Looks like "they" are back to their old practices of censoring posts. At least some are posting their posts were deleted (due to the NEW moderators not agreeing with them about pay for content in the new Forums Transition Discussion Area. Same old, same old it seems.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #11 on: April 23, 2006, 09:34:32 AM »
ReplyReply

On the positive side: maybe you shouldn't worry too much about old posts. At the rate this industry is currently going, especially medium format and professional printing, any answers older than say 6 months are virtually obsolete.

And to spice things up: aren't you guys overrating the value of your posts a wee bit? ;-)
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9312



WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 23, 2006, 09:43:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
On the positive side: maybe you shouldn't worry too much about old posts. At the rate this industry is currently going, especially medium format and professional printing, any answers older than say 6 months are virtually obsolete.
And to spice things up: aren't you guys overrating the value of your posts a wee bit? ;-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63454\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No, not at all. Many of the posts are as relevant today as they were a year or two ago. Much of this is basic imaging advise (about resolution, display calibration, even stuff from my book I shared freely). I absolutely object that over 2500 posts I made are now for sale without my permission.

If I go to your site and find a few photo's I think would look good on my site or somewhere else used to generate income, that's OK with you? You put those images on your site for others to see but not for others to profit from. What if your ISP all of a sudden thought it would be OK to share them with others who use their service? That's OK?

RG forums need to either delete the posts for me since I can't log on or keep them up free for anyone who wants to search for them. There's no other alternative I'm willing to accept, nor should I or anyone else who posted. Least we forget, many posts were deleted by RG so its not like this isn't something they've had a history of doing or can't do.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2006, 10:12:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You put those images on your site for others to see but not for others to profit from.

You seem to turn into a negative state of mind. Seriously. You know full well that you have supplied a wealth of information for the benefit of the community, not for shameless self promotion. People consider you an expert because they know your information is valuable as is, not solely in connection with you. In your idiom, it is exactly the fact that they "profit" and benefit from your information, not just to see it.

Mind you, I'm not denying you your right to have your posts deleted. It would simply constitute common courtesy on their side. And considering they are in Canada, you even stand a chance legally. But I still believe that the "tone" of your postings around this topic is somewhat unlike you, or at least unlike your usual postings...
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
alba63
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #14 on: April 23, 2006, 10:29:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
On the positive side: maybe you shouldn't worry too much about old posts. At the rate this industry is currently going, especially medium format and professional printing, any answers older than say 6 months are virtually obsolete.

There is something true about that. WIth the next generation of MF backs the present ones are "old stuff", same for DSLRs. As soon as a true color sensors or sensors with organic materials are developped, the RG archive will be digital history :-)

Maybe longer for general subjects, but how will one dig in the millions of postings to find them?

Nevertheless the spirit of the place was great, and it doesn't seem that it will go on.

Bernie
Logged
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #15 on: April 23, 2006, 11:28:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
On the positive side: maybe you shouldn't worry too much about old posts. At the rate this industry is currently going, especially medium format and professional printing, any answers older than say 6 months are virtually obsolete.

And to spice things up: aren't you guys overrating the value of your posts a wee bit? ;-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63454\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I don't know how familiar you are with MF backs, or the lack of information on them there is in the internet, but an archive packed with user reports on medium format digital is quite valuable, at least for me. Especially since MF backs are updated less frequently than anything else in digital photography, you might have confused that with '35mm' digital cameras....

Until the recent banning spree, RG's MF forum had hundreds of postings dealing with the pros and cons of the latest stuff on a weekly basis; there simply was, and still is, no comparable source of first hand knowledge.

While not every contribution might have been cutting edge, in summary you could learn quite a bit about a technology not being discussed in depth anywhere else.
Logged
n1x0n
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18


« Reply #16 on: April 23, 2006, 11:50:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You know full well that you have supplied a wealth of information for the benefit of the community

True.
"Benefit of the community" - not for the benefit of Rob or the new owners. Fact is that Rob Galbraith have sold something that doesn't actually belong to him - our knowledge and experience, and new owners are planing to get their money back by selling this content back to us.
So if anyone really cares for "community" - his duty is to insist that his posts should remain acessible for free and for anyone or be deleted.

Rob being one crafty guy, has banned few of the most reputable members, but somehow "forgot" to remove the wealth of information and expertise these few members have provided for his forum.

In regard to this situation - you all should know : everyone has the right to have not only his profile removed, but also all his posts deleted from any web forum, at any time. Forum posts are subject to all Intelectual Property laws applicable to written content.

And to anyone who thinks that erasing all your posts is overreacting - NO it's NOT. Freedom of information requires action!
Logged
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2006, 12:03:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I don't know how familiar you are with MF backs, or the lack of information on them there is in the internet, but an archive packed with user reports on medium format digital is quite valuable, at least for me. Especially since MF backs are updated less frequently than anything else in digital photography, you might have confused that with '35mm' digital cameras....

I am well aware of the lack of information, but less familiar with mf backs. But I have been thinking about the difference between 35mm and mf, and I think that mf is about to go into the rate of change that 35mm has been in untill recently. In 3 years time, maybe LF will follow.

Given that, I think that a new source of information, be it these forums at LL, or a new forum set up by the community with donations, will quickly obsolete the information available previously.

As a matter of fact, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is, and set up something rudimentary if there is enough interest.
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2006, 12:10:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
"Benefit of the community" - not for the benefit of Rob or the new owners. Fact is that Rob Galbraith have sold something that doesn't actually belong to him - our knowledge and experience, and new owners are planing to get their money back by selling this content back to us.
So if anyone really cares for "community" - his duty is to insist that his posts should remain acessible for free and for anyone or be deleted.

Agreed, but isn't this where the self-moderating ability (in the broadest sense) of a community comes into play. If RG doesn't apply common sense or common courtesy, it will most likely hurt his (good?) reputation and consequently his other business.  

Quote
And to anyone who thinks that erasing all your posts is overreacting - NO it's NOT. Freedom of information requires action!

Yes, but the value of information is also inversely proportional to the amount of information. It has been said many times before, even in this thread: to find the valuable information in the abundance is no small feat. So perhaps leaving the information there is much more disrupting...
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2006, 02:35:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You seem to turn into a negative state of mind. Seriously. You know full well that you have supplied a wealth of information for the benefit of the community, not for shameless self promotion. People consider you an expert because they know your information is valuable as is, not solely in connection with you. In your idiom, it is exactly the fact that they "profit" and benefit from your information, not just to see it.

Mind you, I'm not denying you your right to have your posts deleted. It would simply constitute common courtesy on their side. And considering they are in Canada, you even stand a chance legally. But I still believe that the "tone" of your postings around this topic is somewhat unlike you, or at least unlike your usual postings...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=63458\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think Andrew has a legitimate gripe with the new forum owners. His posts are one of the reasons the archive has value, and the new owners need to either allow free access to the posts or else devise a way to compensate Mr. Rodney and the other experts. Or else delete them. Otherwise, they are deriving financial gain from the intellectual property of other people without their consent, and IMO ought to be thoroughly sued if they persist in that course of action. I've written a few posts that people have found educational and informative at RG, here, and Fred Miranda, and if some started charging money for access to my posts, I'd expect a piece of the action as well. If the new owners want to charge for posting privileges, fine. But charging for access to the writings of third parties who did not consent to such an arrangement is a big no-go.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad