New York photographers needed for protest pics Sept 1

"ColynG©" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:49:13 -0700, "wendeebee"
wrote:



If someone asked me to help out with my resources to
raise money/awareness/****s and giggles for themselves or for a cause,
and I
agreed to volunteer, I still don't get how that's a scam. Anyway, I see
where you are coming from now.

A scam is being deceitful in your intentions. These people know how to
use words to convence you. Scanners target elderly people and they
volunteer, they are still being scammed.

As one respondant pointed out. This organization is anti- Republican
as well as anti-American but he says it isn't meant to be..

Anything even remotely associated with the ACLU is anti-American
whether they be Democrat or Republican..


Colyn Goodson


You see Colyn, your original response clipped all the politcal reference
out, and seemed to be responding only to the poster's plea for assistance,
that's what I was responding to you about. I really don't care who is
throwing the event, as I have no intention of participating. I suppose I am
just saddened that everything we do, or even say these days seems to have a
dollar value attached to it.

You make an excellent point in your comment about how the elderly are preyed
upon, but here I was pre-supposing that any respondents to this request
would be intelligent enough to research any cause they would commit their
time and good name to.

--
wendeebee
@sympatico
..ca

In article ,
ColynG© wrote:
On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:37:29 GMT, "gwb" wrote:


you are right, the president can not go to war without a majority vote of
approval from the house and congress. knowing this should help you
understand why he decided to lie to them, the american people, the united
nations, and the rest of the world, and dragged the good name of this
country and the highest office in the land down into the gutter. murdering
thousands of americans as a result of his lies, and maiming countless other
servicemen and women that you rarely hear about, not to mention the
foreigners that have been killed. and yet the republicans try to impeach
clinton over a blowjob.



Had Bill Clinton done his job in 93 when terrorists struck the towers
instead of getting a blowjob, those thousands killed would still be
here..and so would the towers..


If you're refering to OBL and AQ, they had nothing to do with the
first WTC bombing; I believe some of the people from the first WTC
bombing hooked up with AQ, later.

See: _Ghost Wars_ by Coll

Reagan dropped the ball by invading Granada in retaliation for the
Beirut bombing that killed a couple hundred US Marines. It set the
precident of not responding to attacks with force and it started the
US tradition of invading places that have nothing to to with attacks
on US people or property.

FWIW I don't believe we've had a "proper" declaratation of war since
WWII or Korea.

In his second term, every time Clinton used our military to attack AQ
(and he did), the Republican house screamed "Wag The Dog" and the
impeachment hearings put a real damper on what he could do. The
Reptilian House made huge in Intelligence. There is a whole string of
votes on bills intended to strengthen the military that voted
party-line; Democrats for, Republicans against.

****ing politics.

Today's Bumpersticker: Nobody Died When Clinton Lied.


--
Al Dykes
-----------
adykes at p a n i x . c o m

In article ,
ColynG© wrote:
On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 03:37:29 GMT, "gwb" wrote:


you are right, the president can not go to war without a majority vote of
approval from the house and congress. knowing this should help you
understand why he decided to lie to them, the american people, the united
nations, and the rest of the world, and dragged the good name of this
country and the highest office in the land down into the gutter. murdering
thousands of americans as a result of his lies, and maiming countless other
servicemen and women that you rarely hear about, not to mention the
foreigners that have been killed. and yet the republicans try to impeach
clinton over a blowjob.



Had Bill Clinton done his job in 93 when terrorists struck the towers
instead of getting a blowjob, those thousands killed would still be
here..and so would the towers..


The people that did the first WTC bombing did it with no assistance or
knowledge on the part of OBL and AQ.

See: _Ghost Wars_ by Coll

Reagan dropped the ball by invading Granada in retaliation for the
Beirut bombing that killed a couple hundred US Marines. It set the
precident of not responding to attacks with force and it started the
US tradition of invading places that have nothing to to with attacks
on US people or property.

In his second term, every time Clinton used our military to attack AQ
(and he did), the Republican house screamed "Wag The Dog" and the
impeachment hearings put a real damper on what he could do. The
Reptilian House made big cuts in Intelligence. There is a whole
string of votes on bills intended to strengthen the military that
voted party-line; Democrats for, Republicans against.

****ing politics.

FWIW I don't believe we've had a "proper" declaratation of war since
WWII or Korea.




Not to defend Bush but I doubt he lied and where did you get the
thousands murdered by him from??

When making accusations you need to present proof..afterall our
Constitution says innocent till proven guilty..



