Caedes
Upload Images
Welcome guest
Log In or Register
User Stats
- 0 total users online
- 44 users active today
- 259180 total members
- +show users online
Elephant Graveyard
Discussion Board -> Elephant Graveyard -> Rejected Images
Rejected Images
Comments
Post a Comment - Subscribe to this discussion
a rejected image huh, how interesting. I'd like to know more on why an image would be rejected.
0∈
[?]
~~~~~~~Photographematis de Deus Facturae ~~~~~~~~.
0∈
[?]
"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
Just noted that you have three rejected images in your galleries, Joey.
Did you not receive any notification with respect to these three?
Did you not receive any notification with respect to these three?
0∈
[?]
"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
No Les I did not, could you please tell me what three they are or were?
0∈
[?]
~~~~~~~Photographematis de Deus Facturae ~~~~~~~~.
Also interesting of you to note that I have three rejected images in my gallery when my gallery has been empty for over a week or so. So how do you know that I have three of them If I've already deleted all my uploads off the site?
0∈
[?]
~~~~~~~Photographematis de Deus Facturae ~~~~~~~~.
Images that are rejected are kept in a hidden area so that we have a record of past activities that we might need to remember.
Images are only rejected for specific infractions that are outlines in the Code of Conduct.
Images are only rejected for specific infractions that are outlines in the Code of Conduct.
0∈
[?]
-caedes
Well Caedes I'd like to know what my infractions were an what images they were. Why don't we receive a notification?
0∈
[?]
~~~~~~~Photographematis de Deus Facturae ~~~~~~~~.
We do send notifications when the image is rejected. Since yours are almost a year old it will be difficult to remember the specific reason in these cases.
0∈
[?]
-caedes
Well I've never received one. How bizarre and I suppose atypical. Seems like Les knows which ones they were? I'm a little perturbed in that it's like being charged with a felony and never knowing you committed a "crime/infraction" Hidden and record, sounds like the IRS. :P
0∈
[?]
~~~~~~~Photographematis de Deus Facturae ~~~~~~~~.
Straight up, here, Joey ...
Your appearance on the other discussion thread, that had it's roots in the issue of 'rips' ... and specifically, your anecdotal comments and I quote you here;
"I've seen photographers take small images off sports illustrated on the Internet and turn them into fine 16x20 prints. Good size eh?"
Specious, at best, citing anecdotal evidence ... and seemingly, the 'good size eh' part ... sarcastic, to my eyes and mind.
(The "D.igital V.isual I.nterface" facet you brought to the discussion, has nothing to do with the printing of images. It has everything to do with how graphics/images are displayed on your monitor. That's it.)
At worse, it appeared to me (having taken note that you did indeed delete your gallery at the time of my writing of my reply to that specific post of yours) ... troll-like behaviour.
A former member, comes back ... finds a highly flammable subject matter ... and weighs in non-productively. (Really can't recall you being all that active on the forums, prior to these two discussions.)
You even resurrected (to a degree), this thread here.
I check ... sure enough, three rejected images in your galleries.
And given that you have never been one to silence your own voice (not being facetious, nor sarcastic here ... nor, attacking you with this comment ... in fact, I admire that personality trait that I perceive in you) ... to state that you just quietly aquiesced on the matter of having an image rejected (let alone, three) ... didn't/doesn't add up. Simply put.
And now? After a year?
You start in on questioning as to the 'why'?
"So how do you know that I have three of them If I've already deleted all my uploads off the site?"
(*shakes head ...*)
So ...
I was perturbed at what appeared to be a couple of 'selfish' postings by you (read; 'troll-like') that did not add any value to the discussions in question.
You wished to delete your galleries?
You were able to do so.
They were not absconded by, nor did they become 'the property of the oligarchical state' that you offhandedly claim to exist here.
The liability that comes hand-in-hand with what is being displayed on this site, rests with the owner. Not ... you. And indeed measures have to be in place and enforced to afford the owner some protection.
Ergo, the "Caedes Code of Conduct" in place and enforced as best 'we' can.
Your appearance on the other discussion thread, that had it's roots in the issue of 'rips' ... and specifically, your anecdotal comments and I quote you here;
"I've seen photographers take small images off sports illustrated on the Internet and turn them into fine 16x20 prints. Good size eh?"
Specious, at best, citing anecdotal evidence ... and seemingly, the 'good size eh' part ... sarcastic, to my eyes and mind.
