In this response, you Rox, show why you Rock! Heath http://batmangeek.com
--- In [email protected], "Roxanne Darling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think I might have a few answers to your questions Andreas. > 1) "is proper acknowledgement not a fair request?" > It is a fair request IMO, however it is not an obligation unless I am using > someone's content with the requirement in their copyright license. > > I did credit and link to you in my very original post on my site and in this > thread. You pointed out to me that it was your opinion I should have also > credited Brittany. I did not actually discover the lumiere page you and B > created when I did my speedy late night research (I did not have time to > follow all of the embedded links on the post on your personal site.); once I > learned about it on the list, I immediately added a link to the lumiere > page, added a mention of Brittany and a link to her site. Within 2 hours, I > also visited B's site and left a comment with my apology as I could not find > her email address. > > 2) Neither you nor Brittany have responded to me publicly or privately to > acknowledge that I have addressed your concerns. Perhaps (I'm just sayin') > if you had, this thread would have died a long time ago. In my experience, > it is tricky territory to go making issues on behalf of someone else. B has > chosen to leave the list and that is her choice. I still have NO IDEA what > HER actual feelings and opinions are. And that is somewhat absurd as this > whole thread revolves around my not crediting her in the first place. > > 3) You have not addressed the manner in which you posted your request, which > many experienced as rude and not in the spirit of collaboration. Many of > your contributions on the list Andreas are very legalistic - in that I mean > you have a great mind for detail and nuance and are quick in many cases to > point out flaws in others' reasoning and site laws of many nations. I think > the situation here is confusing to people because you have built a case on > sand (maybe because this is a "Beach Walks" issue he he) instead of your > usual granite. Asking people to take down their videos rather than you > removing their links? That is so not like you! And silly me, I thought you > were grabbing them all by a tag or something automated, not linking each one > by hand. That is indeed a labor of love. Thank you for taking the time to > add the link to our episode BTW. > > 4) The Manifesto v participating in the lumiere collection issue. Again in > light of your adeptness with the language, I am confused that you don't > understand how the use of "we" extends from the Manifesto to the collection > in many people's minds. This could easily be addressed by adding some > disclaimers to the pages along the lines of: > > "The Manifesto is authored by us, A & B, and reflects our personal opinions. > We have decided to link to others' work as our way of extending this art > form and building a community of lumiere creators. Each artist has his/her > own reasons for creating lumieres and therefore may or may not also support > the Manifesto. We hope you enjoy these." > > Naturally, this is a quick brain dump and you will be able to craft > something elegant yet still on point and in your own voices. > > So what do you think? Can we make some lemonade now out of > these juicy lemons? > > Aloha, > > Rox > > > > On Jan 17, 2008 8:07 AM, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I am not seeing any wish to discuss the contents of the manifesto in > > this > > thread. Mike is the only one who has come close, but pointing out that he > > has scripted a lumiere video (we all have) is not an opening for > > discussion. It's just a statement of fact. > > > > I have written some long e-mails in this thread, that have either not been > > > > read or ignored. Most e-mails in this thread have been repeats and I don't > > > > want to sit and type up the exact same reply again. As I've already > > pointed out Brittany left this list in early 2006. It would also help if > > you would address the original point of my participation in this thread > > ("is proper acknowledgement not a fair request?") > > > > From the people in this thread I have seen - with a few welcome exceptions > > > > - only gripes about the manifesto somehow represents you and your work. I > > can't take responsibility when you choose such a ridiculous > > interpretation. The manifesto uses the pronoun "we" because there are two > > authors. It describes our reasoning for maintaining a curated list of > > videos that follow six simple rules. It says nothing about the intentions > > that each author has for creating his own lumiere videos. There, I > > repeated myself again. > > > > - Andreas > > > > Den 17.01.2008 kl. 08:23 skrev Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<heathparks% 40msn.com> > > >: > > > > > > > Excellent points Mike, espeacially about Andreas "solution" to not > > > wanting to be associated with his site.... > > > > > > What I find interesting in this discussion, is that Andreas said he > > > wanted to create discussion and yet, for the most part he has not > > > participated in this discussion....there are valid questions and > > > concerns being raised and he and Brittany are silent....I find that > > > very telling.... > > > > > > Heath > > > http://batmangeek.com > > > > > > --- In [email protected] <videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com>, > > "Mike Moon" <mgmoon@> wrote: > > >> > > >> I have produced over 30 Lumiere videos that are linked on the site. > > >> When I started, there was no manifesto, just 6 simple > > >> rules/guidelines. I create Lumieres with the challenge of those six > > >> restrictions... 