The APUG Membership Council

[johnnywalker]

As for the issue of status labels, I think it is better that the people involved in the management of the site be identified unambiguously. I am sure that while there are those who object to the labels, others would argue that if the Council members are not clearly identified, then they could be acting as spies and agents provocateurs. Most online discussion groups use some sort of identification system of this sort, and I think more transparency is better than less in this matter.

Absolutely. If forming a council has created some consternation in the membership, think about what would be hitting the fan if it were a secret council!

 

[copake_ham]

Absolutely. If forming a council has created some consternation in the membership, think about what would be hitting the fan if it were a secret council!

As per my PM - there is already a control mechanism.

At the end of the day, I think it is up to each Subscriber to consider how she/he feels about being included/excluded from The Council.

To use the"Blansky bar" metaphor, it's a bit worrisome to realize that you're getting served the "industrial p--swater" at the line while others are drinking the microbrews in the backroom with the boss.

 

[scootermm]

What makes a good APUG'er? What makes and exemplary APUG'er such that she or he is exalted to the ranks of The Council?

believe me... speaking as a person and as a council member... Im not exemplary and Im not exalted by likely anyone and if I were exemplary or exalted, more than likely it WOULD NOT be because of an internet forum, or at least I wouldnt want it to be because of an internet forum.

To use the"Blansky bar" metaphor, it's a bit worrisome to realize that you're getting served the "industrial p--swater" at the line while others are drinking the microbrews in the backroom with the boss.

I havent gotten any microbrews. But if I did... Id share my beer vouchers.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

George- after all of this, I just HAVE to know- why do you care so much? The fact is, Sean decided he wanted an additional group of folks to serve in an advisory capacity. He decided how many he wanted, and he decided who he wanted. Nobody on the Council came running up to Sean and said "oooh! oooh! Pick me! Pick me!". We were all approached and asked if we would take on this responsibility. No plenipotentiary powers were dangled in front of us.

 

[copake_ham]

George- after all of this, I just HAVE to know- why do you care so much? The fact is, Sean decided he wanted an additional group of folks to serve in an advisory capacity. He decided how many he wanted, and he decided who he wanted. Nobody on the Council came running up to Sean and said "oooh! oooh! Pick me! Pick me!". We were all approached and asked if we would take on this responsibility. No plenipotentiary powers were dangled in front of us.

FC,

You know what's interesting? In this thread you responded to my earlier posts.

Then, I didn't post to this thread for about 2 days. And during that time the number of pages posted here doubled. So it was not as if I've been adding to the "page count".

And in all of those pages since I had last posted, you did not post at all.

Now I post again and within a hour or so - you respond.

Why?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

George- maybe it's because I think you have something interesting to say?

 

[copake_ham]

George- maybe it's because I think you have something interesting to say?

Indeed an unexpected comment. But many of the interesting things I may have once said here are on fora that I can no longer visit.

There apparently was a "council of censorship" here before there was this "Membership Council". I believe some of those folk now sit on the official "Council". So for me, I guess it's the same old, same old....

I'm a film shooter and realize that APUG is a refuge. So I hope to stay around here. But I'm not sure that it's future will be better by being more exclusive. Because, at the end of the day, this Council is a cadre of favorites.

I'll let it go, with this (if only because I'm tired of pi--ing off The Banana): When memberships to "The Council" were offered, did any of the offerees say: No ?

 

[Dinesh]

I'll let it go, with this (if only because I'm tired of pi--ing off The Banana): When memberships to "The Council" were offered, did any of the offerees say: No ?

What, and give up the microbrews in the backroom with the boss. :rolleyes:

 

[copake_ham]

What, and give up the microbrews in the backroom with the boss. :rolleyes:

Or perhaps, once again, as so often it has occurred before, with a Peerage dangled before their eyes, selected members of the working class party chose to accept the title, honorifics and emoluments, despite their long ago convictions to the contrary.

