Not too long ago I was accused of censorship for deleting a post, and today I've been accused (in private correspondence) of being the humor police for this forum. I admit to having little tolerance for people who are uncivil and/or ungracious. In the South we learn at an early age to display some manners, else someone is liable to shorten our lives drastically.

My question is this: Would everyone prefer that I take a hands-off approach and let people say whatever they wish? On the one hand, it would be a lot easier for me--I certainly don't need the abuse I receive for trying to keep people civil. On the other hand, I fear that a totally unbridled forum would quickly degenerate into a place where many would not feel welcome or would simply be uninterested in participating.

This is your forum--tell me how you would like it to work.

-- Ed Buffaloe (uneye@hotmail.com), November 03, 2001

Answers

First Ed, thanks for doing this usually thankless *volunteer* work. I'm sure most folks appreciate it as much as I do. Complaining majorities usually drown out silent majorities.

Please do not take a hands off approach. You've been striking a fine balance. To repeat what I said in that recent thread, this isn't government, and censorship is perfectly acceptable in such a privately owned forum.

Letting a forum run unmoderated (or close to it) would be like having a call-in radio show without a screener. It's an ugly situation. If you feel that one person's humor is most people's offensiveness, delete at will! Don't ever develop a tolerance for lack of civility, and shrug off any abusive correspondence. Then simply delete that too!

Thanks again Ed.

-- Sal Santamaura (santamaura@earthlink.net), November 03, 2001.

Ed,

I didn't find the comment in question - regarding the grainy negatives - very funny. I found it obnoxious and I'm from New York where 'F**k you' is considered a formal greeting.

Please keep doing what you are doing. We all know it's a thankless task (thank you thank you) but the alternative - an unmoderated free-for-all - is too ugly to contemplate.

-- David Parmet (david@parmet.net), November 03, 2001.

Don't change a thing. You are doing an excellent job & it is appreciated.

-- Robert Orofino (minotaur1949@iopener.net), November 03, 2001.

Ed, Thanks for the great job you are doing. Keep doing what you are doing. Civility and courtesy are always appreciated.

-- Jim Steele (jdsteele@hotmail.com), November 03, 2001.

Ed, Thank you for your tireless work on this forum and please don't change your current approach. I visit this forum regularly for just what it is - the best spot on the web for discussion of our passion - B&W photography. Everytime I visit, I can know it's just what I want - a respite from the daily grind - and the ongoing civility increases that feeling. The patience, tolerance and thoughtful responses by everyone, even to what appear as just plain dumb questions, always brings a smile. If I want rude, I only need walk down the street or visit some other forum. Keep up the excellent work and thanks again.

-- Gary Calverase (grcalveras@aol.com), November 03, 2001.

I would think if you more as an Editor, than a censor. The archive is an anthology, and should be purged of trivia in any form. If you cut something, we can alway ask again.

I'd like to also thank you, Mr. Editor, for this forum. Dean

-- Dean Lastoria (Dvlastor@sfu.ca), November 03, 2001.

Since the comments made by Ed pertain to specifically me, I would like to respond. Ed accused me in a personal email of making an ill- mannered comment that I thought was pretty humorous and well disserved because of the lack of information provided by the questioner. But we all have different senses of humor, and I asked Ed for a little tolerance on that subject.

What I also said in my email response to Ed is that "I think that you [Ed] should spend more time getting people to read the archives before asking redundant questions. And furthermore, there is nothing more ill-mannered, un-courteous, and uncivil than someone asking a question without bothering to provide even the most basic information about their current technique that is necessary for someone to accurately diagnose the problem."

It seems to me that we are answering the same questions over and over again, and usually as not as well as we do the first time because we get tired of repeating ourselves. One of the things that makes this forum unique from rec.photo.darkroom (in fact the only thing that makes it unique) is the archives. Using the archives, we as as the photography community can build upon our knowledge and provide newcomers to photography a place to get comprehensive answers to questions. But for some reason we seem to be failing in this regard, because we get the same questions over and over again every single week.

The other issue I have with the moderator is that if someone wants to ask a question (and I welcome beginners or anyone who has questions or problems), they need make a reasonable effort (not expecting perfection here) to give us enough information to help us adequately resolve their problem. If they don't do that, then I believe that I have every right to complain, even if the complaints include sarcasm. And further, I would ask the moderator to assist in this effort and send personal emails to persons who don't provide enough information in their questions, to ask them to restate the question and provide the necessary information. For me. this would be more useful than acting as a censor for comments that the moderator thinks are rude, etc., and would show a genuine interest in trying to actually help those who have problems, instead of just trying to be a "good ol boy."

