A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

3rd RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 7th 04, 01:29 AM
Thad
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 3rd RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
unmoderated group rec.photo.digital.slr

This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
worldwide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup rec.photo.digital.slr. This is
not a Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural
details are below. All followup discussion should be posted to
news.groups.

Newsgroup line:
rec.photo.digital.slr Digital SLR (single lens reflex) camera systems.

CHANGES from the previous RFD have been made to the syntax and wording
of previously unclear elements in this proposal.

RATIONALE: rec.photo.digital.slr

The proposed newsgroup should be created because it will provide an open
forum for the discussion of digital SLR (single lens reflex) camera
systems, separate from film cameras and non-SLR digital cameras.

Digital SLR photography is growing at an amazing rate. It is generally
more technically oriented than compact digital photography. It is time
to create a Big-8 newsgroup for digital SLR enthusiasts.

Rec.photo.digital was created before the digital photography revolution
peaked. At that time, digital SLR camera systems were not easily
obtainable by the average person, due to high cost and limited
availability. Due to advances in the past year alone by some of the
major camera manufacturers, a person can find digital SLR camera
equipment for sale at almost every shopping mall, strip mall, or
electronics store on earth, at very reasonable prices. RPD was created
to discuss all general aspects of digital photography - including
cameras, scanners, printers, software, and other related topics. If
passed, rec.photo.digital.slr will limit its scope of inclusion to DSLR
(digital SLR) systems and DSLR photography. The majority of digital
camera owners use compact or "point and shoot" digital cameras, and RPD
is an excellent newsgroup for discussion of these cameras.

Many of the current crop of DSLR camera systems share lenses and
accessories with their 35mm film counterparts made by the same
manufacturers. This has generated a substantial volume of crossposted
threads between rec.photo.equipment.35mm and RPD. Digital cameras are
off-topic in RPE35mm, and film cameras are off-topic in RPD. These
crossposted threads are off-topic in both newsgroups, and they eat up a
considerable amount of bandwidth. With the creation of
rec.photo.digital.slr, these crossposted threads would be substantially
reduced. The 35mm crowd can get back to pure 35mm equipment/photography
discussion, and RPD can be free of film talk.

CHARTER: rec.photo.digital.slr

This newsgroup, rec.photo.digital.slr, is an open forum for the
discussion of digital SLR (single lens reflex) camera systems.

These systems consist of:

-Digital SLR (DSLR) camera bodies with mounts for detachable lenses
-Lenses for those cameras
-Any relevant accessories for those camera systems, including but not
limited to: external flash units, memory cards, microdrives, lens
filters/hoods, camera bags/cases, DSLR camera/lens/accessory
maintenance, tripods and monopods.

All postings made to this group should conform to existing Usenet
guidelines (see news.announce.newusers for guideline documents).

Additional On-Topic Discussion:

-Photography techniques, as long as the discussion remains within the
context of DSLR photography
-Image post-processing, as long as the discussion remains within the
context of DSLR photography
-Posting links to personal photo galleries or images, as long as the
discussion remains within the context of DSLR photography
-Discussion of hybrid film-digital cameras and digital backs

Digital rangefinder camera systems are technically not SLR systems, but
they are on-topic if they offer lens interchangeability. Inclusion of
digital rangefinders with mounts for detachable lenses is provisional;
should a separate Big-8 newsgroup for digital rangefinders ever come
into existence, these camera systems will become off-topic in
rec.photo.digital.slr upon passage of the new group.

What Is Considered Off-Topic:

-Discussion of pure film cameras
-Discussion of "point and shoot" or any other non-SLR digital cameras
(digital rangefinders with mounts for detachable lenses are the only
provisional exception)
-Discussion of any cameras with non-detachable lenses
-Discussion of scanners
-Discussion of printers
-Posting links to personal photo galleries or images, not in the context
of DSLR photography

Posting off-topic should be kept to a minimum. All off-topic posts
should be prefixed with [OT] or another easily-identifiable prefix in
the subject line. If a segment of any on-topic thread ever becomes
clearly off-topic, it is the duty of those individuals posting to change
the subject line to reflect the off-topic change.

Debating the pros and cons of digital photography vs. film photography
is off-topic. Please be polite and try to not steer any conversations in
that direction. In the event that any segment of any on-topic thread
ever becomes clearly off-topic by debating the pros and cons of digital
photography vs. film photography, it is the duty of those individuals
posting to change the subject line to reflect the off-topic change.

What Is Considered Inappropriate:

- Crossposting to any other newsgroup except where the post is of direct
relevance to each group in the crosspost

What Is Not Permitted:

-Posts from mail2news gateways and/or anonymous remailers
-Flame wars (comparisons between different digital SLR brands or systems
are permitted as long as they do not degenerate into personal flames)
-Signatures with more than 4 lines
-Exchange and/or discussion of illegal software
-Personal attacks
-Binary postings (i.e. non text postings) other than PGP and small
binary signatures
-Commercial advertisements:

This newsgroup explicitly prohibits the posting of advertisements of any
kind, whether personal, private or commercial, as well as all other
promotional material, whether or not it is in any way related to
photography.

