I am not worried John, if I am "voted off the island" I wont loose a minute sleep. I am just expressing my opinion that I find the idea distateful and underhanded. As Andy pointed out, once a desicion is taken I am free to choose if I want to keep on participating on this site or not......it is really no big deal.mrcallow said:Until it transpires Jorge, don't worry about it. If he picks Sean Clones then nothing changes. If he picks a diverse enough group nothing will happen due to a lack of consensus or... new horizon's might be reached.
Jorge said:Oh no? And how do you propose those members who will be able to "make recommendations" be chosen?
David said:Again, please read more carefully: "Spirited discussions, disagreements, etc. are surely part of the accepted ways of this site". I wouldn't learn a thing if everyone agreed with me - and I wouldn't like it one bit either. Agreement or disagreement is assumed. 'How' those agreements and disagrements are handled is in view.
Respectfully, David
It's basically a Members Moderation Team that will be created. They'll be chosen the same way the moderators team was chosen. It has nothing to do with people being worthy or not. What is has to do with is steering the atmosphere of APUG, so that APUG can be a positive and friendly community that allows people to form friendships, exchange ideas, and have healthy debate. I do not want any squashing of passion or flow of information and a sanitized environment. It's merely a way so those with APUG's best interest at heart can say "wow, this guy really is damaging our community", and begin a process to discuss it, warn the individual, and if needed remove them via a vote". Like many people have said before this is a private forum, and APUG needs to work much harder to secure it's true identity and atmosphere, then ensure it stays that way so the overwhelming majority enjoy their stay here..
Like many people have said before this is a private forum
This is exactly right! it is your forum and you should not have to hide behind a group of chosen people to ousts someone you dont want here. Have the courage to tell them to their face it is your decision.
David said:Dear Jorge,
You also seem to miss the point. It is precisely because it is irrelevant what materials I use that should point the discussion to 'HOW' things are said.
Then what the hell are you doing posting in this thread?.....Andy K said:And I don't give a flying f*ck, who ripped off who! I am sick and tired of reading this whining schoolgirl crap all over APUG!
Is not the $12, I assure you Mike W is wealthy enough that $12 are not going to stop him from eating, it is the principle behind the lack of honesty and fair dealing with your customers. Besides this got started by increasing a limited edition, the $12 post was to show a pattern of behavior, please read the thread before you start complaning.Andy K said:This whole argument is over $12. TWELVE DOLLARS. FFS get a sense of proportion, all of you! Here is someone with a real reason to feel ripped off.
hkr said:Seems like all the vogue to discuss these editions in the past few days, so why not the George Tice?
I agree with everyone's sentiments about the Weston and Nixon books. Same holds for the Tice book - the finest reproductions of any of his books so far. I have and love Tice's Paterson and Urban Landscapes, but the new reproductions easily outclass those. Only 16 pics, but $25 very well spent.
I'm now looking forward to the others, especially Robert Adams, Frank Gohlke, Keith Carter.
Anyone subscribe to the whole series? Or is this topic now taboo?
I really dont give a sh!t if it pisses you off, if you dont like it then dont read it.Andy K said:The above is the first post in this thread. It was an interesting thread. And then all the schoolgirls turned up and trashed the thread. That is why I'm pissed off. If you have a problem with Michael Smith email him. But stop crying over your lost lollipops all over APUG. You're like a bunch of f*cking five year olds.
Sean said:I've been down this road before. When I have banned people or blocked people in the past they just don't get it. If I ban or block someone it becomes them against me, and they leave with the mindset 'Sean had it in for me the jerk, I did absolutely nothing wrong'. I'd rather them get a nice big fat reality check that it was a consensus of the membership that they take a hike. I also struggle with these decisions because many are borderline, so seeking council from a membership moderators group is a great way to explore what needs to be done. These decisions affect the community so the community should have some power here. You still think MAS was spamming us in that thread, I've already said he was not the we had a prior arrangement and we was soon to become a sponsor. Had that agreement not been made and he posted a note like that it would have been removed promptly.
