"Shooting in public toilet" thread missing?

[Socke]

What happened to "shooting in public toilet" thread? I can't find it and search function neither (and search says that I haven't posted to that thread even if I posted a picture to it).

Someone got upset and thread got deleted? If this is the case, I would be interested to know why so?

yep, exactly when I'd written my reponse

Don't know what was so bad about it at that moment.

 

[ywenz]

So wait are you guys all saying that a thread with the suggestion of "What is the best way to sneak a picture of unsuspecting urinal users in a public bathroom?" is a good and productive discussion on RFF? If so, then that is where I disagree. Before anyone says otherwise, yes, that WAS what Jon said in his post. Not in his 1st post, but a subsequent post in that thread.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

No, it wasn't. It was an honest question by a longtime member.

But, please. Let's have some more bag posts and get back to normal.

That's too "elitist", some have complained. Let's have some more "I hate the word 'bokeh' posts", that's more normal...

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

So wait are you guys all saying that a thread with the suggestion of "What is the best way to sneak a picture of unsuspecting urinal users in a public bathroom?" is a good and productive discussion on RFF? If so, then that is where I disagree. Before anyone says otherwise, yes, that was basically what Jon said in his post.

No. You are saying that. You should re-read what others are saying, and not do the "saying" for them.

The point is: a cigar sometimes is just a cigar. Better to do direct asking first, and not draw conclusions. One-sidedness usually makes empires crumble.

 

[Socke]

I deleted it.

sicko photography threads don't have a place on this forum.

if toilet photographers want to wax over their work

they will have to do it elsewhere.

the last thing I want to see in a public toilet is some idiot taking pics

Stephen Gandy

Steven, we once made a documentary about public toilets in Bremen, TV, print and web.

Some where with people whom we asked, others where staged but most without people in it.

IMHO it's a valid question how this can be done.

 

[Taqi]

If he felt that deleting that thread was apropriate then so be it ... it's his forum after all. What worried me was the rethoric in his justification for that action on this thread.

Sounded like a one man lynch mob to me!

Indeed, and it could also be construed as being grossly defamatory. For that reason It would probably be wise to delete this thread also - Mods?

 

[ywenz]

Steven, we once made a documentary about public toilets in Bremen, TV, print and web.

Some where with people whom we asked, others where staged but most without people in it.

IMHO it's a valid question how this can be done.

Staging a public bathroom, or empty public bathroom I'm sure everyone is cool with. Unfortunately he also mentioned the idea of camping out at a bus stop restroom where all the people will be so eager to use the urinals that no one will notice him taking pictures of them.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Wait a minute. This isn't censorship. Censorship is when a government tells you that you can't publish something, and threatens to punish you if you do.

Wow.

A Public Service. The More You Know:

Definition of Censorship

Censoring

 

[back alley]

i find it interesting that while some of you are so very upset with the idea of being censored, with the idea that the owner of this site could do such a horrible thing that you think it's ok to mock the site and some of the members of it.

let's have another bag thread...no, let's talk about bokeh...

how are you any better in your ethics and moral convictions?

gee, i'm upset so i think i'll make fun of other people...and that's ok?

joe

 

[Taqi]

Joe - Seriously - censorship & the original question about toilets aside, I don't think this is a thread that should remain up in the public domain, because of the content of some of the comments and the inferences that may be drawn.

 

[Nick R.]

How can you compare a snide comment about bag threads with calling someone a pervert?

 

[back alley]

Joe - Seriously - censorship & the original question about toilets aside, I don't think this is a thread that should remain up in the public domain, because of the content of some of the comments and the inferences that may be drawn.

right now, i'd say that's stephen's call.
i will continue to monitor and take appropriate action if needed.

joe

 

[back alley]

How can you compare a snide comment about bag threads with calling someone a pervert?

it's a matter of degree, don't you think?

joe

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Joe: please point me to where I've posted any mocking of this site.

Perhaps you've confused a reference to people's inability to deal with something different with "mocking of the site".

I also find it interesting that you're focusing on that.

 

[Socke]

Staging a public bathroom, or empty public bathroom I'm sure everyone is cool with. Unfortunately he also mentioned the idea of camping out at a bus stop restroom where all the people will be so eager to use the urinals that no one will notice him taking pictures of them.

So what's wrong with telling the OP that this is not what you would do or want to be done?

Personaly I see a documentary project first, then I see problems in what I would publish or not. Like most of the material from the, very dirty, toilet in our redlight district or the one where the bums pitch camp.

The peoples dignity has to be respected, but in case of the junkies we featured the shot in local TV.

 

[Ash]

Joe you're dangerously close to becoming emotionally involved in this thread. Moreso than maybe you are already.

I think the problem is that the thread was removed as if it never existed. Without any warning, and with a quite volatile response from Stephen in this thread. That's what I think a bunch of us are angry about.

I also think that too many people are reading words and iterating them as something else.

Also, the matter of degree thing. You gotta poke fun at yourself. I got ginger hair, seriously. Bag threads, we're laughing at OURSELVES not at others. That's a different game to personally attacking a member.

 

[Socke]

Joe - Seriously - censorship & the original question about toilets aside, I don't think this is a thread that should remain up in the public domain, because of the content of some of the comments and the inferences that may be drawn.

Yep, fully agree.

 

[back alley]

Let's have some more "I hate the word 'bokeh' posts", that's more normal...

seems mocking to me.

i focused on the reaction by some to the action of stephen. when the owner of the site gets involved in the moderation of the site i generally back off, did the same when jorge was owner.

i added my 2 cents when i felt like i was being drawn into it by comments made. i feel very protective of this place and don't like when people make fun of it or fun of me bcause i'm a gearhead.

joe

 

[robg]

I'm new here. I don't like to see this sort of action.

Having worked in the publishing industry for some time, I feel the separation of ownership from editorial (moderation) should be sacrosanct. Smoke and mirrors, maybe, as the owner 'employs' the moderators, but it should be an invioable principle.

Some people have declared the owner has a 'right' to do this. I've never seen anyone state otherwise. Choosing when and how to exercise that right makes the difference between an pleasant forum and an imflammable one.

The legality argument falls flat on me. Generally, performing acts such as this expose the owners to more legal problems than they may have solved. It indicates the owner has editorial control and is therefore responsible for all content. If someone elses posts similar but worse photos and the owner does not act, it can be seen as some sort of tacit allowance. Touch none of it, and they're more likely to be safe from harm.

 

[rxmd]

I would have a lot less problems with this if Stephen would close threads instead of deleting them, attaching a notice that it is closed and why.

And if he does delete threads, it would again bother me a lot less if these deletions were announced somewhere, along with the reasons for deleting. If nothing else, these announcements would serve as a public notice what kinds of threads Stephen tolerates and what he doesn't tolerate. If, like here, threads are just deleted without notice, and people have to ask where the thread went and are taken by surprise and start censorship discussions, I think something is going wrong.

I guess I'm with Ash in saying that this kind of deletion practice is losing Stephen a lot of respect in my eyes. IMHO at least he should be a bit more upfront about when he's deleting something and why. Of course, Stephen can see fit to do as he chooses, and then again I can see fit to be bothered by this and voice my opinion.