I have just uploaded... why can't i see it ??
>From: jajo <m.crenshaw gmail.com>
>Reply-To: photoblogsgooglegroups.com
>To: Photoblogs <photoblogsgooglegroups.com>
>Subject: [photoblogs-discuss] Re: Critical remarks about
onexposure.net
>Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:18:03 -0700
>
>
>Hi Paula.
>
>Follow these steps;
>
> * First, register here:
>h
ttp://www.onexposure.net/index.php?action=register
> * Then, login.
> * You will now see that the links on the top of the
page has
>changed. Click on "My pictures" to enter the
section where you can
>upload pictures, view your queue of pictures, view not
published
>pictures, view links to your pictures from external
webpages, view
>latest comments on your pictures and more.
> * To upload, click "Upload pictures".
> * Upload your picture and wait. Screening can take
time depending
>on how many photos that are ahead of you in queue. You
can always view
>status of the pictures in queue from the "Upload
queue".
> * If you picture disappears from the "Upload
queue"-page it has
>been published. A message will be displayed at the top
of "Upload
>queue"-page ONCE after pictures has been published
saying how many
>photos that were added to our site. You will also
receive a
>confirmation on e-mail.
>
>Warm welcome to onexposure, I hope and believe you will
have a great
>time!
>
>/ Jacob
>
>
>
>On Jun 5, 7:05 pm, "Paula Faraco"
<paulafar...hotmail.com> wrote:
> > So Jacob... how can i get in onexposure.net !!
> >
> > Should i send you some of my pictures and you tell
if i can enter this
> > photoglob ??
> >
> > Thanks, Paula.
> >
> > >From: jajo <m.crens...gmail.com>
> > >Reply-To: photoblogsgooglegroups.com
> > >To: Photoblogs <photoblogsgooglegroups.com>
> > >Subject: [photoblogs-discuss] Re: Critical
remarks about onexposure.net
> > >Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 08:19:58 -0700
> >
> > >Hi!
> >
> > >My name is Jacob and I am one of the founders
of onexposure.net. I
> > >just wanted to leave a reply in this thread,
to answer some questions
> > >raised and fill some gaps in the story told
here.
> >
> > >First of all, for those who are unfamiliar
with onexposure.net:
> >
> > >* Onexposure.net is a photo community where
photographers upload their
> > >best work . A group of screeners will look at
every photo uploaded
> > >publish only those who fit for the site.
Photos that don't fit will be
> > >rejected, and there are several ways within
the site to get critique
> > >and help to better understand why. The
selection of photos is based on
> > >evaluating originality, message, mood,
aesthetics and technical
> > >quality.
> > >* Onexposure.net is to be compared with a
photo magazine rather than
> > >flickr, blog or any other site where you can
store your photos. This
> > >is not the place for common photos of pets or
boring vacation shots.
> > >This is a place for special shots.
> > >* Onexposure.net relies on the philosophy of
both giving and taking.
> > >Giving feedback, receiving feedback. Showing
photos, viewing others
> > >photos. The screeners will spend quite a lot
of time looking at photos
> > >uploaded (on average 10 minutes per photo).
Screeners often give
> > >detailed feedback both on published shots, and
photos that didn't make
> > >it all the way. All this is completely free
and we don't make a cent
> > >on running this completely ad-free homepage.
We pay big bills for
> > >internet and server every month. What we
request in return from our
> > >users is the right to show photos uploaded.
> >
> > >About deleting photos:
> >
> > >* If we deleted all photos by a photographer,
many hours of unpaid
> > >work by screeners and other members (giving
critique and commenting
> > >photos) would be gone. This is not very
respectful for the site crew,
> > >or other members. It also goes against our
strive to create a stable
> > >environment, where photos are not disappearing
all of a sudden. In
> > >short - we don't want our users to feel that
it is a waste to spend
> > >time giving feedback. We also want to make the
photos immortal - like
> > >in a photo paper magazine - where photos just
don't disappear for no
> > >reason.
> > >* We delete a photo (or a few photos) if the
photographer has a good
> > >reason for it. We want people to enjoy the
site and feel comfortable
> > >that we will listen to their requests.
> > >* Some photographers wants to have all their
photos published. Once
> > >they have a rejection, they demand that we
change or decision, or they
> > >threat to leave the site and demand all photos
to be deleted. This is
> > >a scenario that goes against the whole purpose
of a site where
> > >everybody is judged equally (even the
screeners themselves!).
> > >* Jens post makes it sound like we are trying
to hide the fact that we
> > >don't delete photos without a good reason.
This is not at all right.
> > >We display information about this on at least
three places: 1) When
> > >you register. 2) In the web forums. 3) When
you upload a photo.
> > >* We have well over 1000 users and more than
500 with one photo or
> > >more published. Most people have no problem at
all with the fact that
> > >we don't delete photos since they enjoy our
site and joined it because
> > >they like what we do and how we do it.
> > >* About the user agreement - ndiginiz is right
that it has changed.
> > >Originally, the agreement said: "By
registering, you agree that your
> > >personal information is stored in our database
and that your uploaded
> > >pictures will be displayed on onexposure.net.
This information will
> > >not be shared with anyone outside of
onexposure.net". This means
> > >exactly the same - but the new user agreement
is clearer on the point
> > >that we don't delete photos. Of course, the
new user agreement only
> > >applies to users who registered after the
change. In our user table,
> > >we save the complete agreement that each user
accepted, to make sure
> > >we can clarify exactly what was accepted for a
certain user.