Jorge said:I really dont give a sh!t if it pisses you off, if you dont like it then dont read it.
You're judging something that hasn't even been implemented yet. It will take a lot to have someone removed and it would be a last resort..Jorge said:I see, so it is a popularity thing. Instead of someone being vanished by you and being mad at you they will be mad at you and the cabal. Underhanded but a nice way to share the hard feelings.
So I guess if someone says anything about your sponsors, even if we dont know they are then they will be banished as well, nice going......
I tell you what, you can save the yourself and your cabal the hassle of dealing with me, feel free to cancel my membership and remove it from your site any time you want. I am done dealing with the master race.
Donald Miller said:If all of you don't mind, allow me to approach this thing from a factual basis for a moment.
O.K....this whole thing began over what some of us, certainly I, considered to be unethical and unprofessional behavior on the part of Michael Smith. This was the unilateral attempt, by him, to set aside his own terms on the limited edition. This was done without consideration of his customers and his attitude seemed to be condescending and inconsiderate at the very best and demeaning and abusive at the worst. This was exacerbated by the fact that apparently Mr. Smith saw nothing wrong with his approach to things. He has not to this point in time made any apologies for what appears to be inconsiderate behavior.
I am really bothered by the fact that Michael Smith seems to think that he has carte blanche in how he deals with his customers of Azo paper...this became apparent when he said in his response to MikeW, and I paraphrase here, that grade three paper should cost him (MikeW) $400.00 per box...I assume that was for 100 sheets.
Michael Smith seems to have the belief that it is the responsibility of his customers to pay his way through life. Let's be realistic here, the credit card bills that he has mentioned in his scathing response to MikeW are no one's problem but Michael Smith's...yet he seems to be factoring this into business operations, by the very fact that he mentions it.
Michael Smith seems to have a distorted view of things. On grade two Azo he is already charging 18% more then B&H Photo on the very same product. Then he adds an additional $6.00 per box handling charge to that product (which B&H does not charge) When this is included, his upcharge goes to 23% above B&H. Then when one adds the additional upcharge on shipping, that by his own admission he does charge actual shipping, the percentage goes to 25% above normal retail charged by B&H. (B&H by comparison charges $6.35 for one box and $9.70 shipping for two boxes of grade two paper to Phoenix.)
Things become materially worse when one considers how he handles grade three pricing. There he immediately goes up 38% on pricing over grade two at B&H. Then he adds the $6.00 handling charge per box and shipping at his whim.
When one listens to Michael Smith, it seems that he is saying that we are supposed to feel grateful to him for the priviledge of paying him from 25% to 40% more. Yet, when I read Michael Smith's latest response to MikeW it was Michael Smith that tried to diminish MikeW when he told him that he was being too tight.
This is factual information. I am not judging Michael Smith as being either a saint or a crook in my statements. I will leave it to you to ascertain your own judgements.
I no longer use Azo...nor would I buy it from Michael Smith if I were using it.
Donald Miller said:Mike Davis,
You failed to consider all of the facts. For instance you failed to address the $6.00 per box handling charge or the difference in shipping and insurance charges.
I fail to see how you can factually represent that buying from Michael Smith is less expensive. I don't find that to be true in my experience...nor do others it seems.
I don't mind your disagreement. I just wish that you would respond factually for a change.
As I said before, considering what has happened in this matter, I will probably never seek to do business with Michael Smith on anything in my life. You of course should choose your own course of action. My course is based upon factual evidence that indicates to do so would not be prudent.
That being said, the matter of Michael Smith is closed...he has become persona non grata. There is no further need for you and I to discuss this matter...Let just leave it that you and I agree to disagree on this matter.
Donald Miller said:Jim, My figures are accurately based on 100 sheet boxes of paper...more normally purchased by most users.
I mean that this matter is closed...please honor my position.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?