[SI] The Final (again) Fate of the Shoot-In

"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Hello Shoot-In Fans, Well-Wishers, Despisers, and the Apathetic,


By my count:



Yes: Paul Furman, (Bowser, Kinon, Jufi,) Walter Banks, Doug Jewell, Helen

Maybe Ifs: Rich Pos, Ken Nadvornick

No: Doug Payne



For those counting I now have 4 mandates that "I" would consider using.

On Mar 31, 9:08*am, Tony Polson wrote:
Helen wrote:

I think everyone knows what I meant, but I'll reword it: *"if you
can't take critique, don't participate".

Thanks for the correction, Helen. *Perhaps when you have more time you
might consider a reply to my other suggestions.

I repeat my warning, that if the most significant change to the SI is
only to make it monthly, keeping all the other failed aspects the
same, it might as well be buried now, for it is surely dead.


I agree that we could take the SI somewhere else, but have strong
links to it on rpe.35mm. I don't like a group that is overly
moderated. I agree that attacks and name calling would be deleted,
but someone's constructive critique deleted because the photographer
took it personally is another matter.
Pbase is a good site IMHO.

Helen wrote:
On Mar 31, 9:08*am, Tony Polson wrote:
Helen wrote:

I think everyone knows what I meant, but I'll reword it: *"if you
can't take critique, don't participate".

Thanks for the correction, Helen. *Perhaps when you have more time you
might consider a reply to my other suggestions.

I repeat my warning, that if the most significant change to the SI is
only to make it monthly, keeping all the other failed aspects the
same, it might as well be buried now, for it is surely dead.


I agree that we could take the SI somewhere else, but have strong
links to it on rpe.35mm. I don't like a group that is overly
moderated. I agree that attacks and name calling would be deleted,


We're in total agreement so far. I would also encourage strong links
to the other photo newsgroups, not just r.p.e.35mm.


but someone's constructive critique deleted because the photographer
took it personally is another matter.


I did not suggest that! Nothing constructive should ever be deleted,
but abuse certainly would.


Pbase is a good site IMHO.


I agree. PBase works well for the images.

In the same way, VBulletin software with a small amount of web space
would work well for the critique.

On Mar 31, 12:06*am, Alienjones wrote:

I had thought I could hold my breath while everyone jumped at the idea
of purity, chastity and a new world order. Thank God for the respirator!

12 good men (or women). It wouldn't seem to be too hard now, would it?
Who is going to keep the score card? Surely it should not be a public
record to brand every one of them should a cretin take it upon
themselves to repeat the past?

The irony is getting thick here. One of the reasons I gave up hosting
the Shootin was because of your troll submissions from D-Mac's many
sockpuppets. George Preddy, Svetlana, Veronika, and who knows how
many more of them you created just to cause dissent in the group. I'm
sure if I researched the Google archives I could find many instances
of you trashing either Lisa Horton or the current host, Jim Kramer, as
well.
I have ZERO confidence that this crap will not be repeated, no matter
how sweet you are trying to sound today under this week's sock,
AlienJones. So nobody here is buying what you are selling, D-Mac, but
then you're used to that, right?

I have no other objections to a revival of the Shootin under the
proposed changes (longer submission windows, better mandates). I'll
try to submit images myself, although I found it tough to fulfill
certain recent mandates like Flowers which was due in January. We
don't have too many flowers around here in January.

I'm not actively campaigning for or against a "NEW & IMPROVED"
Shootin. I seem to recall us going through this discussion before
about what changes needed to be made to keep it going strong, and many
of those proposed ideas for change were ignored and so here we are. as
predicted.

I will say that if a newer better Shootin emerges then I will
participate as much as possible.

"Ken Nadvornick" wrote in message
. ..
All,

I do not any longer actively follow this NG, for reasons the oldtimers
already
know. If you don't, please reread the excellent summation of the
situation by
Rich Pos ("That Rich") in the thread "Did The Group Die?". However, I was
alerted to this discussion by someone in the group and asked to give my
thoughts. So FWIW, here they are...

"jimkramer" wrote:

The Shoot-In was developed to "inspire" people to go out and
take pictures around a theme, share them, and discuss them on
RPE35mm. There have been plenty of minor and basically
insignificant changes to that format. That was the intent and
I believe that should remain the intent.

I agree completely. I also agree with the non-competitive aspect of the
exercise. If it turns into a dog-eat-dog competition I believe far fewer
would be inclined to participate. And given the apparent current rate of
non-submissions that could be disastrous. As before, the goal should be
inclusion, not exclusion. It was supposed to be a building exercise, not
a
tearing down one. That's why it's an -In and not an -Out.

