Seems like DPRevived management has zero issues with that toxic guy at all. Hope they can pay attention to all the warnings many of us have given.
On another topic, and out of curiosity I just checked DPRForum to see where the moderators are, and it is pretty clear they have the exact same arrogant attitude they have/had at DPR, or worse, because now they think they own the place, starting from their founding father, which even makes jokes about us (here) Awful.
+1 I'd like to understand the mindset of someone that must know they're being labelled "difficult" over there, but would want to rush to be a moderator at one of the new forums, but still want to use their old username.
Maybe I'll Google that.
I can assure you we will not be like those other forums. I would have hoped you would have realised that by now 😊😂😁👍
Alan
It's hard to realize "I'm in Paradise"
( Harder than "I'm in Hell" )
😂🤣😁😂🤣😁😂🤣😁
I suggest we have a little faith in Bob, Alan and the admins. I think they've earned that with the work done already to get this site running and set a proper tone for how we interact with and treat each other.
As DPRevived continues to grow and evolve, there will be occasional growing pains. Based on the first few weeks of operation, I think it's pretty clear the folks who administer the site will listen to feedback, give it consideration, and make changes that will foster a positive environment. Let's extend to them the trust their actions merit.
I also wouldn't be too quick to judge how the admins think of the DPReview mods. My sense is that they don't feel it's appropriate to criticize those individuals publicly on a personal level. It's one thing to critique actions. It's quite another to target the person. That would set the wrong precedent of encouraging others to do the same, here.
Imagine what this place would be like if a thread calling for that a-hole BillFerris to be banned from the site was considered acceptable. If any member felt empowered to publicly criticize any other member for being a bad person.
If that's not how we want to be publicly treated, here, we should give serious consideration to extending that courtesy toward others. I understand the frustration some folks have over the interactions they've had with DPReview mods. I'm not diminishing those experiences or questioning the pain that resulted.
I am suggesting that we model the environment we're all working together to build, here, by not treating folks on other sites in a manner we wouldn't accept on DPRevived.
OK, I'm off my soapbox :)
@ BillFerris - " I understand the frustration some folks have over the interactions they've had with DPReview mods."
I don't think you truly do understand Bill. Horrendous behaviour needs to be critiqued and pointed out. Sociopathic moderation needs to be red flagged for others to make a decision for themselves.
Leopards cannot change their spots.
We also do not need a 'Mr. Rogers' [it's a beautiful day in the neighbourhood] type forum filled with puffy clouds and sheep and candy and everyone is teeming with niceness.
That whole concept of moderating adults on the concept of 'not being nice' was total rubbish. A dream statement for the Stasi styled moderator who would have free reign to carry out their sociopathic behaviours totally unsuited for intelligent forum members.
I was reading a thread on DPRForum where Dirk was was basically bullying a fellow named Teldoph. They are running their fiefdom over there. I had enough. I asked Dirk to close my account and delete the content. I hope to see Teldoph over here instead.
@BillFerris
Following on from your post...
"Treat everyone with politeness, even those who are rude to you. Not because they are nice, but because you are."
attributed to Roy T Bennett
Thank you very much for saying that. That's exactly the attitude we should be having. Part of the opportunity of a new start is putting old grudges to bed, and we should do that.
OK. Now I will be personal. It's no secret that I had an extremely difficult time with Mako as a moderator, probably harder than many of the people posting here. Whatever, my position on not maintaining old grudges would be the same. So far as I'm concerned if he chooses to be a member here he should be welcomed, and anyone treating him in a manner contrary to the Terms of Service will be treated in just the same as they would if abusing any other member. That applies to any DPReview moderator who chooses to join this site - regardless of who they are. I would have to say, there are people I'd personally have to grit my teeth to say that far more than I would for Mako, but none the less - we operate an inclusive policy. That means that we don't choose to bar people for arbitrary reasons because we don't like them. As soon as we start doing that we are on the road to being a closed cult. Some people would prefer that, but I wouldn't.