And Ed, this has nothing to do with where you are from. I was born and raised in Texas. But I genuinely care about the problems that people ask, and if they are too careless or lazy to provide the necessary information for someone to respond with a reasonable answer, then I think I should be free to express my indignation.

-- Michael Feldman (mfeldman@qwest.net), November 03, 2001.

Ed, You are doing a fine job on this forum. I find it enjoyable and educational. There is no need for sarcasm or profanity here. The web is a place where people come form all different places and backgounds and meet and mix. theyshould feel welcome and safe. Howard Dvorin Mt. Laurel ,NJ USA

-- Howard Dvorin (HowardDvorin@cs.com), November 03, 2001.

Michael:

Here is what Gabe asked:

"I developed two rolls of HP5 today with HC110 developer using dilution B. I developed according to recommended times, temperature and agitation. Both rolls done in separate tanks both came out overly grainy and I have no idea what happened. The chemicals were mixed today as well."

What other information do you need? What else did you need to know to at least offer an opinion? If the question is beneath you, as it seems to be considering your response, than ignore it. I fail to see the 'humor' in your initial response and I frankly think you are showing an amazing amount of chutzpah (New York term there) in your subsequent responses.

Gabe asked a legitimate question; your attempts to turn this around and make him look like the jerk is pretty lame IMHO.

The best censor we have here is to ignore questions from posters who we believe aren't doing their homework -- and I don't believe Gabe's post falls into this category at all. It's not our job to ridicule newbies for what we perceive as lame or uniformed questions. We can ignore them.

-- David Parmet (david@parmet.net), November 03, 2001.

Michael, I agree 100%. I don't view this forum as a source for students to complete requirements w/o research. I'm all for helping newcomers over issues they can't resolve, but the question "how do I develop B&W film" is NOT such an issue. I have and will remain free to add caustic comments in such cases where I deem it appropriate. Civility has nothing to do with it. If you show up here, asking for opinions, you must be ready to hear them.

Again, the life blood of this hobby is new members, buying products so manufacturers will continue to make them, and I personally have no intention of dissuading any legitimate student of the craft from learning. But, except for hardcore bad language, I'm for no interference.

-- Alec (alecj@bellsouth.net), November 03, 2001.

David, Gabe may have a legitimate problem, but he did not ask a legitimate question.

What we don't know is: has he ever developed any HP5 film with acceptable grain? Has he ever seen someone else's HP5 negative with acceptable grain? Has he compared the grain of HP5 to other films. Does he know that HP5 is one of the grainiest films around?

What developer did he use? What other chemicals did he use? What temperature did he develop at?

BTW, yesterday I sent Gabe a personal email with a recommendation to solve his "grain" problem, which is lot more than the most of you have done, because I don't think most of you actually give a damn about Gabe or his problem, you just want to wallow in your self- righteous notions about civility.

-- Michael Feldman (mfeldman@qwest.net), November 03, 2001.

Michael,

Did you ask Gabe any of those questions prior to suggesting he was an idiot in a public forum or did you do it after you were called on your behavior just to make yourself feel better?

Considering your notions of civility -- at least what you've shown in this forum -- I'll take my 'self-rightous notions' any day.

Have a nice day and welcome to my 'ignore' file.

-- David Parmet (david@parmet.net), November 03, 2001.

David, I did not suggest that Gabe was an idiot. I suggested two things:

First, it makes perfect sense to me that if one person is getting too much grain and another not enough grain, then maybe an exchange of ideas between the two would be fruitful. I don’t believe that this comment is uncivil, and certainly should not be censored.

Second, that I am tired of hearing about the exact same problems week after week; and that I would like to see more use of the archives by persons asking questions so that they can receive more comprehensive and timelier answers to their questions. And while I don’t really know if the moderator “signed up” for the responsibility to encourage people to use the archives, if the moderator has time to complain about my rather tame posts, he should also have time to make people aware of the archives when appropriate.

-- Michael Feldman (mfeldman@qwest.net), November 03, 2001.

First, there was a typo in my initial response. Should have said "Complaining *minorities* usually drown out silent majorities."

Second, the subject of referring to archives. I typically ignore oft- repeated questions, unless others begin to respond, providing opinions with which I disagree. Then there is usually a compulsion to post what I've said earlier so the archives remain balanced.

Expecting the moderator to contact everyone who posts redundant questions seems a bit much. Perhaps a large, bold admonition against asking before checking archives could be added to the page which comes up when posting a new question. That and everyone's willingness to ignore violators might be sufficient to keep these forums from resembling chat rooms.

