Annika 1980

On 2011-08-17 08:17:41 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2011-08-16 20:59 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-08-16 17:31:05 -0700, Annika1980 said:

On Jul 19, 6:38 pm, tony cooper wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:04:06 -0700, Savageduck



wrote:
On 2011-07-19 11:30:03 -0700, tony cooper

said:

On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:44:30 -0400, Bowser wrote:

On 7/17/2011 1:15 AM, Noons wrote:
uw wayne wrote,on my timestamp of 16/07/2011 12:43 PM:
I have not reviewed the site for several years. Does he still post?

Try facebook. He's also mostly gone from pbase, I think he's got som
e
other site. Can't remember the name.

Smugmug

SmugMug is not a place where there is public posting. I have a
SmugMug site. It is primarily a photo host. Brett does not have
a
site linked to "Annika", but you may be able to find his site if you
know his full name.

http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/

That's it. When I said no public posting, I meant conversational
posts like we do here.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

I'm on Facebook. Bret Douglas.

I think we should start a RPE35 Facebook page. Who's in?

Naah! I don't Facebook or Tweet.

You (and Tony and Bret and whoever else) up for a Google+ account?

Point being it's not a wide open space like facebook, but closed
'circles' around activities or people or such. More 'confined' than
facebook.

I would like to actually examine the concept before I commit myself. I
need to educate myself a bit first. So I will get back to you on that
idea.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-08-17 11:44 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-08-17 08:17:41 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

You (and Tony and Bret and whoever else) up for a Google+ account?

Point being it's not a wide open space like facebook, but closed
'circles' around activities or people or such. More 'confined' than
facebook.

I would like to actually examine the concept before I commit myself. I
need to educate myself a bit first. So I will get back to you on that idea.

I sent you an invite (I think).

Premise is you decide who are in your various circles. Less x-ing of
information. (eg: avoids a lot of the Facebook info sharing that's out
of your control).

I'm not sold on it yet, but anything that challenges Facebook to a mud
fight has got to be doing something right.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

On 2011-08-17 08:55:00 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2011-08-17 11:44 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-08-17 08:17:41 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

You (and Tony and Bret and whoever else) up for a Google+ account?

Point being it's not a wide open space like facebook, but closed
'circles' around activities or people or such. More 'confined' than
facebook.

I would like to actually examine the concept before I commit myself. I
need to educate myself a bit first. So I will get back to you on that idea.

I sent you an invite (I think).

Premise is you decide who are in your various circles. Less x-ing of
information. (eg: avoids a lot of the Facebook info sharing that's out
of your control).

I'm not sold on it yet, but anything that challenges Facebook to a mud
fight has got to be doing something right.

I have taken a look, and I am still undecided.
http://www.google.com/+/learnmore/

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 8/17/2011 11:55 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2011-08-17 11:44 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-08-17 08:17:41 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

You (and Tony and Bret and whoever else) up for a Google+ account?

Point being it's not a wide open space like facebook, but closed
'circles' around activities or people or such. More 'confined' than
facebook.

I would like to actually examine the concept before I commit myself. I
need to educate myself a bit first. So I will get back to you on that
idea.

I sent you an invite (I think).

Premise is you decide who are in your various circles. Less x-ing of
information. (eg: avoids a lot of the Facebook info sharing that's out
of your control).

I'm not sold on it yet, but anything that challenges Facebook to a mud
fight has got to be doing something right.


I think the old axiom applies he if it's free then *you* are the
product. I have little faith in social sites to do anything but exploit
their users, and mercilessly.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:31:05 -0700 (PDT), Annika1980
wrote:
: On Jul 19, 6:38*pm, tony cooper wrote:
: On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:04:06 -0700, Savageduck
:
:
:
: wrote:
: On 2011-07-19 11:30:03 -0700, tony cooper said:
:
: On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:44:30 -0400, Bowser wrote:
:
: On 7/17/2011 1:15 AM, Noons wrote:
: uw wayne wrote,on my timestamp of 16/07/2011 12:43 PM:
: I have not reviewed the site for several years. Does he still post?
:
: Try facebook. He's also mostly gone from pbase, I think he's got some
: other site. Can't remember the name.
:
: Smugmug
:
: SmugMug is not a place where there is public posting. *I have a
: SmugMug site. *It is primarily a photo host. *Brett does not have a
: site linked to "Annika", but you may be able to find his site if you
: know his full name.
:
: http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/
:
: That's it. *When I said no public posting, I meant conversational
: posts like we do here.
:
: --
: Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
:
: I'm on Facebook. Bret Douglas.
:
: I think we should start a RPE35 Facebook page. Who's in?

Come on back, Bret; Noons and DMac haven't been seen here for ages. We miss
your Shoot-In entries. (Well, I do anyway; I shouldn't presume to speak for
others.)

No Facebook, this old dog's already trying to learn enough new tricks.

