One might think groups are only a virtual gathering of people with similar photographic interests and subjects. Persons who like to take pictures of fences meet in a group. Bench photographers too. And pics with 50+ favs are entitled to join a 'platin pictures' group .....
Similar to keywords, groups support the organisation of the picture heap.
From this point of view moderation is not really necessary as groups are kind of self-organising. People meet and have more or less a good time looking at their pics and discussing them. It's like meeting freinds - usually there is no need for a moderator when you go out ;-)
So, if we assume groups to be internal 'sub-organisations' moderation should really be at a minimum. Don't tell people what to do if it's not absolutely necessary.
Another approach to groups is to see them as a kind of showcase.
According to this point of view, groups would need heavy moderation. Only the best and most interesting pictures should be displayed. The function of a group in this sense is to attract random passersby.
This means a group is sort of hierarchic: There is a person in charge (i.e. a boss) and others who do the 'dirty' work (i.e. subordinates).
Problems are most likely to arise when a group in the former sense is transformed into a group in the latter sense.
But, basically, group members should decide what kind of group they'd like to join. As this is a hobby people should not be treated like subordinates having to fight for a common goal. ipernity might lose its unique spirit when we start acting like a command unit....
But maybe I'm wrong (ok, unlikely ;-)))) - I look forward to your input!
I hope everybody had a Happy Easter...
and now for some interim results:
Groups are desired and of value, at least for some users.
Groups help users with similar interests to gather and organise. As there is a possibility to do discussions within a group and for a (potentially selected) group of users only, groups fit these desires better than using keywords can do.
It showed up that there are a lot of orphaned and unused/dead groups. It is feared that this may give random visitors from outside ipernity a rather messy impression - therefore these groups should be cleared up.
At least some people are in favour of a certain rigour regarding group content - meaning they approve removing inappropriate pictures from groups. Relevance should be defined in group rules and founders/moderators expect group members to be somewhat familiar with group rules.
At least some of the discussants see group rules as important. One person posted a comment saying (in brief) "rules must be obeyed". Unfortunately this contribution was deleted by the author.
There is another group of panellists emphasising the fun factor of ipernity and refusing being told by others what to do and what not to do. One person criticises a top-down communication, asking for a change in communication between persons responsible and "simple" members.
In summary these last points raise some more questions:
How democratic and legal are "the rules"? Are they compulsory for everybody? Can (paying) members be expected to follow the rules or to leave? Have rules (or at least changes of rules) to be discussed prior to application?
And, more basic, do we need rules or will common sense do? (ok, you may call me an anarchist ;-))
And, last but for sure not least: Does communication or communication style need to be improved between the persons responsible and members?
So handhabe ich das z.B. bei meinen Gruppen "ToGo: bequem&vermüllend" und "Türen und Tore - originell und alt". Fotos von denen ich meine, dass sie nicht zum Thema passen fliegen raus.
In dem Zusammenhang ist mir der Unterschied zwischen Administrator und Moderator nicht klar.
Es gibt einige Gruppen, die zwar ein Thema habe, wo aber Fotos zu finden sind, die am Thema vorbei gehen.
I can only give the example of groups I participate in. One of them is the HFF group. When I joined, the group rules called for posting a maximum of 3 photos on Friday, but it was ok to post also "late" on Thursday night. Then, one time that I took advantage of this flexibility and posted at 10 p.m. on Thursday because I knew I would be busy the next day, I received a stern email reminding me that I was allowed to post only on Friday (my time zone). Some time after that, I started to get "reprimanded" if I posted more than one picture and discovered the "maximum 3" had become "no more than one".
Frankly, my opinion is that there is no need for such stringent rules. The logic behind this seems to be that the group is so successful, that we risk having "too many pictures to look at". This would make sense if pictures were memos and group members were workers at a work place who need to be able to look at all the memos. But IP is not work and looking at pictures is not a chore. It's something we do for fun. And that we can stop doing the minute we stop having fun. So what if one Friday I don't have time (or the desire) to look at all the HFF postings? I'll look at them on Saturday morning (if I feel like it) or not look at them at all and nobody will die from it and no injustice will have been committed.
