another religious lunatic ?

[Homerhomer]

(:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))))))))))))

Oh, God... Help me, please...!
Send someone down here to shoot me...

(:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))))))))))))
===============================

no problem George, I will see you tomorrow, will squeeze you in during my lunch hour.
Peter

[Davids]

Ah,
another Trek meeting!

[Homerhomer]

Ah,
another Trek meeting!
============

not sure if you can call it a meeting David, simply me and George, me fullfilling George's request, the meeting will be very short....;-)

[Mondaychild]

I know who you are talking about - of course he is a fanatic but he somehow respects others´ critiques - he doesn´t insult others if they don´t like his kind of "photography". I wish I could say this about ALL other members ... But I agree, TrekEarth is not the proper place for this "mystic light" pics.

BTW: If someone asks for the "Best photographer on TE" in this forum you could write another member´s name in the answer ... but it is not allowed to write the name of a member who you have problems with!?!? (The same thing happened to me yesterday)
No freedom of speech on TE????

[vapours]

I think you need to let it go Gisi. Having seen what you've also done on TrekLens (4 critiques in total, with 2 of those directly attacking the person you are having a problem with), its coming across as a little obsessive.

[rushfan2112]

I've had first-hand experience with this chap when I critiqued one of his photos. All I got back was some religious clap-trap.

However irritating it may be to try to honour the site objectives of trying to improve photography and have it ignored / receive back gibberish, I DO NOT believe that they should be harrassed or removed from the site.

My suggestion is that we should continue to critique in-line with the site terms and conditions. It the site administrators believe that they are in breach, it is their job to warn or remove them.

By even the most devout religious standards these guys seem very odd. In my opinion, however, weird as they may be by most peoples' standards, that's no reason to castigate or expel them. We have the ultimate form of censure at our fingertips; we can just choose to look at / critique someone else's photographs.

[Mondaychild]

She posted a selfportrait. - I reported that.
She made a re-post. The re-post is a completly different photo from the original. - I reported that.

She is angry because her photos get hardly any critiques (neither positive nor negative) although viewed more than 400 times.

She writes that my photos are postcards and I should make a fortune with them.
She wrote the same thing in critiques to OTHER USER´s photos on TrekLENS. (Because photos of harbours or snowed-in-lanterns get more attention than self-reflections on walls or self-portraits in lingerie - DON`t KNOW WHY ...)

I´m sorry for that. I won´t critisize any of her photos again. Because she only wants "good" critiques.

I GOT MANY BAD CRITIQES - but I accept these. She doesn´t.

[Porteplume]

Bonjour everybody,

I don't want to get involved in this discussion but I know that speaking about somebody [and not to somebody] on a forum, giving names or links, especially when you've got a problem with that person, can be seen as a retribution and point 12 of the TOS makes clear that it is not acceptable.

Amicalement - Viviane

[Loic_bzh]

Gisi, will you talk about your little problem in EVERY new thread of the forum??? :-/

I hope you still can sleep... :p

[Polonaise]

"we can just choose to look at / critique someone else's photographs."

...or, simply NOT to...

And that's the most wonderfuf thing about our community...

Hats off to Paul, for his wise contribution to the tread...

................