Anyone else noticed: Engaging properly in debate is hard for some without false lazy stereotyping?

This post has been filtered based on your content filter settings because it is NSFW. View reply

Σ OI Σ said

CalmNudes said

Σ OI Σ said

  how about getting back to a meritocracy? 

someone's PP page was pointed out for not being diverse enough, well what if a photographer chose to only work with the top 1% of PP models?

What people shoot on PP isn't trying to reflect society. But why should there be an upper age limit, or dress size limit for being included in the "top" models. 

I was thinking more in terms of references and portfolio quality.

age limit and dress size are irrelevant to me.

Not sure how one defines portfolio quality but if we mean models who get most bookings/references, who have the most followers etc then ....

* Would the top models on PP include any males ? 

* The Median age in Britain at the 2021 census was 40. Few models are over 40. And more are 20-something than 30-something. 

* The search I just did says the average dress size in the UK is 16, but how many models are even a size 10 ? 

If you look at the demographics of photographers, who they want to photograph none of these things is very surprising. Complaints of a lack of diversity meant ethnic diversity, rather than a failure to include diverse ages, physiques etc. 

just using PP, a search for models with only the following criteria, everything else, age, gender and race left open.

• 250 references minimum
• minimum 2 years experience
• within a 150 mile radius of me  (that is the absolute limit for me due to travel costs and time constraints)
• Must have been active on the site within 7 days. (again, could be extended a little further)

That produced a list with only one male model. (granted, some may have not come up who have blocked me or I, them)

Also there are other, more personal criteria that come into play that reduce the list further from a result of 91.

This won't be the first time I have used this criteria and yet again I find myself in absolute awe of 

https://purpleport.com/portfolio/artemis/

Meets all the criteria and then some!  1717 references and a clean sheet (that is what I call it when there are 0 negative references and 0 did not show up.)

Her images are all of an excellent quality, the profile notes are impressive, informative and easy to read, image folders are well organised.

Artemis's portfolio has to be the Gold Standard.

Edited by Σ OI Σ

Edited by Σ OI Σ

.

Edited by Σ OI Σ

Gothic Image said

RHM.Photo said

I found the irony overwhelming :)

Me too - on all sides.  There's an awful lot of kettles and pots in these discussions! :-)

I thought very similarly.

I absolutely adore irony.

Some of the contributors to this thread are the worst offenders, who will use insult, derrogation and generalisations at the drop of a hat.

I personally think that the discussion pages would be much better, and livlier if other members of the site felt they could contribute without being bullied by the vocal unpleasant few on here.

It's like they used to say of the old News Of The World:  "All Human Life is Here."

Read with a satirical eye - and enjoy. :-P

JJsPix said

Gothic Image said

RHM.Photo said

I found the irony overwhelming :)

Me too - on all sides.  There's an awful lot of kettles and pots in these discussions! :-)

I thought very similarly.

I absolutely adore irony.

Some of the contributors to this thread are the worst offenders, who will use insult, derogation and generalisations at the drop of a hat.

I personally think that the discussion pages would be much better, and livelier if other members of the site felt they could contribute without being bullied by the vocal unpleasant few on here.

Equally - we could magically return to a not that distant time (online), whereby decent lively debate actually existed??

Where folk could play devil's advocate, should they feel in the mood to, (but without being shot down).

Then, those who are more open, heart on their sleeve vocal, or simply less 'language and opinion filtered' / bothered by what everyone else might think ... might return and enrich things??

Many will be somewhat Asperger's and direct sometimes  😏😇 ... please don't rush to label them 'nasty' or worse 🙏

It is very tiring, constantly 'masking' in real life every day. Online fora can be a space to escape a bit.

YES - there were those handful of 'constant trolls' that would tip this balance and spoil it for all the rest of us that love lovely debate :(

What we have now though, is a super sanitised space on the fora.

There aren't even more than a handful of folk left that are forthright and open minded / confident enough to engage in multiple and varied  topics of debate, WITHOUT instantly becoming partisan (and also being 'defenders' or White Knighting ... often mistakenly coming to the online 'rescue' of someone who hasn't actually taken offence / to whom the argument wasn't angled towards personally).

In life - it can cause more long-term damage, should you always 'be there' to catch someone when they trip or fall.

Online (and especially on 'X' and other social media) there has been a sustained change over time, whereby (especially younger) people feel more confident to come out with some views (often ignorant and without historical education and understanding of) - knowing that they will have a bunch of 'defenders' to chip in when needed.

Personally I find this more sickening and saddening, than the old forum 'piling in' ... that is rare now (largely due to Russ' sensible moderation approach).

This partisan behaviours / utter polarisation of everything = both tedious and damaging to the education and mental health of younger generations.

Instead everyone should be keen to explore the 'grey in between' that still unites us, instead of putting people into the same boxes all of the time (tidier, neater, faster & way more lazy).

