Photos on the forum
Warning: For Full Access Please Log In or Create an Account (Free)
I say let people join a photography forum if they want to post photos. Otherwise this could get way out of hand real quick. Wait, didn't that already happen today?
I can see shoppers posting pics of nasty toilets filled with fecal matter and asking us if we think that is a violation. Or a greasy FF burger with those little hard bits? And who really wants to see a photo of bgriffin? Ouch!
I can see shoppers posting pics of nasty toilets filled with fecal matter and asking us if we think that is a violation. Or a greasy FF burger with those little hard bits? And who really wants to see a photo of bgriffin? Ouch!
I personally don't view tiny photos in a sig line as objectionable. When did this become an issue and why? 
Also, I rarely, if ever, see them outside of the the mouth-watering photos in "General Chat".
(heart)
Also, I rarely, if ever, see them outside of the the mouth-watering photos in "General Chat".
(heart)
I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
stillearning, you are way too late to the party. The whole issue blew up in another thread and we are not talking little pics in a sig line.
And the deleted picture was actually a screen shot of a question and answer from another forum, not a random photo.
Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
@Sybil2: I'm confused, since I read the title of the thread as "Photos on the Forum" and I assumed that was the topic of discussion. Why would we be instead discussing something that transpired on another thread?
(heart)
PS
I was at what you so gaily refer to as "the party", however I left early when the agenda became clear.
(heart)
PS
I was at what you so gaily refer to as "the party", however I left early when the agenda became clear.
I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
This was my doing. Since the thread devolved into a conversation, and I use that word loosely, about pictures or no pictures, I suggested it would be a good topic for Meta.
Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
@bgriffin wrote:
Can they go away?
I know I am late to the party
but wouldn't that be a decision made by the Moderators? I see that some are tasteful, funny and on the money. I guess I don't pay attention to gross out, offensive and filthy ones. Maybe there should be a Shopping Category for photos only, that would not take up reply space. Is the Moderator having a problem with the photos? Sometimes WE pick our own battles.
stillearning, LisaSTL answered your question. And I did not start this thread. I am just participating it in.
@Sybil2 wrote:
I say let people join a photography forum if they want to post photos. Otherwise this could get way out of hand real quick. Wait, didn't that already happen today?
I can see shoppers posting pics of nasty toilets filled with fecal matter and asking us if we think that is a violation. Or a greasy FF burger with those little hard bits? And who really wants to see a photo of bgriffin? Ouch!
It is a good topic for meta. We've had the ability to post photos here for as long as I can remember so I don't see why you think it would "get out of hand real quick." There's only been a handful of times that there have been problems with excessive or disruptive photos. I don't think that's too bad considering the volume of posts. Sometimes a picture is a very helpful tool.
In the other thread, I suspect the OP was attempting to show the comments without a link and the thing blew up bigger than expected. I've done that. I posted a photo I thought would be small and it was huge. It was a pain to go back to the host sight and resize, but I did it as quickly as possible.
How about a compromise? Allow the photos, but limit the size? Can that be done?
Some of the photos have been fun, those food pics in particular. I certainly wouldn't object to a ban on nasty restroom photos or things that could be considered just plain gross. It may have been techman who put up one of those once and I was ready to throttle him because there wasn't much in the way of a warning. Since there don't seem to be any legitimate reasons to include them in the mystery shopping discussions, maybe keep them in General Chat?
Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
@LisaSTL wrote:
I certainly wouldn't object to a ban on nasty restroom photos or things that could be considered just plain gross. It may have been techman who put up one of those once and I was ready to throttle him because there wasn't much in the way of a warning.
In my opinion, this is precisely why major corporations have so many rules; because one time somebody did (fill in the blank). Do you think it is really necessary to institute an "official rule" on the forum to address these far and few between incidents?
(heart)
I intend to live forever. So far, so good.
Apparently none of you have been involved in message boards where taglines became photos of favorite athletes and replies to posts came in the form of internet meme gifs and not actual text replies. It makes it difficult to read at best. When someone makes a bitchy post and the reply comes in the format of a grumpy cat photo. It's just annoying.
When I first joined here in July of 2013 it was probably close to a year before I ever saw a photo posted. Now half a year after that first one they are slowly creeping in. Personally I don't mind them in the general chat area, such as a thread of pretty food photos. I even look at those. But if we allow them to creep into the mystery shopping portion of the board then either we can post any photo we want or someone has to be the photo moderator, and this forum has done quite well with limited moderation.
When I first joined here in July of 2013 it was probably close to a year before I ever saw a photo posted. Now half a year after that first one they are slowly creeping in. Personally I don't mind them in the general chat area, such as a thread of pretty food photos. I even look at those. But if we allow them to creep into the mystery shopping portion of the board then either we can post any photo we want or someone has to be the photo moderator, and this forum has done quite well with limited moderation.
There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind
At the moment only demons come to mind
For pics of beyond dirty, gross toilets? Yup. Once was one time too many. Because of some few and far between incidents of the f bomb we now have a program that is rather extreme in what it censors. What's the diff?
Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It's not pie.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag." -Molly Ivins
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig.
@Sybil2 wrote:
And who really wants to see a photo of bgriffin? Ouch!
You would be surprised at the number of requests I get!
