Using judgement and value of commentating on media (pictures, videos, articles)
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Agree. This looks and sounds like an Spanish inquisition!
by78
General
Forum rules are not the end-all-be-all on content or etiquette or even basic common sense. For example, posting Minnie Chan articles is not against forum rules either, but the consensus is that they shouldn't be posted. Also highly discouraged – but not against rules – is posting fanboy PSed images, rumor videos, and content of dubious provenance. Conversely, by forum rules, political posts should be strictly confined to off-topic forums, but obviously it hasn't been enforced effectively due to limited moderator resources.
If you compare SDF's rules to rules at PDF, they are remarkably similar and overlap in many areas, and yet, the quality of the two forums couldn't be more different.
The real issue is whether it's ok for SDF to become a place where anything goes so long it doesn't explicitly contradict the bareboned rules or whether higher standards on quality are expected of members.
by78
General
I wouldn't characterize 4 or 5 likes per post as "well received". By what metric or survey have you reached the conclusion that a low single-digit like count on average qualifies your posts as well received?
by78
General
This thread concerns behavior at our flagship military forums, not the anything-goes, off-topic political threads where you usually participate.
solarz
Brigadier
Rules exist so that a common, objectively definable set of behaviors can be enforced. If I'm not mistaken, doctored or fake images are explicitly against the rules in military threads. There are also examples of rules specific to a thread, such as the Coronavirus thread, where the sharing of unsubstantiated rumors is disallowed and this is strictly enforced.
So if you have concerns about the quality of content in SDF military threads, then you need to define a set of objective criteria and propose them to be included in the forum rules.
Right now, the issue is you think the other poster's captions are distracting. That's a matter of personal preference.
We all have different reasons for coming to this forum. Just because certain posts do not match your expectations of what this forum should be, doesn't mean they should be censured.
Personally, I am able to live with pictures and captions even if I think they are unnecessary and of little benefit.
However, I also think that it is always beneficial to try and improve the quality of contributions as well.
The whole reason of laying this out in the open, is so that the member base is able to come out and say what they feel like regarding the quality of said contributions... because as has been repeatedly stated -- there are no forum rules against posts with captions if they are deemed to be personally judged as unnecessary.
If many members don't care about the above, and if @xyqq does not feel inclined to alter his behaviour, then that is fine, it just means that at least everyone's come out and said it.
In which case, @by78, in future let it go and stop making remarks and contentious posts in regards to @xyqq's posting and captions in future, because these debates just become off topic for the various flagship threads.
Ultimately there are no rules against captions if one personally deems them as unnecessary or distracting.
However, I also think that it is always beneficial to try and improve the quality of contributions as well.
The whole reason of laying this out in the open, is so that the member base is able to come out and say what they feel like regarding the quality of said contributions... because as has been repeatedly stated -- there are no forum rules against posts with captions if they are deemed to be personally judged as unnecessary.
If many members don't care about the above, and if @xyqq does not feel inclined to alter his behaviour, then that is fine, it just means that at least everyone's come out and said it.
In which case, @by78, in future let it go and stop making remarks and contentious posts in regards to @xyqq's posting and captions in future, because these debates just become off topic for the various flagship threads.
Ultimately there are no rules against captions if one personally deems them as unnecessary or distracting.
by78
General
His captions being distracting is only one of the reasons I listed. Many of his captions also serve little to no purpose by describing the bloody obvious, such as this post here. Do we need to be informed that an image depicts a plane taking off, or landing, or a pilot is getting into the cockpit? Can you not see that for yourself? These captions are just a waste of space because they reveal nothing new, interesting, or something that we can't tell from the images alone.
Speaking of new and interesting, many of his images are simply low quality and uninteresting: just some blurry, low-resolution photos of platforms that have been around for years and even decades, and all of which we can access on our own. We are now into the second decade of the 21st century already; what would have been interesting in the early 2000s or the late 1990s is most definitely not interesting today, especially when the images are of such poor quality and reveal nothing new. SDF is not an image aggregation website or a depository of every open-source, easily accessible low-quality image having to do with the Chinese military. It's not to much to expect a more judicious exercise of judgement in what to post and what not to post.
I won't repeat the rest of my long post on page one of this thread, but my objections are about much more than the manner with which he captions his images.
I can't see where I normally participate got anything to do with my opinons. Or are you saying my opinons are not as valid as yours because of where I normally participate?
I'm a member here just the same as you.
Good points by both of you. On the one hand i agree with @Gatekeeper that as long as the forum rules are followed, the members should not have to justify their posts and be subjected to a "witch-hunt"
But on the other hand I also agree with @by78 that the rules themselves usually have loopholes and are too slow to change thus allowing the users to skirt the rules in such ways to result in lowering the forum quality. I am also regularly visiting PDF and that place is, lets say, not that good... IMO SDF should strive to be more professional than other, more "fan-boyish" forums.
Obviously it is easy to just say "follow the rules" and then wash you hands clean. However the same thing happens when you have rules but then you also have some other "unofficial" rules (which new members may not know) such as what you mentioned regarding the Minnie Chan articles.
Then we must also account for the difference, as you clearly mentioned, between the professional military threads and the more laid back general political threads.
While the political threads are sometimes getting heated due to their political nature, personally I think that their quality is in good condition. Maybe some more pro-US/West members would be beneficial to have, in order to have more diversity on the opinions and avoid becoming an echo-chamber, however in very general terms I would say the quality is good. Big thanks to the mods who are moderating these threads, its hard work reading all the stuff there
Regarding the professional military threads though, I find them excellent. There is strict moderation, there are many professional members who are clearly knowledgable in their fields and have their own sources when they post some information. There is no fan-boyism, no childish fights, and very low level of politics.
Even now, this (mostly not that much important for me) debate regarding adding text on images clearly shows the very high level of these threads.
We must pay attention though, that there is a reason rules are made. And thats because we want all members, new and old, to clearly understand the boundaries between on what to do and what to not do.
So, while highly debatable, I will have to side with @Gatekeeper on this one. It is best to have clear written rules to follow than unofficial rules which some members may know and some others may not. So in this case if no rule exists that forbids it then adding text alongside images should be allowed
Now back on your example again on Minnie Chan, if people dont like her articles (I can see why..) then it is better to have clear rules on how to handle these articles. Alllow, ban, or add disclosure on these articles. Maybe this conversation is for another topic but thats the way I personally believe how matters should be handled on "unofficial" rules
Well, this went a bit offtopic however I felt that some more details were necessary in order to fully convey my opinion on this. Mods feel free to delete this if it went against the rules