Repeat Post: New group for locations in the UK

I've started (Feb 9th) a group for people interested in photographing great
locations in the UK - now has 20 members at the time of writing.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalphotographyuk/

Join if you think it's for you!

Regards,
Steve

"Millybags" wrote in message
...
I've started (Feb 9th) a group for people interested in photographing
great
locations in the UK - now has 20 members at the time of writing.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalphotographyuk/

Join if you think it's for you!


Like so many of these things you have to sign up before you can even take a
glance to see if it's worth signing up. Mind explaining how we could think
it's for us *before* joining?

No thanks. I'm surprised you can even get 20.

Alan
The group has some way to go - I think there's a digital photography group
with 7000+ members. If you have anything you want to contribute - that's
the idea with a group - then join it. You can always unsubscribe. Didn't
you read the bit below ' a group for people interested in photographing
great locations in the UK'? That's what it's about.
Still, you can always stay with NG trolls (rec.photo.digital) to enhance
your viewing pleasure.

"Alan D-W" wrote in message
...

"Millybags" wrote in message
...
I've started (Feb 9th) a group for people interested in photographing
great
locations in the UK - now has 20 members at the time of writing.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalphotographyuk/

Join if you think it's for you!


Like so many of these things you have to sign up before you can even take
a
glance to see if it's worth signing up. Mind explaining how we could
think
it's for us *before* joining?

No thanks. I'm surprised you can even get 20.

Alan D-W wrote

Like so many of these things you have to sign up before you can even take a
glance to see if it's worth signing up. Mind explaining how we could think
it's for us *before* joining?

No thanks. I'm surprised you can even get 20.

This wouldn't be the first time that a yahoo group has been started by a
control freak. Not that it matters: there are many other photo forums
and galleries run by people with less to hide, and more to offer.

--
Hil

"Hils" wrote:
there are many other photo forums and galleries run by
people with less to hide, and more to offer.

http://www.photo.net/

http://www.photocritique.net/ (it will, however fill your
computer's belly with cookies)

http://photosig.com/

Anybody know of any others?

This wouldn't be the first time that a yahoo group
has been started by a control freak.

Folks willing to start, run and fund a discussion group, and
that are _not_ control freaks, are few and far between.

I found CompuServe, in it's early days at least, to be a
pinnacle of control freakishness.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.

Well,

Well, I have joined anyway - what the hell !

I do have one confession - I'm not (yet) digital - why are film users
discriminated against ?

BW

"Millybags" wrote in message
...
I've started (Feb 9th) a group for people interested in photographing
great
locations in the UK - now has 20 members at the time of writing.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalphotographyuk/

Join if you think it's for you!

Regards,
Steve

"Robert Whitehouse" wrote in message
...
Well, I have joined anyway - what the hell !

I do have one confession - I'm not (yet) digital - why are film users
discriminated against ?

.......digitalphotographyuk/


The answer to your question might just possibly be revealed in the name of
his group, don't you think?
It's like saying you joined a Mercedes group the other day and to your
surprise Alfa Romeo users seem to be discriminated against. Doh.

"Millybags" wrote in message
...
Alan
The group has some way to go - I think there's a digital photography group
with 7000+ members. If you have anything you want to contribute - that's
the idea with a group - then join it. You can always unsubscribe. Didn't
you read the bit below ' a group for people interested in photographing
great locations in the UK'? That's what it's about.
Still, you can always stay with NG trolls (rec.photo.digital) to enhance
your viewing pleasure.

You miss the point: if I have anything to contribute then join it. How do I
know whether I want to join it until I join it and then have a look at it to
see if there's anything I want to contribute and thus make it worth
joining....... and so on ad nauseam.

Sorry matey, in this day and age my email address ain't getting bandied
about hither and thither just upon the slight offchance that /yet another/
digital photography forum might be worth anything.

In article , Alan D-W
writes

"Robert Whitehouse" wrote in message
...
Well, I have joined anyway - what the hell !

I do have one confession - I'm not (yet) digital - why are film users
discriminated against ?

.......digitalphotographyuk/


The answer to your question might just possibly be revealed in the name of
his group, don't you think?
It's like saying you joined a Mercedes group the other day and to your
surprise Alfa Romeo users seem to be discriminated against. Doh.


Alan, I think the point is - and I made it to the original poster when
he first raised it - that if the purpose of the group is to share
information about photogenic sites in the UK, why artificially limit its
attractiveness to potential subscribers by calling it a digital group.
His answer was that he used a digital camera, which I find
breathtakingly illogical, but there you go. If he wants to put off 2/3
of the potential subscribers to his list by creating such an impression,
so be it. However, I think your "Doh" should be aimed at the OP, not at
Bob.

Personally I would only sign on to a Yahoo or similar group if there was
a lot of highly valuable (to me) expertise to be found there that I
could not get anywhere else. Otherwise, the significant extra tedium of
such a web-based medium, compared with a "proper" newsgroup, together
with the additional exposure of my e-mail address, is just not worth the
minimal rewards on offer.
--
David Littlewood

"David Littlewood" wrote in message
...
The answer to your question might just possibly be revealed in the name
of
his group, don't you think?
It's like saying you joined a Mercedes group the other day and to your
surprise Alfa Romeo users seem to be discriminated against. Doh.


Alan, I think the point is - and I made it to the original poster when
he first raised it - that if the purpose of the group is to share
information about photogenic sites in the UK, why artificially limit its
attractiveness to potential subscribers by calling it a digital group.
His answer was that he used a digital camera, which I find
breathtakingly illogical, but there you go. If he wants to put off 2/3
of the potential subscribers to his list by creating such an impression,
so be it. However, I think your "Doh" should be aimed at the OP, not at
Bob.

I take your point, and you're absolutely right of course - if a site is
photogenic, it's photogenic, whether the medium be digital, silver or video.
I don't know if I agree with your 2/3 of potential subscribers - I think
it'd be less than that nowadays, but that's another matter.


Personally I would only sign on to a Yahoo or similar group if there was
a lot of highly valuable (to me) expertise to be found there that I
could not get anywhere else. Otherwise, the significant extra tedium of
such a web-based medium, compared with a "proper" newsgroup, together
with the additional exposure of my e-mail address, is just not worth the
minimal rewards on offer.

Also agreed. I'm obsessed with spam at the moment - getting over 40 per day
now - and further exposure through Yahoo is just not on. I don't really
want that worry just to find out if his group is worthwhile.
Notwithstanding the current perversions in rec.photo.digital I think a pukka
NG is always better, though I do admit to using a couple of the forums
within dpreview.com, probably because they're more specialised than here,
ie, aligned to particular cameras.

Alan

David Littlewood