Ping Savageduck

On 6/21/2016 5:19 AM, Noons wrote:


Oh, and apologies: it's Grumman, not Gruman!
Damn keyboard...

I knew what you meant. The only folk who really care are the payees of
their checks.



--
PeterN

On 6/20/2016 10:48 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 02:29:41 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/20/2016 10:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 01:40:17 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/20/2016 8:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 00:34:16 +0000, PeterN said:

FB has a lot of convenience.

Not for me.

Through FB I recently got in touch with a friend who had moved
several
years ago, and we simply lost touch. We often keep in touch with a
large part of our family through FB.

There are other ways to do that.

Probably, but we all agreed to do it through FB. I suspect that you
are a nice guy, trying to be a curmudgeon, but don't know how.

I am not sure of your Usenet character analysis, but as a "nice guy" I
am vulnerable to a few things which will trigger my inner curmudgeon.
One of those things are friendly nudges towards the FB Charybdis.

My biggest complaint is the loss of privacy, so I am careful about
what I post.
Adverse comments have been made about my downgrading images.

So you have been posting images downgraded for FB in a photogroup
where
they only invite adverse comments.

No. With some exceptions I usually post downgraded images, for reasons
we have discussed ad nauseum.

I am not quite that paranoid.

When you post an image on FB, you have given them a non-exclusive
right to use that image for any purpose they deem fit. One of my
friends, a fine art photographer, found some of her images being used
commercially.

All good reasons not to join the FB club.

Horses for courses.

I like to control the reins.

IIRC There are other sites who claim the right to use your images in
exchange for the free posting space. At least FB greases the umbrella.
(sometimes.)
Our older daughter's FB page was maintained for years. she used her
dog as a nym and the dog would regularly complain about the things her
mother was "forcing" her to do. It was cute and funny. One day FB just
terminated her page, because not using your own name is a violation
of their rules. (It's hard to get a dog to pay for purchases.) That
take down brought a sharp realization of FB's commercialism. Sort of
took all the fun away. I will not login to sites through FB and since
then I only use it for family connections.

Quite frankly, even Google Photos (ex-Picasa) provides a better
experience for sharing images, folders of images, or URLs to images,
than FB. Then there are all the various ways of sharing or collaborating
we get with an Adobe CC subscription from LR, to Behance, and Portfolio.
https://www.myportfolio.com/examples

For me, image sharing is NOT my primary use for FB.




--
PeterN

On 2016-06-21 21:04:17 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/20/2016 10:48 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 02:29:41 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/20/2016 10:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 01:40:17 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/20/2016 8:47 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-21 00:34:16 +0000, PeterN said:

FB has a lot of convenience.

Not for me.

Through FB I recently got in touch with a friend who had moved
several
years ago, and we simply lost touch. We often keep in touch with a
large part of our family through FB.

There are other ways to do that.

Probably, but we all agreed to do it through FB. I suspect that you
are a nice guy, trying to be a curmudgeon, but don't know how.

I am not sure of your Usenet character analysis, but as a "nice guy" I
am vulnerable to a few things which will trigger my inner curmudgeon.
One of those things are friendly nudges towards the FB Charybdis.

My biggest complaint is the loss of privacy, so I am careful about
what I post.
Adverse comments have been made about my downgrading images.

So you have been posting images downgraded for FB in a photogroup
where
they only invite adverse comments.

No. With some exceptions I usually post downgraded images, for reasons
we have discussed ad nauseum.

I am not quite that paranoid.

When you post an image on FB, you have given them a non-exclusive
right to use that image for any purpose they deem fit. One of my
friends, a fine art photographer, found some of her images being used
commercially.

All good reasons not to join the FB club.

Horses for courses.

I like to control the reins.

IIRC There are other sites who claim the right to use your images in
exchange for the free posting space. At least FB greases the umbrella.
(sometimes.)
Our older daughter's FB page was maintained for years. she used her
dog as a nym and the dog would regularly complain about the things her
mother was "forcing" her to do. It was cute and funny. One day FB just
terminated her page, because not using your own name is a violation
of their rules. (It's hard to get a dog to pay for purchases.) That
take down brought a sharp realization of FB's commercialism. Sort of
took all the fun away. I will not login to sites through FB and since
then I only use it for family connections.

Quite frankly, even Google Photos (ex-Picasa) provides a better
experience for sharing images, folders of images, or URLs to images,
than FB. Then there are all the various ways of sharing or collaborating
we get with an Adobe CC subscription from LR, to Behance, and Portfolio.
https://www.myportfolio.com/examples

For me, image sharing is NOT my primary use for FB.

....but an image shared via FB was what brought us here.

--
Regards,

Savageduck