«

Roland Karlsson <> wrote in
news:Xns958BB0F95C83klotjohan@130.133.1.4:

> Can you please tell me where my G2 belongs?

r.p.d.zlr

--
Bill

On 22 Oct 2004 20:27:22 GMT, Roland Karlsson
<> wrote:

>OK - you guessed it. They have just blewn it and made a
>seriously bad choice IMHO. And I missed it. Did you?

Actually, given the *huge* proportion of "YYYY" votes and highly
limited number of abstentions and "No" votes, I'm inclined to disagree
with "choice". "Choice" implies there was a decision, and having
looked at the results I don't think very many people gave their votes
a lot of thought at all. Take the rangefinder group for example; it
got voted through 336:34 and last I checked the sole example of this
camera type to date, the Epson R-D1, isn't even shipping until
November 1st at an RRP of $2999 - hardly a mass market camera!

Keeping RPD for general discussion and splitting off stuff specific to
P&S and SLR cameras I can understand, maybe ZLRs too if there is
enough *genuine* interest, but my money is still on tumbleweed in the
rangefinder group.

To save you looking, yes, I voted. Like this, in fact:

P+S: yes
SLR: yes
ZLR: abstain (if there's enough interest, then go for it)
RF: no (vote to create it later if they take off)

PS. If you *did* consider your votes and went with "YYYY"; good for
you and please disregard the non-applicable dig above, but I'm curious
as to your reasons why.

Andy

If you missed it, you weren't paying attention - there've been MASSIVE
threads on the topic for the last three months. The way I have Mozilla
set up, it expands threads with new messages; these have been impossible
to miss. There ahve been numerous discussions along various stages of
the process, then endless notices of the upcoming vote.

> Hi,
>
> There have been a voting about dividingt the r.p.d. - a real one.
> It is now ready. And we will have 4 brand new groups in 4 days from now.
>
> Did you - just as me - miss that this was going on?
>
> Did you know that two of the groups are called zlr and point+shoot?
>
> Do you know what a zlr is?
>
> Do you really know what a point+shoot is?
>
> Do you know what the other two groups are called?
>
> In what group are you planning to post printing and editing things?
>
> And where are you going to discuss different technology stuff, e.g.
> about sensors and anti shake and flash memory?
>
> Are there any range-finder flash memory out there?
>
> OK - you guessed it. They have just blewn it and made a
> seriously bad choice IMHO. And I missed it. Did you?
>
>
> /Roland

Jeremy Nixon wrote:

> On the other hand, the simple fact that you managed to miss this process,
> which was posted in this group and which went on for several months, is an
> extremely good argument in favor of creating the new groups. It points
> out very well indeed how difficult it has become to follow this group.
> There are quite a few people (some of whom I even know) who want to read
> this group but have given up on it because it is impossible to keep up
> with.

I'll second that.

I've only been here a few months, since just before the RFDs started...
never really worried about it enough to get involved and for that matter
don't care either way about the outcome, but I will agree that it's hard
to keep up with things - I have to start up Mozilla at least once a day
or I get warnings about there being over 500 new message headers.
That's a lot to sort through, especially when a good 50% of the
discussion seems to be people soliciting advice on which digital P&S
camera to buy, something that neither interests me, nor in which do I
have the experience to contribute. Even if that alone were broken off
into a separate group, it would help immensely.

I'm interested more in photography topics in general, and specifically
those related to my Digital Rebel, so a separate SLR group will be
welcome, IF if gets the traffic... if not, then maybe the offloaded
traffic to other groups will make rpd more usable. Either way, I have
the option to subscribe to one, both, or all; read the ones that hold me
interest, participate in those I want to, and ignore or unsubscribe
those that have nothing for me. I fail to see why splitting off more
sub-groups is a bad thing.