Bob

On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 11:17:41 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:
: On 2011-08-16 20:59 , Savageduck wrote:
: On 2011-08-16 17:31:05 -0700, Annika1980 said:
:
: On Jul 19, 6:38 pm, tony cooper wrote:
: On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:04:06 -0700, Savageduck
:
:
:
: wrote:
: On 2011-07-19 11:30:03 -0700, tony cooper
:
: said:
:
: On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:44:30 -0400, Bowser wrote:
:
: On 7/17/2011 1:15 AM, Noons wrote:
: uw wayne wrote,on my timestamp of 16/07/2011 12:43 PM:
: I have not reviewed the site for several years. Does he still post?
:
: Try facebook. He's also mostly gone from pbase, I think he's got som
: e
: other site. Can't remember the name.
:
: Smugmug
:
: SmugMug is not a place where there is public posting. I have a
: SmugMug site. It is primarily a photo host. Brett does not have
: a
: site linked to "Annika", but you may be able to find his site if you
: know his full name.
:
: http://bretdouglas.smugmug.com/
:
: That's it. When I said no public posting, I meant conversational
: posts like we do here.
:
: --
: Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
:
: I'm on Facebook. Bret Douglas.
:
: I think we should start a RPE35 Facebook page. Who's in?
:
: Naah! I don't Facebook or Tweet.
:
: You (and Tony and Bret and whoever else) up for a Google+ account?
:
: Point being it's not a wide open space like facebook, but closed
: 'circles' around activities or people or such. More 'confined' than
: facebook.

I like Usenet because I think threaded NNTP newsreaders work much better than
the Web for conversations like ours.

Bob

Robert Coe wrote,on my timestamp of 18/08/2011 9:14 AM:


Come on back, Bret; Noons and DMac haven't been seen here for ages. We miss

Speak for yourself, low-life troll.

On 2011-08-17 19:18 , Robert Coe wrote:

I like Usenet because I think threaded NNTP newsreaders work much better than
the Web for conversations like ours.

Me too. But it's dead.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

On 2011-08-17 08:55:00 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2011-08-17 11:44 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-08-17 08:17:41 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

You (and Tony and Bret and whoever else) up for a Google+ account?

Point being it's not a wide open space like facebook, but closed
'circles' around activities or people or such. More 'confined' than
facebook.

I would like to actually examine the concept before I commit myself. I
need to educate myself a bit first. So I will get back to you on that idea.

I sent you an invite (I think).

Premise is you decide who are in your various circles. Less x-ing of
information. (eg: avoids a lot of the Facebook info sharing that's out
of your control).

I'm not sold on it yet, but anything that challenges Facebook to a mud
fight has got to be doing something right.

I have been looking at how G+ might work for an SI type forum/circle,
and the main con I can see is the closed aspect. Even now with the
dearth of active SI contributors, we still get the occasional casual
lurker making an entry. Since there is the potential to have some of
the current contributors not join G+, I have a feeling the G+ photo
circle would have fewer participants than those we are able to draw
from rpe35mm, rpd, rpdslr-e, and ap.

While G+ has an ability to isolate the various circles from each other,
and to only share an album, or stream/discussion with a specific circle
it is going to be a awkward, regardless of any improvement over FB.
With G+ it is going to be a by-invitation only, closed club with very
little opportunity to grow. Also unless all participants in a circle
have the ability to add to an album, for each SI type challenge/mandate
there will be a separate album for each entrants 3 shots rather than
grouping each mandate in a single album.
So I have a feeling G+ would be a little messy for an SI type forum,
but for a group of like interest folks it would be a pretty be good way
to come together.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2011-08-18 09:42 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-08-17 08:55:00 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

On 2011-08-17 11:44 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2011-08-17 08:17:41 -0700, Alan Browne
said:

You (and Tony and Bret and whoever else) up for a Google+ account?

Point being it's not a wide open space like facebook, but closed
'circles' around activities or people or such. More 'confined' than
facebook.

I would like to actually examine the concept before I commit myself. I
need to educate myself a bit first. So I will get back to you on that
idea.

I sent you an invite (I think).

Premise is you decide who are in your various circles. Less x-ing of
information. (eg: avoids a lot of the Facebook info sharing that's out
of your control).

I'm not sold on it yet, but anything that challenges Facebook to a mud
fight has got to be doing something right.

I have been looking at how G+ might work for an SI type forum/circle,
and the main con I can see is the closed aspect. Even now with the
dearth of active SI contributors, we still get the occasional casual
lurker making an entry. Since there is the potential to have some of the
current contributors not join G+, I have a feeling the G+ photo circle
would have fewer participants than those we are able to draw from
rpe35mm, rpd, rpdslr-e, and ap.

While G+ has an ability to isolate the various circles from each other,
and to only share an album, or stream/discussion with a specific circle
it is going to be a awkward, regardless of any improvement over FB. With
G+ it is going to be a by-invitation only, closed club with very little
opportunity to grow. Also unless all participants in a circle have the
ability to add to an album, for each SI type challenge/mandate there
will be a separate album for each entrants 3 shots rather than grouping
each mandate in a single album.
So I have a feeling G+ would be a little messy for an SI type forum, but
for a group of like interest folks it would be a pretty be good way to
come together.

I've come to pretty much a similar conclusion - hard to get people on
board, esp. new blood and lurkers.

But, face it, NG forums are dead Jim.

I'm a member of a couple web based groups - the problem there is that
it's mostly fanbois who can't admit that there are actually downsides to
any equipment choice.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.