APUG moves from community to society. So much for the common denominator of being a film shooter willing to kick in a few bucks to keep the lights on. Now we have classes.

Can I presume, at least, that Council folk will be expected to continue to pay full price Subscriber dues?

 

[Sean]

Congrats to the new Council. I truly look forward to having your guidance. With nearly 21,500 members - this site is becoming enormous - your presence will be very helpful.

Oh, and I guess I'd better take Dinesh off my "Ignore" list!

But truly, I respect all of you and know you support the interests of APUG and it's goal/mission.

Thanks

 

[MattKing]

George:

I probably have rad every post you have made on APUG (unless you have been posting in the Soap Box, where I rarely go).

I agree with you frequently (possibly because of some shared interests ), and disagree with you from time to time as well. In any event, I'm always interested in what you have to say.

Have you ever considered, that at least some of the people on the Council are there because they don't post very often on issues of the type that Sean seeks to have input on, while Sean doesn't need to have behind the scene input from you, because you post your input for all to see anyways!?

Matt

 

[copake_ham]

George:

I probably have rad every post you have made on APUG (unless you have been posting in the Soap Box, where I rarely go).

I agree with you frequently (possibly because of some shared interests ), and disagree with you from time to time as well. In any event, I'm always interested in what you have to say.

Have you ever considered, that at least some of the people on the Council are there because they don't post very often on issues of the type that Sean seeks to have input on, while Sean doesn't need to have behind the scene input from you, because you post your input for all to see anyways!?

Matt

Matt,

Perhaps you're right. PM sent.

 

[Helen B]

Right now, the full scope of the Council is vague.

Could one of their roles be to keep valued contributors happy, and to keep them in the game? Over on photo.net the moderators take positive steps to encourage participation by the guys who actually know something, technically, professionally and commercially. As that is another site, and the communications between the moderators and the members are private, I don't want to go into detail except to say that I have been generally impressed with their encouraging and supportive actions, and the way in which those actions were taken.

Best,
Helen

PS Losing Charles Webb as a contributor would be a great shame.

PPS Do not read any sub-text or personal motive into this post.

PPPS How about letting the Council members introduce themselves - especially those who are not prolific posters (and it would be good to see some examples of their photography if it isn't already here); and how about asking the ones who post under abbreviated names or pseudonyms to change to their full names?

 

[Katharine Thayer]

The voice of the full membership will always come before the Council in regards to site decisions. In that regard the Council is part of the membership with everyone else. I look to the Council for advice on membership activities not on infrastructure and decisions that require discussion of the full membership. I can understand your concern and I hope that clears things up.

Sean, I'm very glad to hear that, but wish it had been made more clear from the beginning.

A question: should it surprise anyone if, out of a group of several hundred dedicated and active and committed regular participants, you choose 15 of them to be advisors to the administrator and moderators, and if in announcing this decision to the membership at large, you suggest that the dual function of this group will be (1) to police the membership, and (2) to speak for the membership, that there might be some consternation, voiced or not, among those who have considered themselves very much a part of the daily life of APUG, and now feel somehow out of the loop? I have no vested interest here, since I don't know any of those people and am not one myself, but just as an observer, it seems to me there might have been a more sensitive way to go about this.

I don't have an opinion about whether the council is a good thing or not; I trust Sean's judgment that this is something he felt he needed. I've hesitated to even speak on the matter, thinking that after all, I'm new and very much an outsider, and don't at all aspire to insider status at APUG, and so who cares what I think about this; it doesn't matter.

But then it occurred to me that one of the reasons that Sean gave for taking this step is to make and keep the site friendly and welcoming to new people. So even if it doesn't matter about me personally, maybe it does matter in general, if new people come here and feel put off by the ingrown and clubbish flavor of the site, as I have been. And the in-groupy banter from the members of the new council, the swaggering disguised as joking, has only increased that offputting feeling rather than reducing it, for me.