(The "D.igital V.isual I.nterface" facet you brought to the discussion, has nothing to do with the printing of images. It has everything to do with how graphics/images are displayed on your monitor. That's it.)
At worse, it appeared to me (having taken note that you did indeed delete your gallery at the time of my writing of my reply to that specific post of yours) ... troll-like behaviour.
A former member, comes back ... finds a highly flammable subject matter ... and weighs in non-productively. (Really can't recall you being all that active on the forums, prior to these two discussions.)
You even resurrected (to a degree), this thread here.
I check ... sure enough, three rejected images in your galleries.
And given that you have never been one to silence your own voice (not being facetious, nor sarcastic here ... nor, attacking you with this comment ... in fact, I admire that personality trait that I perceive in you) ... to state that you just quietly aquiesced on the matter of having an image rejected (let alone, three) ... didn't/doesn't add up. Simply put.
And now? After a year?
You start in on questioning as to the 'why'?
"So how do you know that I have three of them If I've already deleted all my uploads off the site?"
(*shakes head ...*)
So ...
I was perturbed at what appeared to be a couple of 'selfish' postings by you (read; 'troll-like') that did not add any value to the discussions in question.
You wished to delete your galleries?
You were able to do so.
They were not absconded by, nor did they become 'the property of the oligarchical state' that you offhandedly claim to exist here.
The liability that comes hand-in-hand with what is being displayed on this site, rests with the owner. Not ... you. And indeed measures have to be in place and enforced to afford the owner some protection.
Ergo, the "Caedes Code of Conduct" in place and enforced as best 'we' can.
0∈
[?]
"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
I just checked my messages and Joey PM'd me about the names of the rejected images that still reside in the galleries viewable by the image mods.
If this is a case of my having jumped the gun and slipping into 'full-cranky pants mode' ... as I would really, really ... really like to believe that Joey is being earnest here (hey, I liked the humour you brought to the site, on the wish front? ... yes, of course, I wish you would have disseminated some of your photographic knowledge in your comments ... but, the site is set up for members to find their place and enjoy it as they see fit) and not, as I first perceived ... 'the former member returns disgruntled and is now bent on having some fun' ... my apologies, Joey.
Maybe it's time for walkabout again, pour moi.
(*shakes head at hisownself ...*)
If this is a case of my having jumped the gun and slipping into 'full-cranky pants mode' ... as I would really, really ... really like to believe that Joey is being earnest here (hey, I liked the humour you brought to the site, on the wish front? ... yes, of course, I wish you would have disseminated some of your photographic knowledge in your comments ... but, the site is set up for members to find their place and enjoy it as they see fit) and not, as I first perceived ... 'the former member returns disgruntled and is now bent on having some fun' ... my apologies, Joey.
Maybe it's time for walkabout again, pour moi.
(*shakes head at hisownself ...*)
0∈
[?]
"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
Just wanted to know the specific reason the image(s) were rejected Les, like what part of the code was specifically violated that would cause a liability. Also, what rank rejects images? Praetor , Aediles , Consul etc... ?
0∈
[?]
~~~~~~~Photographematis de Deus Facturae ~~~~~~~~. IF I VOTE ON YOUR IMAGE YOU WILL RECEIVE A 10/10. Why? Because every capture of life around us or artificial generation of color and lines is unique and special.
The liability stuff was mentioned, to round out and flesh out things some more, Joey. (Ie. pornographic imagery as the most obvious example.)
Not mentioned specifically in reference to your images that were rejected.
"Also, what rank rejects images? Praetor , Aediles , Consul etc... ?"
Answer:
"The Caedes.net Senate
The Caedes.net Senate is the governing body of the caedes.net society. It is made up of a hierarchy of smaller assemblies. The lowest senatorial rank, Aediles, is charged with the maintenance of order in the society and the preservation of its values. The Praetor assembly is primarily in charge of the artistic and cultural development of the society and in the maintenance of its art galleries. The Consuls are responsible for the creation and enforcement of Law (see the Code of Conduct). All are overseen by the Praetor Maximus."
It is indeed a team effort all around 'on this side of the fence', if you will ... regardless of whichever and whatever function.
Not mentioned specifically in reference to your images that were rejected.
"Also, what rank rejects images? Praetor , Aediles , Consul etc... ?"
Answer:
"The Caedes.net Senate
The Caedes.net Senate is the governing body of the caedes.net society. It is made up of a hierarchy of smaller assemblies. The lowest senatorial rank, Aediles, is charged with the maintenance of order in the society and the preservation of its values. The Praetor assembly is primarily in charge of the artistic and cultural development of the society and in the maintenance of its art galleries. The Consuls are responsible for the creation and enforcement of Law (see the Code of Conduct). All are overseen by the Praetor Maximus."
