Forum update document for discussion

Good grief! Stop trying to suggest YOUR idea of moderation please! Nobody needs another replica of DPReview.

👍🏻

Rich

👍🏼

If there's one big forum for "photography technique" a lot of these things could be either, single detailed threads by someone knowledgeable which are pinned in there or handled in some form of editorial content and then linked to in one or a couple of pinned threads at the top. I get the notion of separating things up, and agree that some of the themes you mentioned are very important, but if you can tag threads in some form it just isn't necessary or helpful to create more (smaller and less visited) specialized categories for things like that in my opinion.

While I personally don't approve of some responses or words used by @Stig (whom I perceive to be a bit overly allergic to any kind of suggestion of any interference with the way conversations are handled,) I also think that this has been said over and over again, and the reaction from the team responsible for the site has always been the same: There absolutely will be no moderation in the way you seem to suggest. This is one of the topics where I have accepted that this stance is not only a firm one by the people responsible for the site, but in some form one of the main reasons they are doing it. While I never had any interaction whatsoever with any moderator on dpreview, I also understand that a not insignificant number of users here share that sentiment and in addition many who don't, have already left. While I personally still have my reservations about it and am uncertain if this approach might work, I've decided to trust the team on this one for now and see how things develop over time.

Because if things turn out in a way which I don't appreciate after some time, I'd rather have to accept this whole endeavor as a "well intended but failed experiment" and leave the place behind than insisting on things being done the same way "because we've always done it that way and for some reason I wasn't afffected negatively by it". It would feel unfair to those who felt like they weren't handled justly by the dpreview moderation system (we've heard a number of examples which suggest that it wasn't just about "bad apples" among the moderators, but a systemic problem there).

Like a couple of others seem to have already suggested: In a place like this it's ultimately mostly up to the users to create a welcoming and interesting atmosphere, worthy of participating and I appreciate a number of people (whom I've only met recently) here very much already. This includes some, who may be considered part of the "troublemakers" or at least what a moderation system focused on enforcing "just good manners!" may deem as such. So, I'll continue to try to give those people a fair chance as well, and if they continue to only distract or start to stir up emotions for no reason, I'll ignore them and let their off-topic posts wander to the dumpster, where they can be further discussed by those who enjoy that kind of conversation.

Sorry for the long-winded (and admittedly also partly off-topic) response. I just feel like it seemed a bit "smuggled in" there, when the topic at hand was something completely different...

Or as W. Eugene Smith often said. "I didn’t write the rules – why should I follow them? Since I put a great deal of time and research to know what I am about? I ask and arrange if I feel it is legitimate. The honesty lies in my – the photographer’s – ability to understand." Creating art is about breaking out of the conventional wisdom or "expert thought." If one is going to be hide bound by convention and the photographic rules of "experts," then one is no different than a computer.

There are multiple ways to cut up this pie
There is no right or wrong way
Whichever way it is done, some people will like it and others won't

Personally, I don't really mind how it's cut up (it's still the same pie), so I would suggest going with Alan's model - amended by any of the thoughts, above, he wants to take on board - and see how that works out. If there are any areas where it transpires over time that clearly don't work, I'm sure Alan & co will be humble enough to make some further tweaks

Really appreciate the openness of the running of this site - at DPReview I felt like a bit of an "intruder" at a select club - here I feel that everyone is treated as an equal (though I freely admit by skills/talent/knowledge are nowhere near the levels of many who post here)

Tim

Hi,

It looks.decent to me. I like the way the APS-C and H are combined. And I like the film section being there as well.

Stan

Alan,

Looks good. Type vs manufacturer - I have no strong feelings either way

Dumpster in Threads view - personally, I would rather it was visible there - they're sometimes good for a laugh and easy enough to skip if not in that mood - but I'll acquiesce to the majority view

I would split the gear forums differently (as outline in my post on page 1 here) but, frankly, the way you have split it also goes a long way to eliminating gear BRAND in discussion threads. Personally, given that you wish to position this site around photography results and process/techniques rather than “brand vs brand” I think that the draft structure you laid out is as good as any.

Thank you, Alan, for the continued effort to find a niche where DPRevived will stand out and find an audience.

If you'd like to shift the focus from photo gear and the technology & science of photography to photography and the genres of photos people enjoy making, I'll suggest reorganizing so the photographic genres section is at the top. I'll also suggest adding a "Photo Art" area where images that aren't photos but involve photography as part of the image-making process can be displayed and discussed.

Discussion of gear can't be avoided but it needn't be made the focus of the site. I recommend doing away with brand and format-driven discussion forums. Simplify to just a few categories: digital, film, photo editing. Let the Canon, Sony, Nikon, 35mm, APS-C, and medium format folks rub shoulders with each other. If somebody's AI-curious, what better way to scratch that itch than by being exposed to discussions of the topic in the gear forum?

I'll also offer a word of caution. While I really like the idea of a forum built around vibrant discussions of photography, that seems to be the last topic folks on the current forum actually want to discuss. I don't see it in the forums I monitor.

If the transition is going to be a success, I think you'll need to make some significant changes.