[rparmar]

rparmar seriously what are you talking about. It has nothing to do with his right to do anything. The facts are RiceHigh is a troll who has continuously used this site to run up the traffic to his own personal website. If he wants to express his opinion here at Pentaxforums let him knock himself out. But that is not what he does. He starts a thread with no content except a link to his personal website. How is his opinion being censored when no opinion was even expressed.

What am I talking about? I wrote that already. If you have a specific issue understanding any of it I'll try to help.

You are welcome to your opinion on RiceHigh. He is welcome to an opinion of you. It is precisely that I am trying to defend.

How is RiceHigh increasing "traffic to his own personal website" a problem? Does this hurt you in any way?

I imagine then you did not click on his link. So how is this hurting you?

And how was he being censored? His post was deleted. How much simpler can it be?

Personally I would rather RiceHigh posts the links to his ill-considered opinions, rather than clutter up the forum with them. He is actually using the web correctly and efficiently by using a link instead of repeating content.

[rparmar]

Simple ostracism - refusal to interact with RH because he cannot be trusted to abide by the UNWRITTEN rules of discourse here - should do the trick eventually.

That is by far and away one of the best posts I have read. Not only that but I agree with it completely. The two are often but not always congruent.

[Rico]

rparmar the last time I checked this was Pentaxforums not RiceHigh Personal Promotional forums.

What am I talking about? I wrote that already. If you have a specific issue understanding any of it I'll try to help.

You are welcome to your opinion on RiceHigh. He is welcome to an opinion of you. It is precisely that I am trying to defend.

That is not what you were talking about in the least or remotely defending. You are defending RiceHigh's right to drop by Pentaxforums create a thread then only post a link to his personal website as the only content to that thread. What you wrote had nothing to do with his opinion of me or my opinion of him.

There was nothing censored in his post other than the direct link. Nothing else was censored because the post did not contain anything other than the link. Am I saying this clearly enough?

None of this has anything to do with hurting me it has everything to do with a forum member using the hard work of Adam to solely promote their personal website and piggy back on the success Adam has created. Maybe you don't care or think this is a small issue but in the broader scope it is disingenuous to Adams efforts.

[deejjjaaaa]

rparmar the last time I checked this was Pentaxforums not RiceHigh Personal Promotional forums.

There are a lot of people here who do promote themselves in many different ways, nothing wrong w/ that. Or you they are allowed to do this
for as long as they praise Pentax ?

[Maxington]

What am I talking about? I wrote that already. If you have a specific issue understanding any of it I'll try to help.

You are welcome to your opinion on RiceHigh. He is welcome to an opinion of you. It is precisely that I am trying to defend.

How is RiceHigh increasing "traffic to his own personal website" a problem? Does this hurt you in any way?

I imagine then you did not click on his link. So how is this hurting you?

And how was he being censored? His post was deleted. How much simpler can it be?

Personally I would rather RiceHigh posts the links to his ill-considered opinions, rather than clutter up the forum with them. He is actually using the web correctly and efficiently by using a link instead of repeating content.

He is not "using the web correctly", it's very common on forums to not allow links to blogs because people simply use them to up their hit counters and move up google searches and blog rankings and so on. After that, they'll use them to start making money on ads, or selling commercial products. Once one person is allowed to do it, then everyone will, and then the forum is rendered useless.

And yes, Ricehighs blog does hurt everyone who uses Pentax gear. The more traffic he gets, the more damage he can do to the Pentax name when he comes up high on google searches and turns users off buying into the Pentax range with his anti-Pentax crusade. If his blog had valid well researched and backed up critcism, that would be ok. It hasn't got any of those things.

Also 99 times out of 100, Ricehighs blog is simply linking AGAIN to someone elses work (but only if its negative to Pentax), yet again he is hit farming to drive his insane agenda.

There is a very good reason he has been banned from multiple camera forums. He's had far more latitude here than he received anywhere else, and he is obviously starting to wear it out.

[deejjjaaaa]

it's very common on forums to not allow links to blogs

I did not see you raising that issue about many people here putting such links to their blogs in signature ("...All images (c) 2008 Robin Parmar. Visit my Flickr images, website, or blog. ..."), even to their websites created for profit (pro photogs)... huh ?

[Maxington]

I did not see you raising that issue about many people here putting such links to their blogs in signature ("...All images (c) 2008 Robin Parmar. Visit my Flickr images, website, or blog. ..."), even to their websites created for profit (pro photogs)... huh ?