It is indeed a team effort all around 'on this side of the fence', if you will ... regardless of whichever and whatever function.
0∈
[?]
"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
Exactly "Not mentioned specifically in reference to your images that were rejected". Why can't someone get a straight answer?I get enough flesh at work, anyhow just wanted to know the specs, of course there are obvious manifestations of liability such as cleavage, but how does a picture of colorful trees or a flower pose a liability? How absurd, lets drop it at that. Wouldn't it be neat if we could elect senators? Like especially those who donate to the site? Maybe that could be an additional membership perk...Eh... nevermind. Thanks for identifying this "fence"/ walls on that side of the fence. Thanks Les :)
0∈
[?]
~~~~~~~Photographematis de Deus Facturae ~~~~~~~~. IF I VOTE ON YOUR IMAGE YOU WILL RECEIVE A 10/10. Why? Because every capture of life around us or artificial generation of color and lines is unique and special.
Well ... how many answers do you want Joey?
Caedes' reply above:
"We do send notifications when the image is rejected. Since yours are almost a year old it will be difficult to remember the specific reason in these cases."
My general answers above.
Now, how about you answer the questions posed to you?
Why now?
Why a year later?
You even resurrected (to a degree), this thread here. Why?
"I've seen photographers take small images off sports illustrated on the Internet and turn them into fine 16x20 prints. Good size eh?"
Example, please?
D.V.I. ... how does this relate to printing?
Given your proclivities for stirring the proverbial pots ... I find it difficult to believe that you remained silent for a year ... and now that that information is somewhat difficult to retrieve, you take a stand now?
"How absurd, lets drop it at that."
Right. Few more words came after that statement, didn't they Joey?
(*taps mic ...*)
Still on, be my guest ...
Caedes' reply above:
"We do send notifications when the image is rejected. Since yours are almost a year old it will be difficult to remember the specific reason in these cases."
My general answers above.
Now, how about you answer the questions posed to you?
Why now?
Why a year later?
You even resurrected (to a degree), this thread here. Why?
"I've seen photographers take small images off sports illustrated on the Internet and turn them into fine 16x20 prints. Good size eh?"
Example, please?
D.V.I. ... how does this relate to printing?
Given your proclivities for stirring the proverbial pots ... I find it difficult to believe that you remained silent for a year ... and now that that information is somewhat difficult to retrieve, you take a stand now?
"How absurd, lets drop it at that."
Right. Few more words came after that statement, didn't they Joey?
(*taps mic ...*)
Still on, be my guest ...
0∈
[?]
"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
From your new sig:
"IF I VOTE ON YOUR IMAGE YOU WILL RECEIVE A 10/10"
/\ A petulant and insolent response.
/\ Last word from me.
"IF I VOTE ON YOUR IMAGE YOU WILL RECEIVE A 10/10"
/\ A petulant and insolent response.
/\ Last word from me.
0∈
[?]
"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
+purmusic (Praetor)
Why now?
Why a year later?
[chuckles inside]...Because you mentioned it Les... until you decided to show your snootiness it was just a simple question.
"You even resurrected (to a degree), this thread here. Why?"
Because I simply wanted to know why, is it wrong to ask why? Do you have a problem in someone resurrecting? A word that you seem to fancy as if a thread was a corpse and I a shaman? :D The logorrhoea you transcribe on this site to dance around questions and flatter yourself is simply psychopathologic in nature. Thank you for your superfluous comment of my new Sig. I thought you'd like that.
/\ Last word from me.
Why now?
Why a year later?
[chuckles inside]...Because you mentioned it Les... until you decided to show your snootiness it was just a simple question.
"You even resurrected (to a degree), this thread here. Why?"
Because I simply wanted to know why, is it wrong to ask why? Do you have a problem in someone resurrecting? A word that you seem to fancy as if a thread was a corpse and I a shaman? :D The logorrhoea you transcribe on this site to dance around questions and flatter yourself is simply psychopathologic in nature. Thank you for your superfluous comment of my new Sig. I thought you'd like that.
/\ Last word from me.
0∈
[?]
~~~~~~~Photographematis de Deus Facturae ~~~~~~~~. IF I VOTE ON YOUR IMAGE YOU WILL RECEIVE A 10/10. Why? Because every capture of life around us or artificial generation of color and lines is unique and special.
This is frustrating.