The recent Mandates have been IMHO a little weak, but that
doesn't mean the photographer that failed to see anything and
didn't submit something wasn't also being a little weak. The
Shoot-In needs better Mandates to work.

Not certain I agree completely here. To be sure, the mandates were
sometimes
(often?) outside of people's comfort zones. But that's where the
challenge
was. And look back at some of the early mandates. Water. Motion. Six.
Change. Pretty mundane. The difference was the quality of the
submissions.
Back then people worked hard at it and it showed. Plus, it was apparent
to me
that a repeat few had a real problem with, as Tony P. correctly states,
"working to a brief." Even such nebulous ones. OTOH, brief "briefs"
allowed
a far wider range of interpretations. Personally, I always preferred that
my
submission's connection to the mandate be as subtle and nebulous as
possible.
A puzzle, if you will. Something to be noodled out by the viewer. But
that
was just me. And I realize that some others (no names here) didn't like
that
approach at all. But it *was* supposed to be just for fun... wasn't it??

The other thing the SI desparately needs are contributors willing to
critique - and do it without abuse. Most people submit because they want
to
hear what people think. The serious ones anyway. I saw commenting as the
lifeblood of the exercise. If I remember correctly, the first SI mandate
where no one commented was "Cute." Participation seemed to go downhill
from
there.

The Shoot-In needs a group of active participants that are not
involved in flame wars. That means no matter how tempting it is
to call so and so a stupid %#$&^^^!! don't. Get a Newsreader
and use the killfile liberally. If you don't see it you won't be
tempted by it.

For anyone with even a modicum of self-control, this is a piece of cake.
I
was always *amazed* at the number of posters who lacked this essential
ingredient in their personalities. To allow someone to drop a baited hook
in
front of you and be so undisciplined as to be unable to simply ignore it
and
move on was a continuing source of facination to me. While I also
participated in my share of heated arguments* over the years, I think I
can
say that I never allowed myself to be drawn into one when I didn't wish to
be.
Good Lord. This is Usenet and these are all just words. 10,000 years
from
now, who's 'gonna care anyway?

* Just ask Tony P., whom I went several rounds with regarding the quality
of
my - and others - SI submissions. But I always continued to hold his
equipment opinions in high regard, even though I strongly disagreed with
him
in other areas. In fact, he once gave me quite sound advice regarding a
lens
(180mm f/2.8 ED Nikkor telephoto) which factored into my purchase of that
lens. It's now one of my favorites. I'd love to see Tony submit to the
SI
sometime. And I'd LOVE to see everyone else treat that submission with
genuine respect. I know I would.

For anyone still using Google Groups and Gmail I highly
recommend the FREE news service: http://news.motzarella.org/
Yes, you will need to give them a real email address, but no
one else needs to see it.

For the record I am filtering out all gmail addresses to control
SPAM.

I filtered no one, other than the porn freaks and commercial posts.
Everyone
has a right to an opinion, even ones I don't like. But gratuitous abuse
is
where I draw my line. When it gets out of control, I won't filter. I'll
just
quietly leave. Besides, in the current situation filtering won't bring
back
all of the good people who got disgusted and left.

Frankly I'm working hard on getting SI burn out, so I'm going
to propose going back to a monthly Shoot-Ins. To do that I need
twelve (12) solid mandates. Send them to S I 1 AT jlkramer DOT
net. There should be no spaces and the obvious errors fixed.
And I will need a solid commitment from people to participate.
A clear and concise "Yes, I want to play!"

Funny thing is, Jim, that right before I got fed up I had just dropped
about
$4K+ on some pretty serious darkroom and camera upgrades. Things that had
languished for years. The bulk of the darkroom items were upgraded with
an
eye specifically toward future submissions to the SI. And the camera
upgrade
was a complete Calumet C-1 8x10 system with two lenses (G-Claron normal
and
wide angle). I had intended to do as many mandates as possible with this
camera, given its obvious advantages and limitations.

[a fair amount of time elapsed here...]

So OK, after after some rather lengthy offline discussions on this subject
with other NG members, I'll go ahead and bite. If you can scare up
another
eleven committed participants, I'm in. If you can change to a monthly
schedule, so much the better. Those who have dabbled in 8x10 will know
what I
mean when I say that making a single photograph with this equipment can
take
anywhere from an hour or two to a week or two - or longer. On APUG they
have
what they call a Monthly Shooting Assignment that they actually run for
two
months due, I suspect, to the greater number of large-format users. These
Big
Dogs are defintely not for the faint of heart.

