[GoremanX]

Sorry, but I'll disagree. lack of tact, is lack of tact. As in " A rose by any other name is still a rose."

I suppose he could've put flowers around his requests to make them seem less brusque. But I think some people feel offended the moment they've been told they did something wrong.

mmm, these roses sure smell fresh

I think that we should define lack of tact.

Are we meaning lack of tact as in "I am going to post this thread about how can I improve my portraiture in News and Rumors without even bother about posting it in the right place?"

or as in "I have moved this thread to General photography-Techniques and style which it is where it belongs. IF you dont want your thread moved, take the time to read the description on the subforums and post it in the right place"

Can't believe you're saying this...

Which part? the one where he point out the thirst for money....or the one where he suggests that he might not feed that thirst?

[Oscar1]

I think that we should define lack of tact.

OK

"Tact" Telling someone they've made a post in the wrong place in a manner that makes them want to be sure they do it right the next time.

"Lack of tact" Telling someone they've made a post in the wrong place in a manner that makes them want to put the post in the right place the next time but wondering why the guy that told them was such an ass about it.

I don't understand why anyone thinks it's the business of anyone other than Adam and Gary.

It's not a democracy here. Adam is the owner of the forum and can what he wishes.

I know one member who was banned from this very forum for suggesting that the administration wasnt democratic so I think that the very same administration of the forum differs from your point of view. Or at least, it pretends to care about that.

When the things go south in this forum I dont think that there is anything wrong in point that out. You cant insinuate that we have no right to ask for explanations about dubious movements. We do have that right. In response to that, he has the right to:
1)say nothing,
2)to ban the opposition,
3)to attempt to throw a smoke curtain,
4) to play the "how dare you say that?... I am the greatest benefactor from internet and all I do is disinterested" card,
5) to ask for more money to afford a nice lens collection
6) make the forum dissipate.

[Adam]

The process by which all decisions made by the moderators is democratic actually, in the literal sense of the word

The general rule of thumb for me at least is this: if the member benefits the community, is friendly toward others, and doesn't hurt others or ruin the atmosphere for others, then everything is OK. I don't think a policy could get any better than that!

With your post above you're shown that you're just asking for trouble, BTW.

[icywarm]

My $25 a year, or whatever it is, is well spent. Sure Gary was the first person to reply to one of my treads, and it was to tell me it was wrong and that he moved it, I still like the fact that the place is mod'd. Kinda like a ticket from the cops, sure it erks you, but it is better than a world with out them. He did his job, he did it how he saw fit, now he is not doing it. I don't think because I gave less than 1/2 of a percent of the forums yearly revenue that Adam owes me anything. I am sure the rest of the mod team will step-up, and if we as members want to do something, there are 20 threads with questions/or seeking comments we could answer right now which may be more productive to the 'tribe' than this... but hey I posted... so tells you how productive I am!!

The general rule of thumb for me at least is this: if the member benefits the community, is friendly toward others, and doesn't hurt others or ruin the atmosphere for others, then everything is OK. I don't think a policy could get any better than that!
.

What if a member contributes economically to the community, is unfriendly toward others and ruin the atmosphere for others? Hmmm I wonder....

Besides, that is a really nice policy for someone who wants to have a forum without having to worry about it while others (or a British Other to be more specific) clean the shit for me. Someone following that policy could open forums galore and just sit to receive the perks.

Nothing wrong with that. I just feel slightly dis-attached to sloppy pretenders.

[Adam]

Donations don't let you violate the rules and ruin others' lives. Thus the two are disjoint.

In this case, the shit was being wiped but not cleaned, to use your analogy. That would be smelly, and we don't want that!

[netuser]

I think this thread is too high up for me to understand it but one thing seems clear to me... you might get banned soon Gruoso ....

/me is going to sleep now

Donations don't let you violate the rules and ruin others' lives. Thus the two are disjoint.

In this case, the shit was being wiped but not cleaned, to use your analogy. That would be smelly, and we don't want that!

Only an owner would complain about having his shit wiped but not cleaned. Maybe is time to learn to use bathroom

[k100d]

There are logistical reasons for this, most of which revolve around the use of this forum as a knowledge resource. It gets to a point where members get sick of answering the same questions over and over again, so they don't bother. So when a new member asks an age-old question, he gets poor-quality replies that are either wrong or tell him/her to "RTFM/use the search feature". Then when someone makes the effort of looking up his age-old question before asking it, he gets a bunch of results which essentially suck (and buried somewhere within those results lie a few good threads).

From one point of view, I can understand where "use the search feature" becomes an appropriate answer. On the other hand, having been a recipient of that answer, I tend to resent it. Personally, I think Damn Brit did an excellent job of balancing the need for efficiency (some incorrectly call this "lack of tact") while providing us with the tools to find the answer.

+1
it dilutes the quality of the forum if we have a mass of "FA77 vs DA70" "FA50 vs DA40 vs FA43" and club threads threads instead of a few large threads where people can contribute and add in the future. in another forum i read, the moderator will directly tell people to use the search function. it seems rude and impolite but then isn't it rude and impolite not to see if things have been answered before?

personally i find as the forum has grown much much bigger there have been less things to contribute to and less interesting topics. but that's just me. i hope there are a new group of people who can offer the same enthusiasm of the prior "phase" of users who have contributed a lot of quality material to this forum.

i hope gary does well and that his hammers don't get relegated!

[Adam]

Only an owner would complain about having his shit wiped but not cleaned. Maybe is time to learn to use bathroom

Hidden content may not be quoted

Please do!

[Blue]

I think that we should define lack of tact.

Are we meaning lack of tact as in "I am going to post this thread about how can I improve my portraiture in News and Rumors without even bother about posting it in the right place?"

or as in "I have moved this thread to General photography-Techniques and style which it is where it belongs. IF you dont want your thread moved, take the time to read the description on the subforums and post it in the right place"

Actually, Ed and I are referring to the numerous times where the actual moving of a thread was questionable to begin with. The above example I posted is what I'm referring to. The guy put it in GT, someone moved it to film, then it got moved to Off Brand and the OP ended up with a chicken infraction. That is BS no matter how you cut it.