There's no need to save me, as a newcomer, from the annoying experience of witnessing APUG members bickering with each other, or from people whose purpose seems to be to insult people and/or to pontificate about things they know little or nothing about. That's what the "ignore user" and "ignore thread" buttons are for, no? If I get a sense that a person isn't here to engage in a good-faith dialogue, with me or with others, I push the magic button and poof, he's invisible; I can't see him or "hear" him and I don't have to be bothered with that annoyance again. And if the topic doesn't interest me, or has turned into a battle of egos, poof: it's gone too. The unpleasant person or thread just vanishes from my sight instantly, without running to some authority to resolve the matter. It's a dandy feature, available to anyone.

So it's not the bickering or the repetitive threads or the one or two people who have been rude to me that make me feel somewhat uncomfortable here; I can handle those problems with the features that are provided on the site. But what does make me feel unwelcome is the sort of us-v-them, attitude that seems to prevail here, that says to a newcomer, maybe not in words, "You're not one of us."

I'm not talking about the digital vs analog thing; I'm as virulently anti-digital as most people here, in fact I'd guess I'm more anti-digital than many people here (I dislike inkjet prints quite intensely) even though I do employ a digital negative in making some of my gum prints. I think anyone who is still arguing here that APUG should be more open to digital just isn't getting the message, and I'm certainly not arguing anything of the sort.

What I am talking about is just a welcoming attitude. I have received that welcoming attitude from some good people here, but interestingly enough, the people who have been welcoming to me are people who didn't get chosen for the council, even though some of them are very frequent posters and whose posts, in my opinion, are always worth reading; they are the kind of quiet knowledgeable people who represent the best spirit of APUG, or of any forum, to me.

I've had no interaction, good or bad, with most of the people picked for the council. I've had one or two unremarkable discussions in forums with one or two of them; another was rude to me and has been on my ignore list ever since, and will stay there. But unless I'm forgetting something and someone can correct my memory, not one of the people on the council extended a hand to me, a newcomer (and a fairly visible newcomer, because I'm not shy about posting if I think I have something to say or something useful to contribute); none of these people extended a hand to say hi, welcome to APUG.

It's not my site, so I don't get to pick the spirit that prevails. But if the management really wants to make the site more open and welcoming to newcomers in order to expand the subscriber base, encouraging this clubbish and inbred spirit is not, IMO, the way to do it; encouraging and rewarding APUGers who really are welcoming and open to newcomers, and who are a large part of the reason I'm here and a subscriber, might be a better way to go. Just my 2cents
Katharine Thayer

 

[roteague]

Wonderful thoughts Katharine. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Sean]

encouraging this clubbish and inbred spirit is not, IMO, the way to do it

I guess that is where the big disagreement is in all of this. To me I have moderators and council members as part of the apug 'staff'. There is no club in my eyes. I use dozens of large online forums all with similar structures, for example sitepoint.com

I have never once felt I was left out in their forums or excluded from anything. It's a very friendly forum, just the other day I posted in the wrong area and an "Mentor" politely informed me of that and moved my post. I guess some members on sitepoint would have replied to him with a nasty note asking him 'who the hell do you think you are'.. If anything I am glad they have some structure because some of the other IT forums I visit have none and they are cesspools to say the least. APUG is what I consider a large forum and large forums need members allocated to a variety of official capacities to help maintain the site. I can't just sprinkle magic dust on the server and we all live happily ever after. Maybe I should change the tags for "Admin", "Moderators", "Council" to "APUG Staff" and then we can get back to photography and having a good time?

 

[MattKing]

Sean:

Does it sometimes seem like herding cats?

If you are considering changing labels, how about "volunteer" instead of council?