>>Did you know that two of the groups are called zlr and point+shoot?
>>
>>Do you know what a zlr is?
>>
>>Do you really know what a point+shoot is?
>
>
> There was a very long discussion on exactly this point. The only outcome
> was that pretty much everyone agreed that those names are not very good,
> but no one was able to put forth any better suggestions, simply because
> those names are what we have and no one has invented any others.

So did anyone actually define the term "zlr"? I know what P&S is (we
used to call them "PhD cameras - Press here, Dummy"). My interest lies
in slr-systems, and more general topics... so what do I care about the
existence of groups that don't interest me (rhetorical question, btw,
not aimed at anyone in particular). I also don't subscribe to
alt.sexy.bald.captains either, but that doesn't mean I disagree with its
existence.

> Those things seem like things that would be entirely appropriate for
> this very group.

Yup... and hopefully will be more readable as some of the more specific
noise moves to other sub-groups.

Matt Ion <> wrote in
news:VWied.9280$Pl.3304@pd7tw1no:

> So did anyone actually define the term "zlr"?

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/ZLR

http://www.jafaphotography.com/digit...a_features.htm

--
Bill

Roland Karlsson <> wrote:

> No - actually they are not. ZLR means SLR without
> interchangable lenses.

No, that is not how the marketing people who invented the name use it.

--
Jeremy |

Ken Tough <> wrote:

> Yes, I knew the vote was coming, but (probably to my
> detriment) don't read news.groups. I assumed the CFV
> would come in RPD. I was away for the weekend and it
> appears the vote happened.

The CFV was posted in rec.photo.digital twice over a two-week period.
Votes are held over more than two weeks precisely so that people who go
away for a while won't miss them.

You probably missed it due to the exact reason we need the new groups.

--
Jeremy |

Jeremy Nixon <> wrote in
news::

> The CFV was posted in rec.photo.digital twice over a two-week period.
> Votes are held over more than two weeks precisely so that people who go
> away for a while won't miss them.

Actually the voting period was 21-days.

--
Bill

"Roland Karlsson" <> wrote

> Hi,

> There have been a voting about dividingt the r.p.d. - a real one.
> It is now ready. And we will have 4 brand new groups in 4 days from now.
>
> Did you - just as me - miss that this was going on?
>
> Did you know that two of the groups are called zlr and point+shoot?
>
> Do you know what a zlr is?
>
> Do you really know what a point+shoot is?
>
> Do you know what the other two groups are called?
>
> In what group are you planning to post printing and editing things?
>
> And where are you going to discuss different technology stuff, e.g.
> about sensors and anti shake and flash memory?
>
> Are there any range-finder flash memory out there?
>
> OK - you guessed it. They have just blewn it and made a
> seriously bad choice IMHO.

I've felt the same way

Roland, the whole process was taken away from the people here in the hopes
the ballot box would be stuffed and they would have their new groups.
There was little regard for people who actually use the current groups.
The box was stuffed and look what happened. Very little of this has made
much sense to me. Look at the voting list and see how many people you can
actually recognize or validate as having any posting history with the
identification used to vote. After fairly close securitization, it is my
contention that between 2/3 and 3/4 of the votes are bogus.

> And I missed it. Did you?

No, I tried to warn, but a few people get their jollies by lying about me
and trying to shout me down. A day only has so much energy and vigor and
I'm finding I have less I'm willing to spend on those who purposely and
continuously mislead.

Chalk it up as another big 8 blunder

Steve Young

Roland Karlsson <> writes:

> dy (Bill Hilton) wrote in
> news::
>
>> It was posted several times on this and the 35 mm NGs. Hard to see
>> how you missed it.
>>
>
> I did.
>
> And now we have those more or less bogus groups.
>
> dslr-system is probably useful.
>
> rangefinder might become useful the day we see
> any rangefinder cameras. None now.
>
> Can you please tell me where my G2 belongs?

Not in any subgroup of rec.photo.digital. So your situation is
unaffected by the recent vote.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd->, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>