-- Sal Santamaura (santamaura@earthlink.net), November 03, 2001.

Sal, I agree that it may be unreasonable to put the burden on the moderator to remind every person that they should look at the archives when a redundant question is asked. But I am amazed that the moderator would take the time to chastise my lame comments, and never once (that I am aware of) make someone aware that the question asked was redundant, and was thoroughly answered in the archives; or that it is inconsiderate to ask for help and then not provide even the basic details necessary to adequately answer the question.

-- Michael Feldman (mfeldman@qwest.net), November 03, 2001.

I'm sure many people remember the old Photoshopper forum, and we certainly don't want to degenerate to that! Ed does a fine job and has my thanks. I like this board because of the caliber of people who frequent it and the generally good natured responses. I remember the HP5 question and remember thinking hmmm, not really enough info, I'll pass. Many of us forget that it's hard to ask a really good question when you don't know the answer. If the person knew enough to give all the technical data, he'd probably already know the answer and wouldn't have posted. If the question "ages" a bit with no responses, then I might offer some hints and ask for more info. I always fight the urge to be caustic and sarcastic since (in a world-wide community) English might not be the posters first language and their age and background are unknown. It's safer to just be direct.

-- Conrad Hoffman (choffman@rpa.net), November 03, 2001.

I thought my answer was very direct. The thread regarding "How do I get grainy pictures?" that I recommended contains an excellent discussion of the following: the effect of different developers on grain, the effective of development temperature on grain, the effect of sudden changes in temperature on grain, the effect of development time on grain, the effect of exposure on grain, and a discussion of the general graininess of various different films. So in reality, I believe that my answer was actually pretty good and straightforward advice.

-- Michael Feldman (mfeldman@qwest.net), November 03, 2001.

I'm just glad its not me in the middle of this one :)

Ed you have been more than fair with me, I think you do a fine job.

-- mark lindsey (mark@mark-lindsey.com), November 03, 2001.

Continue moderating exactly as you have been. You're doing a good job.

-- John Hicks (jbh@magicnet.net), November 03, 2001.

I have not read the post to which all the fuss is about. However I do believe that nothing needs to change on this forum. It is well maintained, has good questions & responses. On occasion many of us go 'brain dead' & cannot see the wood for the trees!! I am as guilty of that as anyone else. Please be tolerant of 'silly questions'. A little helping hand may help someone grasp a subject that they are having a problem with. From a response the veil may be lifted; a 's!!t I should have known that' may be uttered & an enlightened fellow photographer will go forward enjoying the craft. We are not all brain surgeons or master craftsmen & have other thing on our minds besides photography. Nowadays photo clubs seem few & far between so it is difficult to ask casual questions & get a casual response. We have therefore to rely on the biggest photo club around (LUSENET) to offer our silly & not so silly questions.

-- Melvin (bramley@nanaimo.ark.com), November 03, 2001.

Ed, first I'd like to thank you for doing a fine job. Trust your instincts, it has served you well.

-- Bong Munoz (bong@techie.com), November 03, 2001.

I want to first thank you for all your efforts maintianing the forum. And I don't think you should change your approach. When i first started reading these forums I spent a great deal of time reading through all the archives because of the gold mine of information there. I have been involved in photography for 17 years and I hope that the context of any question i ask is unique and relevant. However, for many newcomers to photography these forums are the only resource to answer confusing issues. A question that seems painfully obvious to me may be totally bewildering to a beginner. So I think we need to have some patience and do one of three things. First we could answer the question. Second, perhaps the moderator could provide a stock answer explaining the archives. It may seem obvious but newbies may not realize it for the resource it is. Third, instead of being rude, just don't reply to the post.

On another thought, I do find it frustrating when someone will post questions that they should answer themselves through testing and experimentation. If someone asks me what is the best developer to use with a particular film, I tell them to buy different developers and test the film with each one. What is acceptable for me probably is not for many others.

-- James Chinn (Jim1341@dellEpro.com), November 03, 2001.

Ed,

You do a great job. I have read the thread in question, but did not read the item that was deleted. I assume you used your judgement as the moderator in order to keep this forum civil. I sure you get criticism anytime you do this, but that is why you get paid the big bucks as the moderator. I can't imagine how the item you deleted affects the "integrity" of this forum.