YES - it takes a strength of character to be able to debate confidently and without need of support, favour or rescue from others. Equally ... you expect to have to put your big pants on to start with / sling on some armour when needed. You don't thereafter take your armour off and run away, if you see that the 'tide' has turned re: the balance of views online, at that particular online forum 'moment in time'.

Edited by Aardvark🎯VonEssfolk

Aardvark🎯VonEssfolk said

JJsPix said

Gothic Image said

RHM.Photo said

I found the irony overwhelming :)

Me too - on all sides.  There's an awful lot of kettles and pots in these discussions! :-)

I thought very similarly.

I absolutely adore irony.

Some of the contributors to this thread are the worst offenders, who will use insult, derogation and generalisations at the drop of a hat.

I personally think that the discussion pages would be much better, and livelier if other members of the site felt they could contribute without being bullied by the vocal unpleasant few on here.

Equally - we could magically return to a not that distant time (online), whereby decent lively debate actually existed??

Where folk could play devil's advocate, should they feel in the mood to, (but without being shot down).

Then, those who are more open, heart on their sleeve vocal, or simply less 'language and opinion filtered' / bothered by what everyone else might think ... might return and enrich things??

Many will be somewhat Asperger's and direct sometimes  😏😇 ... please don't rush to label them 'nasty' or worse 🙏

It is very tiring, constantly 'masking' in real life every day. Online fora can be a space to escape a bit.

YES - there were those handful of 'constant trolls' that would tip this balance and spoil it for all the rest of us that love lovely debate :(

What we have now though, is a super sanitised space on the fora.

There aren't even more than a handful of folk left that are forthright and open minded / confident enough to engage in multiple and varied  topics of debate, WITHOUT instantly becoming partisan (and also being 'defenders' or White Knighting ... often mistakenly coming to the online 'rescue' of someone who hasn't actually taken offence / to whom the argument wasn't angled towards personally).

In life - it can cause more long-term damage, should you always 'be there' to catch someone when they trip or fall.

Online (and especially on 'X' and other social media) there has been a sustained change over time, whereby (especially younger) people feel more confident to come out with some views (often ignorant and without historical education and understanding of) - knowing that they will have a bunch of 'defenders' to chip in when needed.

Personally I find this more sickening and saddening, than the old forum 'piling in' ... that is rare now (largely due to Russ' sensible moderation approach).

This partisan behaviours / utter polarisation of everything = both tedious and damaging to the education and mental health of younger generations.

Instead everyone should be keen to explore the 'grey in between' that still unites us, instead of putting people into the same boxes all of the time (tidier, neater, faster & way more lazy).

YES - it takes a strength of character to be able to debate confidently and without need of support, favour or rescue from others. Equally ... you expect to have to put your big pants on to start with / sling on some armour when needed. You don't thereafter take your armour off and run away, if you see that the 'tide' has turned re: the balance of views online, at that particular online forum 'moment in time'.

Edited by Aardvark🎯VonEssfolk

Well now, I think I would have to say that I'm not sure I can agree with much of what you say.

I've been on the site for just over ten years, and I would assert that lively decent debate is a rarity in all of that time.

If your response is to attempt to justify the almost immediate insult and derrogation that occurs when someone dares to offer an alternative view, then no. I don't agree with you at all.

Indeed, to dare to disagree with some on here is seen as an invitation to be called a troll. And as for having the temerity to put forward an alternative interpretation of a situation; one might as well ask to have a flurry of abuse thrown at one.

I don't particularly bother with the discussion pages on here any more. Basically because I've discovered chess.com. And I personally feel the level of submissions by the vocal few are hardly worth spending time reading.

There are notable exceptions, and there are a number on here whose contributions I will seek out. But generally speaking I only really contribute when I see a thread that makes me smile. And the title of this one made me laugh out loud. As I have already said, I simply adore irony. I also try to keep the red text off my profile health page.

Probably the best debater/contribuor to these threads in the past was mph but he earned himself a lifetime ban for daring to get under the owner's skin. Stolenfaces always livened the place up too, but his is a similar story to Paul's.

But these days, it seems that in addition to the insult and derrogation that occurs, you have the conributors who will dish up outright lies in order to try to "win" an argument. And there is the crux of the matter; many on here don't want a debate, they want an argument.

I don't even think it's a matter of confidence that is needed to join in with these pages. I was personally a football referee for just over 40 years; there is nothing that I haven't been called or insulted over. So whatever is said to me on here is water off a duck's back. But why should anyone have to put up with the inevitable insult that is thrown their way if they should venture to suggest an alternative to a contibutor on here?

I'll iterate; I personally think that the discussion pages would be much better, and livelier if other members of the site felt they could contribute without being bullied by the vocal unpleasant few on here.

JJsPix said

Aardvark🎯VonEssfolk said

JJsPix said

Gothic Image said

RHM.Photo said

I found the irony overwhelming :)

Me too - on all sides.  There's an awful lot of kettles and pots in these discussions! :-)

I thought very similarly.

I absolutely adore irony.