60 seconds max, Fixed camera, No audio, No zoom, No > > >> edit, No effects, and I enjoy it. > > >> To me, it's a fun vlogging challenge. > > >> > > >> With that said, I have a couple concerns. > > >> > > >> I was never asked about agreeing with the manifesto (that was added > > >> after I started creating Lumiere videos), but by the way it was > > >> written, it certainly seems like I've agreed to it with the usage of > > >> the word "we" throughout the document. > > >> > > >> I think it was mid-December when I really sat back and thought about > > >> the Lumieres that I created and felt that my work was contradictory > > > to > > >> the Manifesto.... mainly (Quote from manifesto) "We do not believe > > > in > > >> artificially assembled scenes or scripted action.". > > >> I set up my camera and change a tire...that's scripted. > > >> http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2007/10/25/lumiere-detire/ > > >> I set the tripod up and cut the grass...that's scripted. > > >> http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2007/10/13/lumiere-lawn-boy/ > > >> My point is, I read the Manifesto and honestly felt that for me to > > >> post Lumieres, I had to agree with the manifesto. > > >> I was saddened by the manifesto and felt I couldn't continue as I > > >> wasn't sure I could abide by the added philosophical views of the > > >> manifesto, even though I was still within the 6 rules initially > > > outlines. > > >> Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I'm not a lawyer, University Professor or > > >> philosopher that is able to dig deep into the interpretations of the > > >> document, I just kept seeing "we" throughout the document and felt I > > >> was either in or out... no gray area. > > >> I'm just Joe vlogger that enjoyed the 6 challenges that were > > > original > > >> setup and now felt there were more restrictions and beliefs that > > > took > > >> the fun out of it. > > >> > > >> After reading through this thread, I was pissed at the way Roxie's > > >> oversight was responded by Andreas. We're all in the same world... > > >> brothers and sisters of one species. There was no reason for such > > >> anger and disdain and it certainly could have been responded to with > > >> better tact. > > >> > > >> Adrian: > > >> To your Question about having video's removed from the list. The > > > only > > >> solution Andreas has responded with is to "delete the video". Delete > > >> it from it's original posted location... delete it from Blip (or > > >> whatever storage location) and lose all links including those to > > > other > > >> sites or discussions. > > >> > > >> I don't want to remove my Lumieres. I will just debate within myself > > >> if I'll do more and if I do create others, will I share with the > > >> Lumiere site. > > >> > > >> It's too bad really... in my mind it was just suppose to be a > > > creative > > >> video exercise that challenged me, not a viewpoint of video creation > > >> that I was suppose to agree with. > > >> > > >> > > >> Mike > > >> Vlogger and Lumiere creator. > > >> http://vlog.mikemoon.net > > >> > > >> > > >> --- In [email protected] <videoblogging% 40yahoogroups.com>, > > Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > hi Heath > > >> > > > >> > fair enough, I think there are some reasonable concerns in there. > > > I > > >> > guess it is one thing to more or less curate material that > > > relates to > > >> > the lumiere project, but there are issues if the curation is > > > done > > >> > automagically, as it were. > > >> > > > >> > On the other hand I have no doubt that Andreas and Brittany > > > wouldn't > > >> > have a problem with removing links to someone's work if they > > > asked. > > >> > > > >> > personally I think curating material that relates to a theme is > > >> > excellent, it is just manual tag clouding really :-) helps > > > promote > > >> > stuff too! > > >> > > > >> > On 16/01/2008, at 12:59 AM, Heath wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > But Andreas has stated, that in addition to linking to a video > > > if > > >> > > someone emails him, that if he or Brittany come accross a > > > Lumiere > > >> > > they will then also link to it...But what if the person doesn't > > > want > > >> > > to be linked to because they don't believe in this manifesto? > > > Look, > > >> > > I know the web is a great big link fest, but in cases like > > > this, I > > >> > > think it bears pondering that practice. Cheryl has already > > > stated > > >> > > that she will no longer make Lumiere's because she doesn't want > > > to be > > >> > > associated with the manifesto, I find that troubling. How many > > >> > > others feel that way? If Andreas were giving people the choice > > > to be > > >> > > associated with the site he has, I wouldn't feel the way I do, > > > but he > > >> > > doesn't always do that, and that is where my concern lies. > > >> > > > >> > Adrian Miles > > >> > adrian.miles@ > > >> > bachelor communication honours coordinator > > >> > vogmae.net.au > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen > > http://www.solitude.dk/ > > > > > > > > > > -- > Roxanne Darling > "o ke kai" means "of the sea" in hawaiian > Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more > http://reef.beachwalks.tv > 808-384-5554 > Video --> http://www.beachwalks.tv > Company -- > http://www.barefeetstudios.com > Twitter--> http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
