Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/03/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 3/5/02 10:24:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, kiklaas@iinet.net.au writes: > I thought photographers were "happy" people - bad genralisation perhaps, > I am new to this thread and I am gobsmacked at the amount of in-house > squabbling that goes on - I would expect this in an all girls high school > (do not see too many females writing into this thread) - GOSH, I thought > this was meant to be an informative, fun, sharing experience. > > I would hate to see what would happen if all came face to face - talk > about egos. My guess is if we all came face-to-face, it wouldn't happen. A couple of weeks ago I posted a sharp reaction to what I read as some extremely rude, uncivil messages. I unsubscribed. In the interim, I took a rail trip from Albany, New York to Los Angeles and return (6,150 miles = almost 10,000 km!). A lovely trip, a little cocoon of space and time without intrusions, no television, no telephones, leisure to read, photograph (I inaugurated my new 50 year-old Leica IIf with 50/3,5 Elmar and a 25/4 Voigtlander/Cosina Skopar) and contemplate. Also completely rested my delete finger. I thought of some of the discussions which have recently once again hit the LUG and of how often they deteriorate into pure personality clashes. And it occured to me that this phenomenon may well be attributable to our electronic medium. Were we face-to-face, we would, I suggest, never never speak to one another as we seem to feel free to write to one another. It would become an intolerably uncomfortable world. And if two people actually did so in public, that is in a public social setting, others would simply walk away and shun them - it would be too uncomfortable. And it might well lead to blows. This medium is an insulator that disconnects us from the consequences of our rudeness. There is another aspect to this: I believe that there have been posts here that were intended as jokes or puns but that have been read seriously and therefore been taken as provocations. Sharp response spirals into sharper counter-response. When we are face-to-face with someone, body language, facial expressions and all kinds of other unspoken "language" can convey that we do not mean seriously the words we speak, that in fact we sometimes mean the opposite. And the "listener" understands that unspoken "language" as it is intended to be conveyed. The internet deprives us of that possibility. I have a feeling that if we all bear this in mind, if when we are writing a criticism of someone else's post we think of what and how we would express ourselves if we were sitting with that person and a couple of others - say Papa Ted Grant and Momma Tina Manley - having coffee at Starbucks!! - and if we remain cognisant of the fact that the other person can't see our expression or hear the different tone of voice, this would be a much pleasanter place. We can still disagree as strenuously as we always have and yet keep our disagreements and discourse from becoming so hostile that the LUG becomes far less pleasant than it can and should be. My $.02. Best to all, Seth LaK 9 - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html