Matt

I guess that is where the big disagreement is in all of this. To me I have moderators and council members as part of the apug 'staff'. There is no club in my eyes. I use dozens of large online forums all with similar structures, for example sitepoint.com

I have never once felt I was left out in their forums or excluded from anything. It's a very friendly forum, just the other day I posted in the wrong area and an "Mentor" politely informed me of that and moved my post. I guess some members on sitepoint would have replied to him with a nasty note asking him 'who the hell do you think you are'.. If anything I am glad they have some structure because some of the other IT forums I visit have none and they are cesspools to say the least. APUG is what I consider a large forum and large forums need members allocated to a variety of official capacities to help maintain the site. I can't just sprinkle magic dust on the server and we all live happily ever after. Maybe I should change the tags for "Admin", "Moderators", "Council" to "APUG Staff" and then we can get back to photography and having a good time?

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Sean can I ask you just one thing? To "understand what APUG is about" is not at all difficult in terms of reading words on a screen ("NO digital images!"), but understanding the ramifications of this is far harder, particularly this one:

Briefly skimming through a few hundred gallery images to confirm my impression, I note that less than 5% are color, of these most are shot on reversal material, the number of gallery pix based on scanned color prints is vanishingly small. If we then consider than most people shooting color will probably send out to a lab for prints, and that virtually all labs today are enlarging and balancing digitally (even if they then output on wet-process paper), we find that virtually all those who contribute color to APUG are "illegals" (hybrid process users) and thus excluded from print exchanges and (apparently) generally looked down on.

This means that effectively current APUG policy is driving away a large proportion of analog (color film) users and is causing analog photography to be presented as black-and-white only, which is in fact a niche market within the larger niche market of film as a whole. The fact that a quarantine (hybrid) area has been created for them to be driven into is of course a partial but far from complete answer.

I trust you will accept that my question is not at all intended to be provocative but merely to inquire whether you are sure that stated APUG policy is in fact producing the effect you desire. I am of course, like everyone else, deeply appreciative of your efforts.

Regards,

David

 

[Sean]

Those submitting color from what I see are scanning negs and transparencies for the APUG gallery. One member in another thread regarded the gallery as a sketchbook, "here is a glimpse of what I'm working on folks" (I have always liked that analogy). Color shooters are allowed to post scans and to discuss their traditional materials in the forums. They are not restricted from this in any way. Are they open to discuss inkjet printers, inkjet papers, inksets, mac vs. pc vs. linux, intel quadcore cpu's vs. amd quad cores, photoshop cs, microtek vs. epson scanners and 1,000's of other digital topics? No. They know it's out of scope on APUG and visit other sites for that information. Is this driving traditional shooters away from APUG or bringing them into APUG? I think it's bringing them in. Judging by the continued growth there must be something here that is attracting traditional photographers and it's likely the charter displayed on the homepage. I receive countless heartfelt emails and pm's from members thanking me for maintaining the charter. We used to have a hybrid area and it was not a pull for memberships. When we removed the hybrid area APUG continued to grow. Hybridphoto.com almost has 1,000 registrations so it's getting there and much more is planned for that site. I wish there could have been a single login system between the two sites but it was not technically sound. I'm happy that both sites have their own space and are growing. Like I've said before, it's not about excluding anyone on APUG it's about trying to maintain the APUG charter. The charter will not appeal to everyone and trying to please everyone is impossible. I know some people are caught in the middle, but I'm not prepared to modify the entire site to accommodate them by allowing hybrid content. I suppose in 5yrs time Canon will release a 50mpixel B&W DSLR sensor. B&W photographers will start migrating to the new B&W sensor. Many of them will output to traditional paper or diginegs printed to traditional paper. At that point another argument will arise that we are shunning all the B&W digital shooters who print on traditional materials and should open discussions and galleries for them. The line must be drawn somewhere and it must also be a line that can be managed efficiently. There are 1,000's of places to talk digital but only a few that talk 100% traditional (maybe only one).

Sean

 

[Ed Sukach]

I would like to SUGGEST (have patented "Flavored Inner Tube" installed between teeth) that this may be a good time to "chill out" and let this fledgling "Council" do their thing, whatever that is, or may be, at the moment.
I do not look at this as an establishment of an "Elite" - on the contrary, from the composition of the "council", and my narrow assessment of their interactions, they ALL seem to be wise choices of those who are llkely to IMPROVE APUG.

