Peter H Posted July 23, 2015 Share #81 Posted July 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Andreas gives a reason for his decision not to allow discussion about certain topics: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/209327-what-the-leica-forum-is-for/ Thank you Philipp (and Jaap). It's always worth restating. But I think we've all understood this all along. I don't think it in any way affects the commentary on the moderation of political content as contained in this thread. And I'm sure you appreciate that the commentary is not hostile and is intended to be constructive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 Hi Peter H, Take a look here Curious moderation. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted July 23, 2015 Share #82 Posted July 23, 2015 I hate to get political, but just because there's a rule, it doesn't mean that we should not question it? Rules can change. Sometimes, at some point, we have a duty to break the rules ... How does that aphorism go? First they came for the Jews, and I said nothing ... Now, no one is saying that Andreas or anyone in the Moderation team is condoning racism or any other -ism, but when I see a statement which looks like hubris (they used to start with "Every one knows ...", which made it easier), I do feel an urge, a deep seated need, a duty to ask "I beg your pardon?" It is my duty as a human being. The Leitz family famously did not sit back and say "this is politics, we make cameras". We never get away from something someone will say is politics. At this stage, guns are off limits, religion is off limits, Greece is off limits. What's next, The Donald? I'm sure for many in ISL, their choices are moral, religious and political. If they have a Leica, do we have to talk to them? Life is sometimes messy, noisy, uncomfortable, hurtful, and loving, caring and beautiful. Then against that, we could all sit around and discuss MTF charts for the 28 Summilux, and say "nice veges" of the test shots. I find the people here way more interesting. I didn't much agree with Tanks, but he was usually interesting, intelligent and respectful - I think I would enjoy sitting down with him and a scotch, but only if PeterH was sitting next to me :-) We have more than cameras in common - we have humanity, and I think it is a mistake not to be able to express it here simply because someone might be offended. That's life. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 23, 2015 Share #83 Posted July 23, 2015 I hate to get political, but just because there's a rule, it doesn't mean that we should not question it? Rules can change. Yes, by all means, and I think I said so in this post. I also said there that both sides have a better bargaining position if that discussion does not start off with someone breaking the rule or suspecting anyone of hidden motives. I also thought I'd better remind those people who were not aware of the reason for that particular rule where it was both published and explained. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted July 23, 2015 Share #84 Posted July 23, 2015 Yes, by all means, and I think I said so in this post. I also said there that both sides have a better bargaining position if that discussion does not start off with someone breaking the rule or suspecting anyone of hidden motives. ............................................... I can sympathise with that Philipp. But the comments in question seem to have derailed the whole conversation, and are evidently still doing so. The points that John and others are making are not invalidated by some previous infringement by someone else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 23, 2015 Share #85 Posted July 23, 2015 The points that John and others are making are not invalidated by some previous infringement by someone else. I certainly agree. However, this thread started from quite another premise. The question which has been raised in due course (whether the rule against discussing political etc topics is really needed and useful) may not become evident to all members interested in that question. I don't know if Andreas would really enjoy starting that discussion again. However, if members really feel that strongly about discussing that kind of thing in a photography forum possibly handicapped by amateur moderators, I feel that chances for an open and constructive discussion might be better if the parties interested in such an improvement started a thread with that very topic, untainted by any recent events, focusing as closely as possible on the expected benefits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 23, 2015 Share #86 Posted July 23, 2015 I hate to get political, but just because there's a rule, it doesn't mean that we should not question it? Rules can change. Sometimes, at some point, we have a duty to break the rules ... The cases do not compare. At all. Thank you. I had a fairly good grasp of the forum rules when Andreas invited me to become a moderator of this forum. Nonetheless, I studied them again very closely before consenting. Had there been any rules I had felt uncomfortable about, I would have declined. Again, when Andreas formulated the Mission Statement we discussed that quite earnestly and thoroughly before consenting. Only after those discussions did he install them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted July 23, 2015 Share #87 Posted July 23, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) ....................................... Again, when Andreas formulated the Mission Statement we discussed that quite earnestly and thoroughly before consenting. Only after those discussions did he install them. Just an observation here, but what a shame at least some member discussion wasn't invited first. I imagine that as a group you probably felt there'd been enough discussion over the years, and enough experience gathered, for the moderators to make wise decisions about the rules, and I'm sure that by and large you would have been right about this. And I respect the position you've taken, and certainly respect the huge voluntary effort you all put into this. But it still feels to me that a great opportunity is being missed to make this an even better and more interesting forum for a more diverse group of people. I've had more than a few private messages over recent months from people regretting that the discussion part of the forum is becoming increasingly