If this is too much to ask or if people just don't want to
participate that's fine; the PBase account will expire in August
and that will be the end of it...

My understanding is that someone else from the group has offered offline
to
pick up the modest cost for another year of the PBase account. Hell, if
all
of the SI participants could only discipline themselves to focus just on
Photography, I'd pick it up myself.

Ken


Hi Ken, nice to hear you here again.

First things first, there is absolutely no way I could let you submit to the
SI with an 8x10 camera I mean I even had issues with the 4x5's :-)

"Cute" was three years ago in April. I can see where the finger is
pointing. :-)

It's not about the money for the account, it's about the participation of
the group. Having said that and peaking at Google groups to see what I've
been missing:
1) I personally would be strongly opposed to moving the SI out of RPE35mm.
Born here, die here, as I psych myself up for a move out of state.
2) If people want to pay for the current Pbase account,
http://www.pbase.com/gift
username is "shootin"
The Email for the account is jlkramer AT wading-in DOT net
3) If you want to commit to play speak up now.
4) If you want someone else to moderate the SI say that too.

Jim

jimkramer wrote:
"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Hello Shoot-In Fans, Well-Wishers, Despisers, and the Apathetic,


By my count:



Yes: Paul Furman, (Bowser, Kinon, Jufi,) Walter Banks, Doug Jewell, Helen

Maybe Ifs: Rich Pos, Ken Nadvornick

No: Doug Payne

You could count me back in if you really aren't filtering Gmail email.
In one posting you implied that you were (you said "For the record I am
filtering out all gmail addresses to control SPAM.") and then in a
followup you said that only applied to news postings. I still think
that's a bit silly, in the same way that I thought it was silly when
people filtered out postings from those that used AOL, or hotmail, or
any other service. But if it's just that, then I'm willing to submit. It
would've made no sense for me to submit stuff that was being ignored.

I kind of like Tony's suggestion of a VBulletin Web-based forum. They
work well, *as long as* someone(s) are willing to administer them.
That's potentially a lot of work. And they can be prone to the kinds of
attacks that every other kind of forum is subject to. You can be a jerk,
get kicked off, and just sign up with a new username. Hence the
'administer' comment above.

I still say give NewsProxy a try. Filter out anything that's
cross-posted. That in itself gets rid of a whole lotta junk.

"Doug Payne" wrote in message
...
jimkramer wrote:
"jimkramer" wrote in message
...
Hello Shoot-In Fans, Well-Wishers, Despisers, and the Apathetic,


By my count:


Yes: Paul Furman, (Bowser, Kinon, Jufi,) Walter Banks, Doug Jewell, Helen,
Bret, Doug Payne

Maybe Ifs: Rich Pos, Ken Nadvornick

No:

You could count me back in if you really aren't filtering Gmail email. In
one posting you implied that you were (you said "For the record I am
filtering out all gmail addresses to control SPAM.") and then in a
followup you said that only applied to news postings. I still think that's
a bit silly, in the same way that I thought it was silly when people
filtered out postings from those that used AOL, or hotmail, or any other
service. But if it's just that, then I'm willing to submit. It would've
made no sense for me to submit stuff that was being ignored.

Consider it done. It is a bit silly and until Google does something about
it, it will remain silly, but very effective.

I kind of like Tony's suggestion of a VBulletin Web-based forum. They work
well, *as long as* someone(s) are willing to administer them. That's
potentially a lot of work. And they can be prone to the kinds of attacks
that every other kind of forum is subject to. You can be a jerk, get
kicked off, and just sign up with a new username. Hence the 'administer'
comment above.

Based on the number of "hidden" bot hits I get on my sites looking for
Bulletin Boards of assorted names, I won't be administering one anytime
soon. And that is after I started doing IP Denies from the former Soviet
Block.

I still say give NewsProxy a try. Filter out anything that's cross-posted.
That in itself gets rid of a whole lotta junk.

Yes, but it also leaves in quite a bit and worse, someone is asking to add
other groups to the SI which would be cross postings. :-)
Jim

jimkramer wrote:

"Doug Payne" wrote in message
...
I still say give NewsProxy a try. Filter out anything that's cross-posted.
That in itself gets rid of a whole lotta junk.

