I've wanted to mention something along these lines lately but refrained for
various reasons (didn't wish to introduce an OT thread; didn't wish to join
an OT fray already in progress; etc.).
But now that Mike Veglia has tossed his hat into the ring I'll speak my
piece and try to keep it peaceable.
Some listfolk prefer to keep strictly on-topic: no drifting toward cars,
guns, SUVs, politics, endoscopic work, etc.
Fair enough...to a point. But Mike Veglia's photographic pursuit *is* cars,
race cars to be specific. Shall we forbid any mention of cars, including
his work - done, BTW, with OM gear? Or allow him, but no one else, to
mention the "c" word? In which case, if he graciously lets us know about an
update to his website featuring photos from a recent race, are we to refrain
from responding onlist?
I'm truly not being facetious and especially not trying to start an argument
for the sake of one.
Here's why. I have little or no interest in any kind of racing, cars or
otherwise. But I appreciate good photography of any kind regardless of
subject matter. My feelings and opinions about the subject matter are
immaterial. Yet 'til now I'd refrained from even mentioning an occasional
photographic subject of my own: guns. Why? The recent brouhaha that
sprouted from the mere mention of the "g" word. (Those of you who are
interested can confirm via the archives that the first opinion shot across
the bow was fired by a non-gunner - not by a pro-gunner - apparently
provoked by the "g" word, dropped by another member. And, no, this isn't a
jab at that particular member who contributes many delightful posts despite
having an upside-down view of the world.)
As a former airgun collector I discovered how tricky it can be to photograph
such objects. Anything combining highly reflective and non-reflective
surfaces presents a challenge to any photographer. The same can be said of
sculpture, flowers in vases and the nude figure.
But imagine how preposterous it would be for each of us to rant ad nauseum
at the mere sight of one another's photos of geysers, mountains, flowers,
bugs, molded clay, chiseled marble and visible skin?
So, again, I ask...how strictly do we adhere to Olympus topics? If
absolutely strictly, then I propose a compromise: we shall all refrain from
OT and taboo topics of any kind in the text of our posts - Olympus content
only; but likewise our taglines shall remain sacrosanct - they may not be
commented upon or subject to debate by others. Whether the tagline reads
"Snoopy for President", "See my photos of naked guns at
dubdubdub.nekkidguns.com" or "I really, really, *really* hate OT threads" -
inviolable, uncensored, free from comment or criticism.
Okay...*now* I'm being facetious. Because we all know that wouldn't work.
Next thing we know, our taglines will be longer than our message text and
we'll battle pet OT peeves out via taglines.
So we're back where gentlefolk have always been. In polite society we may
agree to disagree, even loudly and at length, but must refrain from cheap
shots. Sometimes it's difficult to refrain when we believe we're only
responding to a personal affront initiated by another. Lord know, I've
failed in that regard on occasion.
Meanwhile, SEE MY PIX OF NAKED FISH AND OTHER ODDITIES!!!
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=1005538&a=7442500
-----------
Lex Jenkins
---------------------------------------------------------------------
2b XOR -2b ... that's the equation - Ur Amblet, 'The Very Bad Quarto'
=====================================================================
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|