I consider myself an serious amatuer photographer. I have just set up my own darkroom after using community facilities, and have enjoyed experimenting with my new setup. During this process, and in the last four years during which I have gotten into photography, I am sure I have asked a lot of questions that seemed stupid to others (and which now would even seem stupid to me). But the graciousness of others, including people in this forum, in sharing their experiences and information with me in an understandable way has made me a much better photographer and printer. I do usually seach books, the web and other information first (most of my initial knowledge came from trial and error and books rather than someone telling me what I needed to know). But it is amazing how much confusing and contradictory information is out there. So it is nice to have a forum like this where we can draw on the experience of others to address direct and specific questions (even if sometimes answers here are inconsistent or contradictory).

Yes, some of the postings are overly simple and perhaps inappropriate. But I would hate to have a situation where I or anyone else feels uncomfortable asking a questions for fear of being called or insinuated to be a moron. If someone doesn't like a question, don't post a response. Or be a little more civil in saying that the person should do a little basic homework. Frankly, when I see a stupid question and an overly harsh response, the responder is usually the one who looks more foolish.

I do have one specific suggestion. Above "New Questions," would it be possible to post a link called something like "How To Use Archives" that explains the wealth of information that can be obtained from this exercise? I know that I did not appreciate this feature the first few times I visited these forums.

-- Jim Rock (jameswrock@aol.com), November 04, 2001.

Ed:

Please keep your hand on the helm. Your efforts are appreciated. Thanks for helping buck the trend away from civility. Personal sarcasm has no place in a forum such as this. Where in the guiddelines for using this forum are there minimum requirements for technical competancy or experience.

If we don't watch out, "Fyou"" will indeed become a formal greeting. Here in Singapore we get laughed at for banning chewing gum, graffitti and spitting, but it does make a difference.

Thank you sir.

-- RICHARD ILOMAKI (richardjx@hotmail.com), November 04, 2001.

Ed, Keep the standards! I like what is going on here but you cannot please everyone. If you remember Photoshopper... it was a pretty good site all except a few bad apples and now it is closed down because of a few trash mouths. Sometimes the easy way of doing things isn't the best and I know you are putting your valued time into this but it is a good place where some people can learn, bounce ideas and generally chat about what we all love to do! KEEP THE STANDARDS... Please! Cheers, Scott

-- Scott Walton (scotlynn@shore.net), November 05, 2001.

Ed,

You are doing a great job...keep it going. There are a number of sites to go to if people want to be sarcastic or condescending with people of similar attitude it does not need to be here. I go here for help and information to improve my craft and when possible help someone out if I have been through their problem. It would be too bad if "new blood" was turned away by old hands as it dimishes us all. Like it or not, it is the inquisitive new blood with redundent questions containing insufficient information that will carry the medium forward into the future. And who knows what will come out of these questions? Old threads and conventional wisdom are great but new ideas and information occur daily.

-- Mike (watgo@aol.com), November 05, 2001.

Ed, seems like the prevailing attitude is KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!!!The of Photoshopper forum was good for me, I miss most of the information that was shared. While I am still in the process of building a darkroom and since I have been out of the darkroom for some time, I personally find reading the older post informative. That said, some people just come off a little harsher than others - ignore them there comments, but read comments anyway - sometimes they do have some good information. As stated earlier, there are fewer and fewer places we can go - let's not destroy this forum, and remember it's not that hard to be polite - we were all lacking in knowledge at one point and needed some help to get started.

Thanks again Ed for the work you do. Mike Castles

-- Mike Castles (photomc@flash.net), November 05, 2001.

I believe that there are a lot of misconceptions about the incident that started this thread. First, the post in question was not deleted by Ed. Second, I have never ridiculed any question as being too trivial or too dumb. Third, I am not suggesting that this forum be allowed to deteriorate to an "anything goes" free-for-all, and I glad that Ed takes the time and effort to delete inappropriate remarks.

I did vent my frustration about seeing the same questions being asked week after week, and the obvious lack usage of the archives. I then expressed my thoughts that, in addition to the moderator intervening when he feels that comments are "uncivil," that he also spend some amount of time trying to figure out how we can encourage people to utilize the archives when appropriate. I think that I have some right to express my opinion on this subject because I personally have answered many “newbie” questions and tried to help them as best I could. But I also know that the answers to repetitive questions get worse over time, and rather than ignoring the question, I hope that there is some way to make the archives more accessible and more useful.

Hopefully Ed will eventually delete this thread so we can get back to photography.

-- Michael Feldman (mfeldman@qwest.net), November 05, 2001.

I'm guilty of posting questions that were previously asked in the archives. Not only were the responses to my post informative and enthusiastic, but also new and different from the archived responses. Conrad Hoffman's above response sums it up perfectly, and I hope Michael Feldman reads again before posting another supposedly sarchastic answer.

-- Steve Wiley (wiley@accesshub.net), November 07, 2001.