Yes, but it also leaves in quite a bit and worse, someone is asking to add
other groups to the SI which would be cross postings. :-)

I find it works very well for me. I see very little spam. (I have
spamassassin for email). I don't think it's too much to ask SI
participants to use a single news group; hell, you're already limiting
their ISPs :-) There's a very good set of NewsProxy filters out there,
developed for another news group. I find they do the trick for me. You
can filter on the *number* of cross-posts, limiting it to a reasonable
number like 2 or 3.

On Mar 31, 10:00*am, Annika1980 wrote:
On Mar 31, 12:06*am, Alienjones wrote:



I had thought I could hold my breath while everyone jumped at the idea
of purity, chastity and a new world order. Thank God for the respirator!

12 good men (or women). It wouldn't seem to be too hard now, would it?
Who is going to keep the score card? Surely it should not be a public
record to brand every one of them should a cretin take it upon
themselves to repeat the past?

The irony is getting thick here. *One of the reasons I gave up hosting
the Shootin was because of your troll submissions from D-Mac's many
sockpuppets. *George Preddy, Svetlana, Veronika, and who knows how
many more of them you created just to cause dissent in the group. *I'm
sure if I researched the Google archives I could find many instances
of you trashing either Lisa Horton or the current host, Jim Kramer, as
well.
I have ZERO confidence that this crap will not be repeated, no matter
how sweet you are trying to sound today under this week's sock,
AlienJones. So nobody here is buying what you are selling, D-Mac, but
then you're used to that, right?

I have no other objections to a revival of the Shootin under the
proposed changes (longer submission windows, better mandates). *I'll
try to submit images myself, although I found it tough to fulfill
certain recent mandates like Flowers which was due in January. We
don't have too many flowers around here in January.

I'm not actively campaigning for or against a "NEW & IMPROVED"
Shootin. *I seem to recall us going through this discussion before
about what changes needed to be made to keep it going strong, and many
of those proposed ideas for change were ignored and so here we are. as
predicted.

I will say that if a newer better Shootin emerges then I will
participate as much as possible.


Point well made. Entries made by sockpuppets should be deleted and
this pertains to everyone. The SI should be taken seriously.

On Mar 31, 10:09*am, "jimkramer"
wrote:
"Ken Nadvornick" wrote in message

. .. All,

I do not any longer actively follow this NG, for reasons the oldtimers
already
know. *If you don't, please reread the excellent summation of the
situation by
Rich Pos ("That Rich") in the thread "Did The Group Die?". *However, I was
alerted to this discussion by someone in the group and asked to give my
thoughts. *So FWIW, here they are...

"jimkramer" wrote:

The Shoot-In was developed to "inspire" people to go out and
take pictures around a theme, share them, and discuss them on
RPE35mm. *There have been plenty of minor and basically
insignificant changes to that format. *That was the intent and
I believe that should remain the intent.

I agree completely. *I also agree with the non-competitive aspect of the
exercise. *If it turns into a dog-eat-dog competition I believe far fewer
would be inclined to participate. *And given the apparent current rate of
non-submissions that could be disastrous. *As before, the goal should be
inclusion, not exclusion. *It was supposed to be a building exercise, not
a
tearing down one. *That's why it's an -In and not an -Out.

The recent Mandates have been IMHO a little weak, but that
doesn't mean the photographer that failed to see anything and
didn't submit something wasn't also being a little weak. *The
Shoot-In needs better Mandates to work.

Not certain I agree completely here. *To be sure, the mandates were
sometimes
(often?) outside of people's comfort zones. *But that's where the
challenge
was. *And look back at some of the early mandates. *Water. *Motion.. *Six.
Change. *Pretty mundane. *The difference was the quality of the
submissions.
Back then people worked hard at it and it showed. *Plus, it was apparent
to me
that a repeat few had a real problem with, as Tony P. correctly states,
"working to a brief." *Even such nebulous ones. *OTOH, brief "briefs"
allowed
a far wider range of interpretations. *Personally, I always preferred that
my
submission's connection to the mandate be as subtle and nebulous as
possible.
A puzzle, if you will. *Something to be noodled out by the viewer. *But
that
was just me. *And I realize that some others (no names here) didn't like
that
approach at all. *But it *was* supposed to be just for fun... wasn't it??

The other thing the SI desparately needs are contributors willing to
critique - and do it without abuse. *Most people submit because they want
to
hear what people think. *The serious ones anyway. *I saw commenting as the
lifeblood of the exercise. *If I remember correctly, the first SI mandate
where no one commented was "Cute." *Participation seemed to go downhill
from
there.

