New forum category on images comments

[howard smith]

neil, you have apparently deleted my last post without any evidence it was ever there.  The post was not crude, rude or any way objectionable, but a mere statement of fact.  If you did remove it, could you tell me why?

[Mark D Segal]

Neil,

I was just in this thread a short time ago and saw some kind of post from Howard Smith saying that he wasn't coming back because of something you said to him. Then that post disappeared, but now there is another (presumably later)post from Howard - indicating evidently that he is back nonetheless - complaining that a previous post of his was deleted. Is that the one where he said he wasn't coming back? I was going to be facetious and ask whether that was a threat or a promise, but if the deleted post is the one I'm referring to, Howard clarifies it was a "mere statement of fact", so I won't go there.  

Now getting down to substantive stuff, thanks for posting the reference to the Sontag piece. It so happens that it didn't do much for me, but that's just me (others may have found it really meaningful) - doesn't in any way detract from the usefulness - indeed desirability - of administrators and other members bringing such "think pieces" to the table for a forum category such as this one. So members' comments about this or that think-piece shouldn't deter anyone from making such recommendations in the future.

And welcome back Howard  

[howard smith]

Sorry for the confusion.  I am not back.  For the record, here is neil's e-mail to me.

You have been warned by a staff member. Your warning level has been increased, and this will be viewable to all members. Once you have reached the maximum warning level, your posting permissions will be revoked.
You have been warned from the following post: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/cgi-bin....ry50217

Hello Howard, thanks for reading susan's little essay and your comments for me.

The deleted post was to tell nwil to go ahead and revoke my posting permission.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Hey, Neil,

I don't think Howard has said anything to justify revoking his posting privileges. I have disagreed slightly with him on one occasion, but I find his comments generally thoughtful and not at all offensive. I'm all for trying to add balance to the forum, but not by cutting off reasonable people.

Eric  

[boku]

This is very concerning.

I hope that statement doesn't get me a similar demerit. I am afraid to say anything.

[neilcowley]

Howard seems to be posting just fine, no-one has revoked anything.  I use several features in moderating the forum that michael doesn't so you may not be familiar with them.

Howard's post was an inaccurate statement and I removed it becuase this thread isn't about Howard.

[neil]

Thanks for your comment Mark, I think that's all that can be expected of any piece of 'art' and so the world spins....

Regarding Howard's warning, if you'd like to start a thread about it I can answer your questions, otherwise further posts on this topic will be deleted.

[neil]

Some more-on art critcism and how we can alighn ourselves to the reference point of hte artist to bring the best criticism.

But you seem (correct me if I'm wrong) most attuned to that artist whose life is an intense and often self-consciously unworldly devotion to his or her own tightly circumscribed routine; so that when the signature of that artist finally emerges, it doesn't appear as something sudden, cheap, and public, as the commanding gesture of naughty self-branding that many people now associate with modern and postmodern art, but as something worthy of a similarly intense devotion on our part.