Some of the contributors to this thread are the worst offenders, who will use insult, derogation and generalisations at the drop of a hat.

I personally think that the discussion pages would be much better, and livelier if other members of the site felt they could contribute without being bullied by the vocal unpleasant few on here.

Equally - we could magically return to a not that distant time (online), whereby decent lively debate actually existed??

Where folk could play devil's advocate, should they feel in the mood to, (but without being shot down).

Then, those who are more open, heart on their sleeve vocal, or simply less 'language and opinion filtered' / bothered by what everyone else might think ... might return and enrich things??

Many will be somewhat Asperger's and direct sometimes  😏😇 ... please don't rush to label them 'nasty' or worse 🙏

It is very tiring, constantly 'masking' in real life every day. Online fora can be a space to escape a bit.

YES - there were those handful of 'constant trolls' that would tip this balance and spoil it for all the rest of us that love lovely debate :(

What we have now though, is a super sanitised space on the fora.

There aren't even more than a handful of folk left that are forthright and open minded / confident enough to engage in multiple and varied  topics of debate, WITHOUT instantly becoming partisan (and also being 'defenders' or White Knighting ... often mistakenly coming to the online 'rescue' of someone who hasn't actually taken offence / to whom the argument wasn't angled towards personally).

In life - it can cause more long-term damage, should you always 'be there' to catch someone when they trip or fall.

Online (and especially on 'X' and other social media) there has been a sustained change over time, whereby (especially younger) people feel more confident to come out with some views (often ignorant and without historical education and understanding of) - knowing that they will have a bunch of 'defenders' to chip in when needed.

Personally I find this more sickening and saddening, than the old forum 'piling in' ... that is rare now (largely due to Russ' sensible moderation approach).

This partisan behaviours / utter polarisation of everything = both tedious and damaging to the education and mental health of younger generations.

Instead everyone should be keen to explore the 'grey in between' that still unites us, instead of putting people into the same boxes all of the time (tidier, neater, faster & way more lazy).

YES - it takes a strength of character to be able to debate confidently and without need of support, favour or rescue from others. Equally ... you expect to have to put your big pants on to start with / sling on some armour when needed. You don't thereafter take your armour off and run away, if you see that the 'tide' has turned re: the balance of views online, at that particular online forum 'moment in time'.

Edited by Aardvark🎯VonEssfolk

Well now, I think I would have to say that I'm not sure I can agree with much of what you say.

I've been on the site for just over ten years, and I would assert that lively decent debate is a rarity in all of that time.

If your response is to attempt to justify the almost immediate insult and derrogation that occurs when someone dares to offer an alternative view, then no. I don't agree with you at all.

Indeed, to dare to disagree with some on here is seen as an invitation to be called a troll. And as for having the temerity to put forward an alternative interpretation of a situation; one might as well ask to have a flurry of abuse thrown at one.

I don't particularly bother with the discussion pages on here any more. Basically because I've discovered chess.com. And I personally feel the level of submissions by the vocal few are hardly worth spending time reading.

There are notable exceptions, and there are a number on here whose contributions I will seek out. But generally speaking I only really contribute when I see a thread that makes me smile. And the title of this one made me laugh out loud. As I have already said, I simply adore irony. I also try to keep the red text off my profile health page.

Probably the best debater/contribuor to these threads in the past was mph but he earned himself a lifetime ban for daring to get under the owner's skin. Stolenfaces always livened the place up too, but his is a similar story to Paul's.

But these days, it seems that in addition to the insult and derrogation that occurs, you have the conributors who will dish up outright lies in order to try to "win" an argument. And there is the crux of the matter; many on here don't want a debate, they want an argument.

I don't even think it's a matter of confidence that is needed to join in with these pages. I was personally a football referee for just over 40 years; there is nothing that I haven't been called or insulted over. So whatever is said to me on here is water off a duck's back. But why should anyone have to put up with the inevitable insult that is thrown their way if they should venture to suggest an alternative to a contibutor on here?

I'll iterate; I personally think that the discussion pages would be much better, and livelier if other members of the site felt they could contribute without being bullied by the vocal unpleasant few on here.

Oddly enough I think the two of you are furiously agreeing….at least in part.  I certainly don’t engage in the forums as much as once did.  Not because I feel ‘bullied’ ( a severely overused word in a vast variety of contexts in todays world in IMHO) but because many responses to calmly argued positions - mine and others - are subject to expletive-laden, name-calling ad hominem attacks if they don’t reflect the de rigeur stances of the main players on here including the owner.

I don’t think I ever agreed with Stolenfaces but am sorry he has gone. mph however was and is a thoughtful, witty, educated and erudite individual who didn’t deserve the owners petty vindictiveness.  Debate and discourse on here is the lesser for their absence.  The same goes for VanBrighaus.  Opininated, stuck in one groove, but again educated, knowledgeable and erudite if you got him off his usual track.

Debate, genuine open-minded debate, is good for the soul.  But you won’t find it here.