Auction announcements (Ebay.com and others) are prohibited.

Posting links to commercial websites with the sole intention of
promoting those sites is not permitted; links to commercial websites may
be posted in the context of answering a specific question.

When posting on rec.photo.digital.slr, please use standard Usenet
netiquette. Treat other posters with courtesy and follow standard
conventions when replying to posts. Please trim the posts you reply to,
retaining only the significant portions in your follow up. Preserve
attributions (the bits that specify who wrote what in each post) and
limit your signature to 4 lines or less. To ensure readability, do not
use HTML in your posts and limit your line lengths to the Usenet
standard of 80 characters.

END CHARTER.

PROCEDU

This is a request for discussion, not a call for votes. In this phase
of the process, any potential problems with the proposed newsgroup
should be raised and resolved. The discussion period will continue for
a minimum of 21 days (starting from when the first RFD for this proposal
is posted to news.announce.newgroups), after which a Call For Votes
(CFV) may be posted by a neutral vote taker if the discussion warrants
it. Please do not attempt to vote until this happens.

All discussion of this proposal should be posted to news.groups.

This RFD attempts to comply fully with the Usenet newsgroup creation
guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and "How
to Format and Submit a New Group Proposal". Please refer to these
documents (available in news.announce.newgroups) if you have any
questions about the process.

DISTRIBUTION:

This RFD has been posted to the following newsgroups:

news.groups
news.announce.newgroups
rec.photo.equipment.35mm
rec.photo.digital

Proponent: Thaddeus Lip****z
Proponent: Alan Browne
  #2  
Old September 7th 04, 03:31 PM
Dave
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Thad wrote:

This newsgroup explicitly prohibits the posting of advertisements of

any
kind, whether personal, private or commercial, as well as all other
promotional material, whether or not it is in any way related to
photography.

Auction announcements (Ebay.com and others) are prohibited.

Posting links to commercial websites with the sole intention of
promoting those sites is not permitted; links to commercial websites

may
be posted in the context of answering a specific question.



So, Tony "the Spaz" Spadaro and his monumental, ego-driven sig would be
persona non grata at r.p.d.s?

Cool.

Sounds like private hobbyist FA posts would also be verboten, which I
think is a huge mistake as it destroys a sense of community. But at
least you addressed the issue in a clear, well-written manner. As
opposed to saying that your "not as unambiguous" charter prohibits
private FA posts because, "you say so and you were there." Of course,
neither eBay nor most ISP's care, so what are you going to do about it
anyway?

But when you come down to it, this whole slr/pns distinction is pretty
much elitist crap to begin with, so I don't really see this group
taking off even if it does get created. You can't tell me that there
are enough significant differences between say an Oly 8008 and a dRebel
that you can fuel a whole new group. And since you can't retroactively
make discussion of dslr's OT in r.p.d most of the traffic is still
going to go there.

I predict r.p.d.s will just add to an already "overstructured"
hierarchy and will die a slow death from disuse.

BUT - maybe if you get the Canon/Nikon/Sigma flame wars and the
snuh-sockpuppets to follow you over there then you can have a grand ol'
time while helping to clean up r.p.d. Now *there's* a worthy goal of a
group. Better put that in the charter.

Thanks,

Dave

  #3  
Old September 7th 04, 04:21 PM
Steve Young
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

[added groups with vested interest]

"Alan Browne" wrote

What Is Considered Off-Topic:


Discussion of any cameras with non-detachable lenses.


As my DSLR fits the above,(Oly E20),I won't support this new group.


[...] ... another group is in the works that addresses SLR-like cameras.


Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?

Steve Young

--
One thing you can guarantee, though: if you don't try, you'll never
have to find out it might have succeeded, and you can be very smug
about your species' extinction as it is happening: "I _told_ them
there was no way to bring peace to this planet!"
- xanthian



  #4  
Old September 7th 04, 04:39 PM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve Young wrote:
Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?


no.


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--
  #5  
Old September 7th 04, 04:39 PM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve Young wrote:
Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?


no.


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--
  #6  
Old September 7th 04, 04:39 PM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve Young wrote:
Will this be addressing new charters for the 2 original groups (rpd &
rpe35mm) which are impacted by the new group(s)?


no.


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--
  #7  
Old September 7th 04, 04:40 PM
Lionel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kibo informs me that John McWilliams stated that:

Bruce Murphy wrote:
I could have sworn that we've already established that the E20 wasn't
cool enough to be a newspeak SLR.


I hear what you are saying, Bruce, but I don't see this as an attempt to
be cool or cool enough. The camera above is not an SLR as the term has
become widely accepted throughout the industry and by hobbyist and Pro
photographers.