You can't see the difference for a link in a signature compared with creating new threads constantly with the express purpose of driving traffic to your blog?

[deejjjaaaa]

You can't see the difference for a link in a signature compared with creating new threads constantly with the express purpose of driving traffic to your blog?

and what purpose serves the links in signature, tell me ?

[dave sz]

anyone who posts direct links, is a douche. Why not just copy the story and paste it here so that we don't have to waste time clicking link after link to get to what u want us to see?

[Maxington]

and what purpose serves the links in signature, tell me ?

Are you being deliberately dense?

You don't have to click the link in a signature. You do have to click the link if that is all that is contained in the post.

I personally think signatures should be limited to one line of text only, and that images in signatures are obnoxious and make forums slow to load and messy, but I still don't have to click on them.

[deejjjaaaa]

You don't have to click the link in a signature.

you don't to have the click the link in RiceHigh's posting either.

[deejjjaaaa]

Are you being deliberately dense?

are you trying to insult me know ? one of your brothers (namely "kev.pride" from AU) already did that to RiceHigh using an ethic slur... are we not white enough for you ?

[Maxington]

I'm no longer discussing anything with you.

[Rorschach]

are you trying to insult me know ? one of your brothers (namely "kev.pride" from AU) already did that to RiceHigh using an ethic slur... are we not white enough for you ?

Way to generalize. So if you're against RH, you're a racist...oh, why don't you whip out the Hitler card too while you're at it.

Quit defending RH. The guy is abusing this forum and I for one would like to see his ass banned from here. I dont give a hoot about his skin/eye/hair color. He should see a doctor who can help with his obvious problems.

Boucicaut

[Lance B]

The main purposes of a society are to protect the individual members from harm and to advance the condition of the individual members through group effort. Over time, expectations of individual behaviors (or the absence thereof) evolve that foster attainment of the society's goals.

In any free society there must be certain behaviors that, while technically a right, might not be acceptable in that society. A society with no expectations of permissible - and impermissible - behaviors is an anarchy.

In order to allow a free society to operate certain assumptions and expectations of behaviors exist between persons in the society - otherwise they cannot communicate, negotiate or trust each other, and the society serves no purpose. Most rules in free societies define impermissibe behaviors - they are "Thou shalt not" rules.

Three forms of rules or codes or understandings define the working of a free society:

• Legal - in modern societies, written rules that can be adjudicated by independent judges
• Moral - in modern societies, rather vague expectations that behaviors do not threaten the principal pairing unit. Typically religious expectations fall under this category.
• Social - evolving expectations of inter-personal behaviors that either allow large groups of people to live in close proximity and promote efficient interaction, or proscribe behaviors that create discord or are risky.

Violation of these rules or codes or structures typically results in some form of ostracism of he who violates them - in order to preserve the right and ability of the society to exist and function, and to protect the expectations of the members that the OTHER members will behave in a certain way.

Forms of ostracism:

• Legal - usually some form of confinement or punishment.
• Moral - usually denial of certain of the benefits those who are "moral" receive.
• Social - refusal of members of the society to interact with the violator because he cannot be trusted to behave as the members assume one will - interaction with this member is inefficient, risky or discordant.

RiceHigh has broken no express Forum rule that I have ever read, so appealing to Adam to "ban" him is not a valid solution - there is no "law" for Adam to adjudicate. Likewise it is not clear that any written rule warranting censorship has been violated, so appealing to a Mod to delete a thread is unjust and is, further, offensive to our concept of free discussion.

RiceHigh has broken no moral rule that I can think of.

I submit, regardless of one's opinion of RiceHigh's position on Pentax equipment, the content of his blog, his purpose in posting here or the value of his information, his behavior has been repeatedly outside the boundaries of the social norms of this Forum. Whether with or without intent, his posts have caused discord among the members.

Therefor, ostracize him. Simply add RiceHigh to your Ignore list - you will not see his comments in any threads. Don't fall into the trap I did on this thread and be tempted by the title. If RH posts a thread, just skip it.

Responses - here and to his blog - apparently are what RH wants. Eventually if he does not get what he wants here he will just stop, going elsewhere to get the responses that he wants.

Simple ostracism - refusal to interact with RH because he cannot be trusted to abide by the UNWRITTEN rules of discourse here - should do the trick eventually.

Perfectly put and something we all need to read in order to comply with societal expectations.