Shel, I think we're finding the answer to the question you posed when you started this...
"Are you photographers or equipment fondlers? Let's find out ;-)) Kenneth Waller ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: PAW: Too Much PAW > Rob Studdert commented that the PAW postings are becoming > too much, and suggested that we only post PAW pics on > Friday. > > Phtooey! I say. The pics should come as the mood strikes > you, when you have a good one you want to share, or when you > have one you're looking for comments about. And why just > one a week? This is a photography list, pictures, images, > photographs ... call 'em what you will, we communicate > through our photos. > > I've noticed that people who rarely post messages have > presented us with some photos. Perhaps some of those people > find it hard to express themselves for one reason or another > ... this list can be intimidating some times, the > discussions technical in nature and hard to follow, so the > posting of pictures is a great way for some people to > communicate and share their thoughts and feelings with the > list. > > I've also noticed that some of the more tech oriented people > haven't participated in the PAW yet ... after all their talk > about how valuable the technical and high tech side of gear > and peripherals is to making a good photo, I haven't seen > any of those good, high-tech produced pics. C'mon guys, > join the party, show us your stuff. > > Again, I'm not the moderator of the PAW, but my opinion is > to let the photos flow <LOL>. If they are going to be > restricted to being posted only on a specific day of the > week, then I suggest that discussions about digital gear and > technical discussions, and discussions about flash, or film, > and even OT discussions, be limited to but one designated > day per week. > > Anyway, Rob's comment was in response to Raimo's comment > that the list traffic was a bit heavy and that he was going > to unsubscribe for a while. I don't believe Raimo said > anything specific about the PAW being the reason for his > decision ... don't have the message handy so I'm not sure. > But, regardless, this has always been a heavy traffic list, > and over the years many people have dropped off because of > the message count. That's just the way it is. So, let's > not pick on the PAW, especially since it's in its infancy. > It'll develop its own place on the list in time ... and I > bet it will still be overshadowed by tech talk. > > Just my dos centavos ... > > shel