banal because of the pre-emptive nature of the rules and their policing. And just as you fear that political conflict can feed through to other sections of the forum, I believe that conservative banality does too. And that represents a great lost opportunity for this forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 27, 2015 Share #88 Posted July 27, 2015 The cases do not compare. At all. Thank you. I had a fairly good grasp of the forum rules when Andreas invited me to become a moderator of this forum. Nonetheless, I studied them again very closely before consenting. Had there been any rules I had felt uncomfortable about, I would have declined. Again, when Andreas formulated the Mission Statement we discussed that quite earnestly and thoroughly before consenting. Only after those discussions did he install them. Sorry, Philip, I was not questioning you or your understanding of the rules; just pointing out that generally we should not govern our lives purely by rules - we should always be prepared to question rules if we think they need to be reconsidered. I appreciate that the desire is not to offend, and for that offence not to flow over into other parts of the forum, but I see that as cloaking over underlying issues. For example, we can have a bland conversation about the latest M camera, and the lens released to make the most of its sensor. As that discussion develops, we learn more about each other; and that is a pleasant and forum enhancing experience. Now, what if we were to learn that the person we were exchanging views with was an unreconstructed racist or the owner of a company which used slave labour (make up your own issue - mass murderer? Dictator? does it matter?). So, we keep exchanging politely, and he is smart enough to not to mention that he has just been released from prison for multi-billion dollar fraud. Either bland discussion ensues, or we learn who he is and we point out to him that his behaviour really isn't good for humanity. We're not saying that you should not enforce the rules, but we are engaging in a discussion on the forum over whether or not the rule (as enforced) is actually a good one. I'm with Peter, in case you hadn't guessed - the rule makes many forum discussions banal, while actually many of the Leica discussions can be quite offensive for the lack of respect shown to other forum members. I know there is nothing you can do - I was never suggesting there was. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 27, 2015 Share #89 Posted July 27, 2015 ... So, we keep exchanging politely, and he is smart enough to not to mention that he has just been released from prison for multi-billion dollar fraud. Either bland discussion ensues, or we learn who he is and we point out to him that his behaviour really isn't good for humanity. .. :-) This really has unexpected depths, even if they have nothing to do with the main line of your argument. For one, I don't think that a former prisoner needs a photography forum in order to know that society at large thinks that what he did does not agree with the rules of that society. He has been told so by the judge and by being in goal. The only thing we do not know is whether he merely ran afoul of some rules or actually acted to the disadvantage of humanity. As a matter of fact, it happens from time to time that something a member does becomes known here and that the member is told in no uncertain terms that what he does is not good for humanity. And that's not even covered by the no politics or no religion rule. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 27, 2015 Share #90 Posted July 27, 2015 All very entertaining, but not the point I was making. It is not your application or acceptance of the rules, but a discussion of the rules that is the point. Not sure I can add to this. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 28, 2015 Share #91 Posted July 28, 2015 All very entertaining, but not the point I was making. It is not your application or acceptance of the rules, but a discussion of the rules that is the point. Not sure I can add to this. Cheers John Yes, I said that this was not the point you were making. I already suggested earlier in this thread to start another thread for discussing the rules themselves, as I think a thread about the application of the rules and in particular this thread here might not be an optimal place for that. What's more, I think the forum rules and the way the forum is to appear to its customers ought to be discussed with the landlord. Moderators will have opinions, I think, but no way to implement any changes. They might not even know the reasons for or the history of the existing rule set. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted July 28, 2015 Share #92 Posted July 28, 2015 Either bland discussion ensues, or we learn who he is and we point out to him that his behaviour really isn't good for humanity. Even in a lower key example than mass murderer, I cannot see that pointing out, in writing, the error of someone's ways is likely to add to the value or quality of the Leica Forum. A couple of centuries of penal reform have had limited success in changing such things, and I don't see that Leica photographers have anything new to bring to the party. The characteristics of political discussion here, as on most internet fora other than those dedicated to political theory, are statements of opposing positions, followed by repetition of those opposing positions, leading (after a few cycles of the same) to rising tension and abuse, followed by the moderators stepping in to prevent (sometimes too late) damage spread to more technical threads. I have been a member since about 2011 IIRC, and my participation rate is low, but I have no difficulty in judging members' characters from the posts they make on non-political matters. Hostile political debates online rarely show people in their normal or best light, and I am happy to be without them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted July 28, 2015 Share #93 Posted July 28, 2015 Even in a lower key example than mass murderer, I cannot see that pointing out, in writing, the error of someone's ways is likely to add to the value or quality of the Leica Forum. A couple of centuries of penal reform have had limited success in changing such things, and I don't see that Leica photographers have anything new to bring to the party. The characteristics of political discussion