Jacob the only thing what is really scary remains the fact
that one
has no control of the own work.
There is no explanation which really justifies this
behaviour.
I am not alone with this opinion and s I told you in the
blimage
messageboard this will finally prevent the upload of a high
photographs from different photographers. The control of the
own work
stands above any screening and other work....
I liked the site in the beginning but you changed it in a
way I will
not accept for my images...together with all things which
happened
including the discussions with the site crew I think this
is
enough.....besides this I have no ideas which further
changes will
come in the future ....
What will happen if you remove the photos of mine and others
(in
contrast to the remark on me as one person who wants this
you know
better that I am not alone)? Maybe one or two members will
ask and you
should answer: He just wanted to leave OE with all his
content. Do you
really think this would put damage on your site....more
damage as
insisting on keeping pictures up ??? You really cannot
believe
this...I think this would maybe push OE to the point which
should be
your aim....
On 5 Jun., 20:34, jajo <m.crens... gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 5, 7:43 pm, Jens <j...look-s.de> wrote:
>
> > Ohhh....you found it Jacob....finally.
>
> It was registering that took time, not finding it. You
have already
> told us (in a very threatening e-mail) where to find
the threads along
> your crusade.
>
> > Jacob this simply a lie. I told you more than once
that my remarks on
> > that are concerning another member of OE at that
time and I will not
> > mention his name here but maybe he will find this
thread here by
> > himself.
>
> It is not a lie. We deleted posts from you. If it was
the posts by the
> other member you were referring to, it was really the
same reason
> behind that deletion. We have no interest in deleting
critical remarks
> that are constrictive. We have received lots of them,
and that is the
> main reason why the site is what it is today. Unlike
many other sites,
> critical feedback on onexposure can lead to
improvements within hours
> or days. The other member you are referring to left
because we deleted
> his posts in the forum. The days before he left, I had
seen a very
> negative and sad tone shining through everything he
wrote, on photo
> comments and in the forum. I tried to pep him up with
no result, I
> even discussed future features with him because I
respected his
> knowledge and feedback. In the end, dissatisfied users
are very
> valuable if they provide constrictive ideas on how to
improve things.
> But he even told me OE made him on a bad mood - he had
very strong
> opinions about photo critique which we didn't meet
although we were
> open for his ideas. I guess he just waited for
something to leave the
> site for and he managed to get you to leave with him,
just as I
> suspect you are trying to do with this thread.
>
> > By the way:
>
> > Isntīt it true that Ralph used my name (besides
others) in an
> > interview of a swedish newspaper to promote OE
without asking anyone
> > if he is allowed to do this?
>
> It is true. Ralf was interviewed by a local Swedish
photo magazine and
> we apologize for not asking you in advance. However, I
get the feeling
> you are digging up old corps here.
>
> > Isnīt it true that you displayed my photos at a
domein which is called
> > nowords.nu without asking me to agree?
>
> NOWORDS (also available atwww.nowords.nu) is a part of
ONEXPOSURE.
> The original domain ishttp://www.onexp
osure.net/nowordsand if you
> click the logo (having a very similar design as
ONEXPOSURE logo) or
> the photographer's name you will get back to
Onexposure. This is a
> different GUI to view the finest photos on ONEXPOSURE.
After receiving
> a word from you that you didn't want your photos to be
there, we
> immediately removed them since it is completely
optional - any member
> who does not want a photo selected for this can contact
us anytime to
> have photos removed.
>
> > Isnīt it true that you established that membervote
after my
> > registration and changed therefore the attitude of
the site which
> > should be alone a reason to respect my multiple
wish to withdraw?
>
> Can you explain for me and other readers why the member
vote is a bad
> thing? Sorry - I can't see how a feature that allows a
wider selection
> of photos (that our viewers want to see on the site)
can be a reason
> to withdraw all previous uploads. Sorry, I am lost
here. Please
> explain!
>
> > I think at that time I was one of the 30% who
commented in the forum
> > as well as the pictures displayed. You can dry
again to discredit
> > myself with your WRONG explanation that I left
because of this one
> > photograph but in the end I did nothing here but
telling the
> > truth....I cannot say this about your words.
>
> OK - I am not lying intentionally - I guess we just
perceive things
> differently. I still find very hard to understand why
the member vote
> and the moderation in the forum could end here. Without
one single e-
> mail or indication that this was coming. Very scary.
>
> / Jacob
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
|