The Shoot-In needs a group of active participants that are not
involved in flame wars. *That means no matter how tempting it is
to call so and so a stupid %#$&^^^!! don't. *Get a Newsreader
and use the killfile liberally. *If you don't see it you won't be
tempted by it.

For anyone with even a modicum of self-control, this is a piece of cake.
I
was always *amazed* at the number of posters who lacked this essential
ingredient in their personalities. *To allow someone to drop a baited hook
in
front of you and be so undisciplined as to be unable to simply ignore it
and
move on was a continuing source of facination to me. *While I also
participated in my share of heated arguments* over the years, I think I
can
say that I never allowed myself to be drawn into one when I didn't wish to
be.
Good Lord. *This is Usenet and these are all just words. *10,000 years
from
now, who's 'gonna care anyway?

* Just ask Tony P., whom I went several rounds with regarding the quality
of
my - and others - SI submissions. *But I always continued to hold his
equipment opinions in high regard, even though I strongly disagreed with
him
in other areas. *In fact, he once gave me quite sound advice regarding a
lens
(180mm f/2.8 ED Nikkor telephoto) which factored into my purchase of that
lens. *It's now one of my favorites. *I'd love to see Tony submit to the
SI
sometime. *And I'd LOVE to see everyone else treat that submission with
genuine respect. *I know I would.

For anyone still using Google Groups and Gmail I highly
recommend the FREE news service: *http://news.motzarella.org/
Yes, you will need to give them a real email address, but no
one else needs to see it.

For the record I am filtering out all gmail addresses to control
SPAM.

I filtered no one, other than the porn freaks and commercial posts.
Everyone
has a right to an opinion, even ones I don't like. *But gratuitous abuse
is
where I draw my line. *When it gets out of control, I won't filter. *I'll
just
quietly leave. *Besides, in the current situation filtering won't bring
back
all of the good people who got disgusted and left.

Frankly I'm working hard on getting SI burn out, so I'm going
to propose going back to a monthly Shoot-Ins. *To do that I need
twelve (12) solid mandates. *Send them to S I 1 AT jlkramer DOT
net. *There should be no spaces and the obvious errors fixed.
And I will need a solid commitment from people to participate.
A clear and concise "Yes, I want to play!"

Funny thing is, Jim, that right before I got fed up I had just dropped
about
$4K+ on some pretty serious darkroom and camera upgrades. *Things that had
languished for years. *The bulk of the darkroom items were upgraded with
an
eye specifically toward future submissions to the SI. *And the camera
upgrade
was a complete Calumet C-1 8x10 system with two lenses (G-Claron normal
and
wide angle). *I had intended to do as many mandates as possible with this
camera, given its obvious advantages and limitations.

[a fair amount of time elapsed here...]

So OK, after after some rather lengthy offline discussions on this subject
with other NG members, I'll go ahead and bite. *If you can scare up
another
eleven committed participants, I'm in. *If you can change to a monthly
schedule, so much the better. *Those who have dabbled in 8x10 will know
what I
mean when I say that making a single photograph with this equipment can
take
anywhere from an hour or two to a week or two - or longer. *On APUG they
have
what they call a Monthly Shooting Assignment that they actually run for
two
months due, I suspect, to the greater number of large-format users. *These
Big
Dogs are defintely not for the faint of heart.

If this is too much to ask or if people just don't want to
participate that's fine; the PBase account will expire in August
and that will be the end of it...

My understanding is that someone else from the group has offered offline
to
pick up the modest cost for another year of the PBase account. *Hell, if
all
of the SI participants could only discipline themselves to focus just on
Photography, I'd pick it up myself.

Ken

Hi Ken, nice to hear you here again.

First things first, there is absolutely no way I could let you submit to the
SI with an 8x10 camera I mean I even had issues with the 4x5's :-)

"Cute" was three years ago in April. *I can see where the finger is
pointing. :-)

It's not about the money for the account, it's about the participation of
the group. *Having said that and peaking at Google groups to see what I've
been missing:
1) *I personally would be strongly opposed to moving the SI out of RPE35mm.
Born here, die here, as I psych myself up for a move out of state.
2) *If people want to pay for the current Pbase account,http://www.pbase..com/gift
username is "shootin"
The Email for the account is jlkramer AT wading-in DOT net
3) If you want to commit to play speak up now.
4) If you want someone else to moderate the SI say that too.

Jim


Jim you are doing a great job moderating the SI. It's no easy job,
and I'm surprised that you and the former moderators are not drinking
men/women.......what with all the time devoted and stress it caused.