There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind
At the moment only demons come to mind
So it seems I'm outnumbered so far on the anti-photo front. No worries. Perhaps my hatred is unfounded.
There are reasons that a body stays in motion
At the moment only demons come to mind
At the moment only demons come to mind
bgriffin, I don't like the pictures AT ALL. I would prefer to see none for a smoother reading forum. But -- if most everyone else is okay with it, I can accept that.
Mary Davis Nowell. Based close to Fort Worth. Shopping Interstate 20 east and west, Interstate 35 north and south.
I think we're trying to solve a problem that really doesn't exist --yet.
There haven't been many photos so far and apart from the one Bryan posted not rendering correctly on his first two attempts (I didn't see them, but I think the first was too small to read and the second too large?) I haven't been aware of any problems with the few there have been.
I would not want to see frivolous photos, but if they are helpful in explaining something I don't see a problem with them. I would not want people posting funny pictures they found on the internet unless in the General chat area, nor using photos in siggy lines. But now and then on a shopping thread to help explain something? What's wrong with that? We're always free not to look at a thread or a poster (toggle) if we don't want to.
If it gets out of hand we can address it at that time but I don't think it's anywhere near out of hand yet.
There haven't been many photos so far and apart from the one Bryan posted not rendering correctly on his first two attempts (I didn't see them, but I think the first was too small to read and the second too large?) I haven't been aware of any problems with the few there have been.
I would not want to see frivolous photos, but if they are helpful in explaining something I don't see a problem with them. I would not want people posting funny pictures they found on the internet unless in the General chat area, nor using photos in siggy lines. But now and then on a shopping thread to help explain something? What's wrong with that? We're always free not to look at a thread or a poster (toggle) if we don't want to.
If it gets out of hand we can address it at that time but I don't think it's anywhere near out of hand yet.
Time to build a bigger bridge.
@bgriffin wrote:
So it seems I'm outnumbered so far on the anti-photo front. No worries. Perhaps my hatred is unfounded.
bgriffin, I know you were probably exhausted from the day's events yesterday with BillB or whichever one it was so by the time you started this thread, you did not actually explain anything. I understood what had gone down but the latecomers did not. And since the original post of that particular thread has been edited 8 or more times with the image being removed, there is no visual reference anymore.
And no one ever told the OP of that thread to remove the image. Since it was part of an article or another forum thread or something, I suggested adding a link so people who wanted to read the full article/thread without the creative editing of that OP could. The OP threw a temper tantrum, resorted to name calling and eight edits later, removed the image without adding a link.
Since yesterday's original image post was removed, here are examples of the whole image thing getting out of control.
[www.mysteryshopforum.com] (scroll down towards bottom of page)
[www.mysteryshopforum.com] (the first post - image doesn't even fit the screen / scroll down towards bottom of page and BillBryaninCarthage feels it necessary to add more images of the "definition of mystery shopping" and grammar rudeness) - Do we really needs screen shots of an online dictionary?
[www.mysteryshopforum.com] (in the first third of the page, BillBryaninCarthage feels the need to post a screen shot showing his DD for MF. Isn't this some form of breaking the ICA by posting proprietary MF information?)
I believe these recent examples are the reason for the start of this thread topic but I do not claim to be inside bgriffin's head.
[www.mysteryshopforum.com] (scroll down towards bottom of page)
[www.mysteryshopforum.com] (the first post - image doesn't even fit the screen / scroll down towards bottom of page and BillBryaninCarthage feels it necessary to add more images of the "definition of mystery shopping" and grammar rudeness) - Do we really needs screen shots of an online dictionary?
[www.mysteryshopforum.com] (in the first third of the page, BillBryaninCarthage feels the need to post a screen shot showing his DD for MF. Isn't this some form of breaking the ICA by posting proprietary MF information?)
I believe these recent examples are the reason for the start of this thread topic but I do not claim to be inside bgriffin's head.
I don't have a problem with any of those images. The first (Scanman's) is an image of text. I don't see much of a difference between posting a screen shot or retyping the entire thing. Personally, I would like that better than reading yet another long, drawn out post of several paragraphs. I can clearly see that it is a thread from another forum and can differentiate between that and the poster's comments and/or our forum quotes. In other words, it stands out nicely.
The others at least are germane to the conversation. I personally didn't find it interesting so I scrolled on past, but I don't see a problem with illustrating a point.
Now, huge pics of our dogs, funny animated .gifs and other various memes, no.
There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
The others at least are germane to the conversation. I personally didn't find it interesting so I scrolled on past, but I don't see a problem with illustrating a point.
Now, huge pics of our dogs, funny animated .gifs and other various memes, no.
I don't have a problem with Scanman's screenshot either. I can understand if it was a vulgar pic, such as a nasty bathroom one, yet with the Reddit screenshot of a discussion, it was actually quite informative and relevant to this forum. Overall, it may come down to the moderators to use their discretion on what they consider appropriate/inappropriate uses of images posted.
Yes it is open. Anyone can see it, they don't even have to sign up unless they want to post.
Some of us want the ability to hide annoying posts from ourselves, not from other readers.
Some of us want the ability to hide annoying posts from ourselves, not from other readers.
Time to build a bigger bridge.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.