Let us give this a chance ... I am sure everyone here, from Sean to the newest lurker, are concerned with the cause and effect, and there will be adequate chances for necessary refinements.

Katherine, I have here a "Magical, Mystery Insider/ Outsider Decider". I have entered your name, and the indication is that you are DEFINITELY an "Insider". I am positive that Sean and the VAST (or even "half-vast") majority of participants here want you be exactly that. I know I do.

The same applies to everyone here. Unfortunately, there seems to be some who thrive on "status", and they appear to be desperate to establish some sort of heirarchy, with themselves at the apex. When their actions become unreasonable, and beyond "limits" - ad hominem attacks, libel, slander, - I believe judicious control measures should be taken. The difficult part, and as I understand it so far, the main mission of the Council, is deciding where those limits are. Not easy, by any stretch of the imagination, an I can see the need for the consensus of a "cross-section" of the participants.

I think Sean has done a brilliant job. His record here, in establishing and riding herd is enviable to say the least. I've DEALT with Artists before, with all their sensitivities and rock hard opinions, their intense defense of their individualities, - and it IS NOT easy.

Give this "Council" thing a chance. So far, it looks good to me.

BTW.... I am one of the "few"? who works with negative color, scanning my prints (I have never scanned a negative or transparency), and I am really reluctant...
No, that is really "off topic" here. I've already argued my case ... an exercise in futility.

 

[Steve Smith]

Unfortunately, there seems to be some who thrive on "status", and they appear to be desperate to establish some sort of heirarchy, with themselves at the apex.

This reminded me of something my father once said about a couple of our local town councillors who acted in a superior way:

"Remember that they are our servants, not our masters".


Steve.

 

[Roger Hicks]

This reminded me of something my father once said about a couple of our local town councillors who acted in a superior way:

"Remember that they are our servants, not our masters".


Steve.

Or as my own father used to end his letters to the Inland Revenue when he was in the navy (he stopped when he retired),

You have the honour,

Sir,

to remain,

my obedient servant...

But back on thread, I'm delighted overall at the way the site is run, and doubly delighted at not having to be one of those without any responsibility (beyond that of an ordinary subscriber) for keeping it that way. Thanks very much, Sean.

 

[photomc]

Wonderful thoughts Katharine. Thanks for sharing.

I will 2nd that, perhaps the 'Council' will take council from the most recent words of Helen and Katharine, as both have summed up my feelings better than I have been able to express them.

 

[jovo]

What I am talking about is just a welcoming attitude. I have received that welcoming attitude from some good people here, but interestingly enough, the people who have been welcoming to me are people who didn't get chosen for the council, even though some of them are very frequent posters and whose posts, in my opinion, are always worth reading; they are the kind of quiet knowledgeable people who represent the best spirit of APUG, or of any forum, to me.

I've had no interaction, good or bad, with most of the people picked for the council. I've had one or two unremarkable discussions in forums with one or two of them; another was rude to me and has been on my ignore list ever since, and will stay there. But unless I'm forgetting something and someone can correct my memory, not one of the people on the council extended a hand to me, a newcomer (and a fairly visible newcomer, because I'm not shy about posting if I think I have something to say or something useful to contribute); none of these people extended a hand to say hi, welcome to APUG.

Katherine, correct me if I'm mistaken, but I checked to see if you had used the Introduce Yourself forum either when you first arrived here, or anytime since and didn't find that you had. Those who do usually get a lot of 'hellos' from a wide variety of members. Since I, for one, don't typically read the threads having to do with gum printing or other alternative processes, I wouldn't have encountered you to welcome in the first place. So, belatedly, welcome! I hope you continue to use, and hopefully enjoy, this site.

 

[jovo]

Or as my own father used to end his letters to the Inland Revenue when he was in the navy (he stopped when he retired),

You have the honour,

Sir,

to remain,

my obedient servant...

Your father was a wit with the kind of attitude I really, really like!