I think this distinction is silly, & pedantic in all the wrong ways. The
number of DSLRs that don't have interchangeable lenses is so miniscule
that excluding them is totally unnecessary, & worse; is insulting to the
owners of those cameras. The argument that people with
non-interchangeable-lens SLRs won't have anything to talk about in the
proposed group is incredibly lame. If they are going to find it boring,
they'll drift over to RPD (or wherever) by themselves - deeming their
cameras to be off-topic in the charter is just a gratuitous slap in the
face. Including rangefinders makes the '.slr' name even more confusing &
divisive. IMO, this will result in a group that will be prone to ongoing
internal flamewars, & will develop a culture hostile to newbies.

Given that the proponents refuse to consider fixing this problem, I am
opposing it under the current name, & will vote 'No' on the ballot, as I
believe that it will be harmful to discussion on photography on Usenet.

I recommend that others also vote against this proposal, if it remains
in its current form.

I will change this stance under one of the following circumstances:
(a) The proponents come up with a reasonable group name that accurately
reflects the topicality described in their charter,
*OR:*
(b) The proponents adopt a more inclusive charter that reflects both the
texbook & commonly used meanings of the term 'SLR'.

Either of these solutions will regain my enthusiastic support for this
proposal. (And maybe someone will come up with some other solution for
these issues.)

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
  #8  
Old September 7th 04, 04:40 PM
Lionel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kibo informs me that John McWilliams stated that:

Bruce Murphy wrote:
I could have sworn that we've already established that the E20 wasn't
cool enough to be a newspeak SLR.


I hear what you are saying, Bruce, but I don't see this as an attempt to
be cool or cool enough. The camera above is not an SLR as the term has
become widely accepted throughout the industry and by hobbyist and Pro
photographers.


I think this distinction is silly, & pedantic in all the wrong ways. The
number of DSLRs that don't have interchangeable lenses is so miniscule
that excluding them is totally unnecessary, & worse; is insulting to the
owners of those cameras. The argument that people with
non-interchangeable-lens SLRs won't have anything to talk about in the
proposed group is incredibly lame. If they are going to find it boring,
they'll drift over to RPD (or wherever) by themselves - deeming their
cameras to be off-topic in the charter is just a gratuitous slap in the
face. Including rangefinders makes the '.slr' name even more confusing &
divisive. IMO, this will result in a group that will be prone to ongoing
internal flamewars, & will develop a culture hostile to newbies.

Given that the proponents refuse to consider fixing this problem, I am
opposing it under the current name, & will vote 'No' on the ballot, as I
believe that it will be harmful to discussion on photography on Usenet.

I recommend that others also vote against this proposal, if it remains
in its current form.

I will change this stance under one of the following circumstances:
(a) The proponents come up with a reasonable group name that accurately
reflects the topicality described in their charter,
*OR:*
(b) The proponents adopt a more inclusive charter that reflects both the
texbook & commonly used meanings of the term 'SLR'.

Either of these solutions will regain my enthusiastic support for this
proposal. (And maybe someone will come up with some other solution for
these issues.)

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
  #9  
Old September 7th 04, 04:40 PM
Lionel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kibo informs me that John McWilliams stated that:

Bruce Murphy wrote:
I could have sworn that we've already established that the E20 wasn't
cool enough to be a newspeak SLR.


I hear what you are saying, Bruce, but I don't see this as an attempt to
be cool or cool enough. The camera above is not an SLR as the term has
become widely accepted throughout the industry and by hobbyist and Pro
photographers.


I think this distinction is silly, & pedantic in all the wrong ways. The
number of DSLRs that don't have interchangeable lenses is so miniscule
that excluding them is totally unnecessary, & worse; is insulting to the
owners of those cameras. The argument that people with
non-interchangeable-lens SLRs won't have anything to talk about in the
proposed group is incredibly lame. If they are going to find it boring,
they'll drift over to RPD (or wherever) by themselves - deeming their
cameras to be off-topic in the charter is just a gratuitous slap in the
face. Including rangefinders makes the '.slr' name even more confusing &
divisive. IMO, this will result in a group that will be prone to ongoing
internal flamewars, & will develop a culture hostile to newbies.

Given that the proponents refuse to consider fixing this problem, I am
opposing it under the current name, & will vote 'No' on the ballot, as I
believe that it will be harmful to discussion on photography on Usenet.

I recommend that others also vote against this proposal, if it remains
in its current form.

I will change this stance under one of the following circumstances:
(a) The proponents come up with a reasonable group name that accurately
reflects the topicality described in their charter,
*OR:*
(b) The proponents adopt a more inclusive charter that reflects both the
texbook & commonly used meanings of the term 'SLR'.

Either of these solutions will regain my enthusiastic support for this
proposal. (And maybe someone will come up with some other solution for
these issues.)

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
  #10  
Old September 7th 04, 04:45 PM
Thad
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Lionel wrote:

I am
opposing it under the current name, & will vote 'No' on the ballot


Thanks a lot, Lionel.

--

Thaddeus Lip****z
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.