Chris wrote:
> On Sun, 6 May 2001, Lasse Karlsson wrote:
> > ( I F we decide on any form of "release" from the PUG participants:)
> > To me this seems like an unnecessary round of messages and extra work
> > for you as well as for the submitter. Why not do it like this (it
> > would be simple and it wouldn't really cost anyone any extra work)?:
> > Each time we submit a photo for the PUG we can add whatever comments
> > we like around the picture, the shooting situation or whatever. Now,
> > if comments on the list are welcome, we just add something like
> > "Comments on the PDML are welcome." This wouldn't really cause anyone
> > any extra work, and the possible commentator can simply check for the
> > above phrase. (Or have I missed something?)
>
> Someone would still have to go through each PUG entry then and make a note
> of which photos wanted comments. Also, there would still be people who
> forget to put the line in the submissions info and would e-mail me
> separately, which would mean *two* places to look. If I implemented this
> idea and then *didn't* go through the 80+ images each month to see who
> wanted comments, the idea wouldn't work, I don't think. If I divided the
> photos up randomly, some commentators could get six or seven people who
> want comments, while other could get none. So I'd have to go through each
> entry each month to divide the work equally. It would be more work for
> people to send an e-mail to me separately, but it would be easier on my
> end if we did it that way. Am I missing something, Lasse? It's possible
> I'm misreading your suggestion.
I may be wrong, but I assumed that most submitters would like to get comments. (That
is if we clearly keep it to friendly general impressions and suggestions on what can
be improved upon. (All of a sudden it has evolved into a discussion on "critique" etc,
which I never understood it to be the case from the beginning. And I am not going to
volunteer for a "PUG critiquer"...:) ) I also would think there'd be more volunteers
if we keep comments on a decidedly non professional level.)
I was thinking that you'd simply do the "randomizing" and sending out the "call
messages" to the volunteers, and it would be up to us to check whether the participant
wants a comment or not. Maybe someone will get only three to comment on and somebody
else will get seven, but would there statistically be that great a risk that there
will be this great a spread of the number of assigned photos? I don't know.
Maybe someone who got too few could ask for additions on the list and someone who
feels he/she got too many could offer one or two more? ("- No, I don't want him, give
me X instead! - How much? - I'll send you an original Pentax cap! - Allright then,
he's yours.") Anyway, the next month, or the next, statistically the distribution
should even out, or?
I don't know, I'm getting tired of all this thinking. Why can't we just go back to
like we started, and just fix the directions a little, like clearly stating that this
gallery is simply for fun and the joy of it, and not a deadly serious competition for
The International Professional & Artistic Photography Awards....?
Lasse
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