Colyn Goodson

http://home.swbell.net/colyng

http://www.colyngoodson.com


--
Al Dykes
-----------
adykes at p a n i x . c o m

On 28 Aug 2004 19:06:06 -0700, (carl) wrote:

In what way was I scamming? I said what the project was for. To
photograph an massive unemployment line. An unemployment line, get
it? If you think this country is doing well, ie you support President
Bush, why would you want to photograph an unemployment line? The idea
is inherently anti-current administration. Only a very very very old
person might be fooled (my 91 year old Republican sweetheart of a
grandmother certainly wouldn't be) into thinking this was somehow a
pro-Bush project.

As I see it, you quickly skipped over a very important part.
You wrote,
"The pay is $0. Repeat, $0. All photographers will receive full
credit for their work, and they can use it on their own in any way
they want, but the Line organizers will retain full rights to use the
pictures (as long as credit is always given) for any purpose without
recompense. You have to let go of your ego for this project."

There's a line in there which carries a lot of import that may not be
well understood: "...but the Line organizers will retain full rights
to use the pictures (as long as credit is always given) for any
purpose without recompense."
IOW, the participants give unlimited rights to their photos to the
line organizers; this means that if the photos (any or all of them)
earn money in any use, the photographer gets his name printed, but no
part of any money earned.
This is not emphasized, and has been ignored by yourself in your
responses.
Since this is, as you explain, a political action, and since the
language will exclude most pro photographers, it's the amateurs who
will be drawn out fr this project, and they probably don't understand
what they will be giving away besides their time.
Thus, the "scam" label.

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 07:04:48 GMT, SCD wrote:

He mentioned PINK SLIPS and that equals Laid Off Workers - maybe you
didn't know that?

SCD

And, of course, each participant wth a pink slip will be vetted to
ensure that all of them were laid off because of the Bush
administration's actions, right?

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On 28 Aug 2004 19:09:11 -0700, (carl) wrote:

I am not going to make any money. Honest. No money. If you can
figure out a way for me to make money please tell me. Just to prove
your point, give me an imaginary way to make money. What big magazine
is going to pay gobs of money from a random bunch of photographers
taking pictures of a line? I mean, someone might want to run it
(that'd be cool) but I'm thinking it's likely to be Obscure Politics
Weekly with a budget of about $3.28 a year.

Really, Colyn, tell me. How the heck am I gonna make money off this
project? Spend money, yah, I'm doing that, my own. Make it? It
ain't gonna happen.

Take a look at the Best Seller list, and tell me how many are
blatently political?
I do believe a book documenting the line would make money.

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 19:50:35 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

carl writes:

On Sept 1 Wednesday morning at 8:13am, as part of the RNC associated
activities, a line of people will form stretching from Wall Street to
Madison Square Garden along Broadway holding pink slips aloft. This 3
mile long line will be up for only 18 minutes. And the sponsers
(People for the American Way, the Imagine Festival) want it
photographed.

You're asking people to get arrested for your cause? Don't you know
it's illegal to take pictures in the USA?

No, I didn't know that.
Would you please cite the law you evidently have found?

So we need digital photographers.

Why digital specifically?

The pay is $0. Repeat, $0. All photographers will receive full
credit for their work, and they can use it on their own in any way
they want, but the Line organizers will retain full rights to use the
pictures (as long as credit is always given) for any purpose without
recompense. You have to let go of your ego for this project.

You can't claim full rights unconditionally without compensation.
You're aren't providing anything to photographers, so you can only ask
them to license photos to you out of the goodness of their hearts, and
you cannot dictate conditions to them.

While I'm not a lawyer, offering credit makes this a valid contract;
both parties benefit.
Whether or not the benefits are comensurate or equal may be argued,
though.

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

AstroPax wrote in
:

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 00:20:53 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

//snip//

Jesus, you're a nutbar.

So just because I'm against the ACLU, I'm a "nutbar" ?

Are you going to tell me you have some sane reason to justify your comment
on the ACLU?

Let me guess,

You mean, "make something up because I don't agree with you."

you're a big fan of PETA too.

Oh, come on. Skip right to the "Marxist" smear and you'll feel a lot
better.

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 07:04:48 GMT, SCD wrote:


He mentioned PINK SLIPS and that equals Laid Off Workers - maybe you
didn't know that?

SCD

Pink slips also refer to car titles.

In my time pink slips have also referred to other copies of
paperwork..


Colyn Goodson

http://home.swbell.net/colyng

http://www.colyngoodson.com

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 01:46:28 -0600, AstroPax
wrote:


Or, maybe all of these pink slip holders should be out looking for a
job or pursuing an education instead of wasting valuable time
protesting.

Now why should they be out looking for a job when they can sit on
their asses and draw unemployement while blaming the Republicans for
being out of work..


Colyn Goodson

http://home.swbell.net/colyng

http://www.colyngoodson.com