However, I really do have to say a bit more about Mako in particular. Getting this thing started would have been a whole load harder if he hadn't acted as an honest broker. He was seemingly one of the few doing that there. There were plenty of moderators being openly partisan, and trying to give their preferred site a boost. The result was chaos with spamming coming from other sites (something we never descended to), moderators deleting posts from sites other than their favourites, not allowing people to answer lies posted about sites and so on. The admins were getting very irritated about the situation (they were all facing the sack in any case, so wouldn't you be predisposed to irritation?) and making some odd decisions and on-the-fly policies. Mako was sticking to neutrality strictly as he saw it, and that included correction of some non-neutral decisions being made. At the same time he had to operate the policy that the admins made - which was sometimes not the best thought through. Frankly, that was what we should have been wanting - we never demanded nor were given favourite's status, all we wanted was a level playing field, and to my mind the person who worked hardest to ensure that was what happened was Mako.
I'll add another note, which may not go down well, but needs to be put out there. Through this period I've been having an extended pm conversation with him - I wouldn't have had a clue what had been going on, and how to navigate the situation without that. The whole site should be grateful for that. I'm not going to reveal any of the details about that conversation, because it is my clear understanding that the conversation only occurred on the basis of a mutual expectation of privacy. However, over that time I've begun to understand much better how he thinks and operates. As I've been developing our facilitation policy, I've been asking his opinions on parts of it. That doesn't mean at all that I want our policy to be framed or to be operated in the same way as was DPReviews - anything but - but as a result I've had genuine and valuable feedback on the thinking behind it, and actually why it ended up the disaster area that it was. I've also begun to understand why some of my wide-eyed ideas about how a policy might work were garbage, and why others were on the mark. What I will say is that all Mako was doing was his utmost to operate the rules as he interpreted them, and the confidence that DPReview had in him should be taken as an indicator that he was interpreting those rules as they intended. I know for a fact that he did not agree with all of the rules, but he saw his role to diligently apply them - and that is what he did.
For what it's worth. Quite a few DPReview moderators have asked (some more like pleaded) to be moderators here. Mako has never done that. However if it were my decision as to who had to undertake the facilitator role here, Mako would be far from the bottom of my list, so long as he felt that he could apply our rules. His MO is to apply the rules, and so long as the management doesn't tell him he's not applying them correctly that's what he'll do. The problem was very poorly drafted rules and lack of management intervention in systematically clarifying things. Our rules should not have the same issues (partly due to feedback from Mako) and the management here is determined that the same mistakes aren't made (we want to make novel mistakes 😀). Moreover, all our rules and policies are being and will be put up for open discussion on the forums before adoption. Any offers of help, from people who can agree to operate those rules, and can demonstrate that they can honestly and diligently apply them, and can accept feedback when they get it wrong (as everyone will sometimes) should be able to be accepted.
Simple rule or guideline is, don't make an entire thread about one particular user unless it is about their photography.
I read that too, that guy Dirk acted like a total bully! I am glad I never open an account there 🤮
Let's clarify the discussion regarding "banning". If someone frequently created ill feeings as a moderator on DPReview, they should not be allowed to automatically continue as a moderator here without thorough reevaluation. At the same time they do not need to be banned from becoming a member here, unless they caused problems as a member there. That's my two penn'orth.
The moderator who banned me from DPReview (without me violating any rules) is now a moderator at DPRForum. Kind of sad since I like the forum software over there far more than this forum software.
Visually yes, it is more "sexy" and looks similar to DPR, but content and community matters more to me... If mako or the other jeremy guy "smeg or "smaug" whatever his name is ended up moderation anything here, I am out.
If only we have an alert 🔔... (Alan?) 🥹🥹🥹
So what you are saying is that he banned you without any reason at all. Apparently there was something what triggered ban. I am a member of the DPReview for 17 years, have over 8,600 posts in about 12 forums, couple of which are moderated by Maco2011. Never been banned. One time moderator (not him) did not like a topic which was discussed and he warned us to stop even topic was legitimate about equivalency in photography.
Hi,
I noticed there is far more going on here than there. And, for me as well, that is what counts. The software will improve over time. I recall when DP Review software was very different in the beginning.
Stan
I suspect it was that I don't like mirrorless cameras. But I don't know. My last posts were really benign and I was never told why.
There is more going on here, for sure, but the tone is better over there (well, in my opinion) and this forum software actually causes me medical issues (I have light sensitivity and this software is occasionally hurting me).