here, as on most internet fora other than those dedicated to political theory, are statements of opposing positions, followed by repetition of those opposing positions, leading (after a few cycles of the same) to rising tension and abuse, followed by the moderators stepping in to prevent (sometimes too late) damage spread to more technical threads. I have been a member since about 2011 IIRC, and my participation rate is low, but I have no difficulty in judging members' characters from the posts they make on non-political matters. Hostile political debates online rarely show people in their normal or best light, and I am happy to be without them. I've explained why I think these arguments miss the essential points, so despite the temptation I shan't repeat myself, except in this detail: I find it sadly perverse that the very spirit of Leica photography as I understand it, embracing as it should investigation into ideas and affairs and means of expression that some will inevitably find distasteful, cannot be supported by this forum. If there is one site above all that should take a braver stance, it is this one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted July 29, 2015 Share #94 Posted July 29, 2015 I find it sadly perverse that the very spirit of Leica photography as I understand it, embracing as it should investigation into ideas and affairs and means of expression that some will inevitably find distasteful, cannot be supported by this forum. There's an intriguing disconnect between the use of the Leica camera to advance radical imagery/thought via the vision of photographers and the tendency for the brand to be used by hobbyists as a symbol of opulently conservative 'good taste' to go along with the German cars in their drives and Swiss watches on their wrists. In the main, this forum is made up of members of the latter group, so it's unsurprising that the moderation reflects and reinforces their values. These conservative values aren't just visible on overtly political threads, but on threads relating to hardware and images. It's as heretical to point out that a Canon 5DIII is a more reliable camera than an M9 or to defend the work of Nan Goldin as it is to question whether ordinary Greek people have to be hammered by austerity for the supposed greater good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 29, 2015 Share #95 Posted July 29, 2015 .... It's as heretical to point out that a Canon 5DIII is a more reliable camera than an M9 or to defend the work of Nan Goldin as it is to question whether ordinary Greek people have to be hammered by austerity for the supposed greater good. You are certainly welcome to point out that any camera that comes to your mind compares favorably with any Leica camera which does. Basing your observation on fact would be useful, though. Since this is a discussion about moderation and forum rules it will not come as a surprise that I point out that unbased bashing of Leica or their products is considered trolling here as much as elsewhere. I don't see why you should not defend the work of Nan Goldin if you feel like doing that; is there any particular reason for you to point out that particular photographer? I think it certainly strange that you find it proper to place a pointed political statement of opinion right into a thread where is has been repeatedly explained that the landlord asks his patrons to abstain from doing so. I'm sure you have your reasons to do so, but they seem to escape me at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted July 29, 2015 Share #96 Posted July 29, 2015 I think it certainly strange that you find it proper to place a pointed political statement of opinion right into a thread where is has been repeatedly explained that the landlord asks his patrons to abstain from doing so. I'm sure you have your reasons to do so, but they seem to escape me at the moment. I was responding to Peter's comment about the 'spirit of Leica photography' and musing on how that 'spirit' can represent very different things to different people. Just as what appears to be political to one person can appear to be resolutely non-political to another. The Goldin reference was to a past discussion on this forum when a moderator took the position that it was essentially a matter of common sense to dismiss her work as worthless before castigating others for having the audacity to offer a counterview. Feel free to delete this and my previous post if you find them to be antagonistically political. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted July 29, 2015 Share #97 Posted July 29, 2015 ... the tendency for the brand to be used by hobbyists as a symbol of opulently conservative 'good taste' to go along with the German cars in their drives and Swiss watches on their wrists. In the main, this forum is made up of members of the latter group, ... Do you place yourself in this group? Since it's doubtful that you personally know all the members here, how have you collected the data on which you have formed your premise? Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted July 29, 2015 Share #98 Posted July 29, 2015 how have you collected the data on which you have formed your premise?My premise, which I don't believe is particularly controversial, is based upon the data provided by the posts made throughout the forum. There's a great deal of liking for Leica cameras based on their supposed hand-built supremacy over 'plasticky Japanese SLRs' and precious little liking for photography that veers from the strictly pictorial. Leica as a company has a strong and ongoing track record of supporting photographers, but there's little regard shown here for the work that they recognise, for example, via the annual Oscar Barnack Award. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 29, 2015 Share #99 Posted July 29, 2015 Here in Switzerland the kind of person most consistently seen to use a German car is a taxi driver. They also might wear Swatches, which are - of course - Swiss watches. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted July 29, 2015 Share #100 Posted July 29, 2015 It seems we've slipped from merely curious to downright bizzarre 'moderation'..... Regrettably, the asshole at the centre of the story didn't kill Cecil with a Leica. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/248354-cecil-the-lion-rip/?do=findComment&comment=2862394 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.