> >
> > >About changing personal info or canceling
membership:
> >
> > >* Of course we allow users to cancel their
membership if they like. We
> > >will then make sure they are no longer visible
in the list of
> > >photographers, their profiles will clearly
show that they are no
> > >longer a member of the site and comments can
no longer be written on
> > >photos.
> > >* Changing personal info, like the
photographer name, is done by
> > >contacting the site crew and is usually fixed
within one hour.
> >
> > >About "strange moderating actions in the
forum":
> >
> > >* Like every serious forum, we remove posts
being off-topic or of low
> > >value for the majority of the users. Jens
posted some poor-written
> > >nonconstructive critique in a place where it
didn't belong, without
> > >doing the most logic thing - bringing up his
issues with the site crew
> > >first by e-mail. These posts were removed to
keep the quality in the
> > >forum.
> >
> > >Why did Jens get angry then?
> >
> > >* We added a "member screening"
feature to the screening process. It
> > >works like this: 1) Someone uploads a photo.
2) The screeners will
> > >look at it and choose either to publish it
directly, not publish it
> > >(reject it) or send it to other screeners for
their input. 3) If sent
> > >to other screeners and the screeners cannot
decide whether to publish
> > >it or not, it can be added to the "member
screening" where all of our
> > >users with at least 2 photos published can
affect the decision. If the
> > >member votes against publishing, a reason for
this can be selected.
> > >When a photo has received 10 votes for or
against publishing, the
> > >screeners will get the photo back and in 99%
of all cases follow the
> > >outcome. This is a feature that strengthens
the community and makes it
> > >more alive. It is very popular, and makes the
selection of photos much
> > >broader than what the screeners
"like" or "dislike".
> > >* Jens has uploaded 35 photos to
onexposure.net. 34 of them has been
> > >published, because they were very good. One
day, he uploaded a shot
> > >that, in our eyes, was quite poor. It was
rejected, and Jens appealed
> > >our decision. Instead of just rejecting the
appeal, we decided to give
> > >it a second chance by putting it in member
screening. 100% of the
> > >votes was against publishing. We had no other
alternative than to
> > >reject the appeal. Not only did Jens receive
his first rejection, he
> > >was also humiliated by the fact that we gave
the power to our members.
> > >This is, from what I can understand, the
number 1 reason why he chose
> > >to leave the site. We have probably spent 5
hours or more with Jens
> > >photos. He has received lots of comments and
feedback from other
> > >members. All is now to be deleted, just
because we didn't publish the
> > >photo. Is this fair?
> > >* It almost sounds like Jens didn't come to
Onexposure for the give-
> > >and-take experience. He came to be exposed.
When we tried to be fair
> > >against other members and rejected the photo
that didn't meet our
> > >requirements, he no longer had the control
himself and our site was
> > >not interesting anymore. Demanding all the
work of the community on
> > >his photos to be deleted is like spitting on
the community. We respect
> > >that Jens left, but in return we would have
appreciated that the
> > >photos uploaded could still be there - as a
token of appreciation of
> > >what we have done for free. In respect of the
work by the community.
> > >Still, it is free advertisement and the photos
will not be harmed by
> > >being there. People will find them and be
amazed by them, and find his
> > >homepage. (Jens: I will immediately restore
the URL to your homepage
> > >in your deactivated profile on onexposure!).
> >
> > >In the end, all we want is to provide a unique
community with screened
> > >content, with as much influence by the members
as possible. We want to
> > >create a feeling of stability - photos
published will remain published
> > >unless there are good reasons for taking them
down. A drama, like the
> > >one directed by Jens, is not a reason good
enough in our eyes. Any
> > >member uploading to onexposure should think of
it like sending a bunch
> > >of photos to a photo magazine - only the best
will be published, and
> > >they will remain published. In return, our
users will take part in
> > >something that is growing fast with new
exciting features every month
> > >and have lots of fun with other photographers
from all over the world,
> > >sharing experiences in photo comments, forums
and galleries.
> >
> > >My last words: Onexposure is a very unique
community. A give-and-take
> > >community. But like any other homepage, what
decides if it is "good"
> > >or "bad" is what you are looking
for. The good thing with this thread
> > >is that the information about our site will be
even clearer. Those who
> > >share Jens opinion have been warned. The rest
have something quite
> > >spectacular to look forward to. I can only
hope everybody makes up
> > >their mind about onexposure.net themselves
instead of letting this one-
> > >sided story ruin what might be the best page
you ever visited.
> >
> > >Thanks for reading to the end.
> >
> > >/ Jacob
> >
> > >On May 21, 8:54 pm, Jens <j...look-s.de> wrote:
> > > > Hello together. Some of you may already
know this site and I also
>know
> > > > that some have uploaded a few photos
there. I also liked the idea of
> > > > the site, because the pictures only
screened pictures will be
>accepted
> > > > for publication. So I have contributed
with a lot of pictures
>there.
> > > > After some time the owners of this site
established an additional
> > > > membervote instead of the normal
screening which is used if the
> > > > screeners refuse to make a final
decision and this was ecactly one
> > > > thing I did not want when I decided to
upload my pictures there.
> > > > Additionally there were some strange
"moderating" actions in the
>forum
> > > > which I found not ok.
> > > > So I decided to leave Onexposure and
asked the owners several times
>to
> > > > delete my
> >
> > ...
> >
> > read more >>
>
>
>>
____________________________________________________________
_____
Descubra como mandar Torpedos SMS do seu Messenger para o
celular dos seus
amigos. http://mobile.msn.com/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Photoblogs" group.
To post to this group, send email to photoblogsgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
photoblogs-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http:
//groups.google.com/group/photoblogs?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
|