Lately, the strict rule of "no more than 1 per member per Friday" caused problems because the algorithm prevented even the rule-abiding members from posting on Friday in their time zone, so the rule now changed again and we have a new limit of "no more than 5 postings per month". I know of people, even long standing group participants, who finally said "forget it!" and left the group. If we keep this up, it seems to me that pretty soon we will no longer have the problem of having "too many pictures to look at"... :(
Regarding the showcase groups, I have no personal experience, but the episode that prompted this discussion proves that there is a need to think through, and discuss with members, how and what kind of rules would need to be applied, especially if a major change is introduced.
That's my 2 bits (ok, more than 2 ... I don't have the gift of brevity ...)
Sami Serola (inactiv… club has replied to Annalia S.raingirl club has replied to Annalia S.As Sami says, the group discussion feature is poorly implemented, so direct contact with ipermail is advised.
1) Allgemein: Gruppen sollten einen spezifischen Inhalt oder Zweck haben und sie sollten häufig besucht werden. Gruppen, in die nur gepostet wird, die aber nicht einmal von den Gruppenmitgliedern besucht werden, sind ziemlich sinnlos. Wer schaut z.B. in eine Gruppe wie "+9999 photos no limits, no restrictions, no conditions".
2) Gruppen mit spezifischem Inhalt z.B. "monochrome", oder geographischer Region wie z.B. "Bretagne" brauchen einen Admin. Der/die Admin kann und soll einzelne Bilder löschen, die eindeutig nicht zum Gruppentitel passen. Zu streng sollte das natürlich nicht gehandhabt werden, sonst sinkt der Spassfaktor bald. Tatsache ist aber, dass viel in Gruppen gepostet wird, was dort nicht hingehört, weil manche einfach ein Bild generell ohne zu überlegen in möglichst viele Gruppen schicken, was eine Unsitte ist.
3) Ein Admin sollte eine gewisse Leidenschaft für die Art Bilder haben, die in der Gruppe repräsentiert werden. Es ist ziemlich sinnfrei, wenn ein Admin eine Gruppe wie "Monochrome" administriert, selbst aber noch nie ein monochromes Bild hochgeladen hat.
4) Ein Problem ist der Administratoren-Wechsel. Oft verlassen Administratoren Ipernity ohne für einen Nachfolger zu sorgen. Wenn sie die einzigen waren, ist die Gruppe tot. Wenn Sie vorher jemand zum Nachfolger bestimmen, ohne ihn zu fragen, kann die Gruppe auch tot sein (ist auch mir schon passiert),
5) Keywords versus Gruppen: Gruppen haben ja auch, wenn nicht vor allem, den Sinn, bestimmte Themen zu finden. Das kann man auch mit keywords, die leider von den Usern viel zu wenig genutzt werden. Keywords erhöhen den Wert eines Bildes für sich selbst und andere.
6) Ändern von Gruppenregeln: Häufiges Ändern stiftet Verwirrung. Aber natürlich kann es sein, dass eine Gruppe sich so entwickelt, dass eine Anpassung erforderlich ist. Eine radikale Änderung sollte vorher diskutiert werden.
7) Löschen von Bildern durch Administratoren: Wie bereits geschrieben, soll und kann ein Administrator einzelne Bilder löschen, wenn sie nicht in die Gruppe passen. Das Löschen aller Bilder eines Users aus einer Gruppe sollte nur diesem selbst vorbehalten sein.
8) Es sollte vorteilhaft immer mehr als einen Administrator geben. Eine Ausnahme können Gruppen sein, die ein Mitglied selbst mit ganz bestimmten Zielen gegründet hat.
9) Gruppe "Hall of Fame": Die Gruppe hatte ursprünglich die einzige Regel, Bilder mit mehr als 50 Favoriten oder mehr als 500 Besuchen zuzulassen. Natürlich sammeln sich dann Bilder von Langzeitmitgliedern an. Es gibt hier bei ca. 4000 Bildern mehrere Mitglieder mit ca. 400 Beiträgen, d.h., jedes 10. Bild ist von einem dieser Mitglieder. Wenn man in den Gruppenpool schaut, fällt dies eigentlich kaum auf. Trotzdem kann man sagen, der Titel "Hall of Fame" bedeutet, dass von jedem Mitglied nur eine sehr beschränkte Anzahl zugelassen werden sollte. Ich teile diese Meinung von Bergfex dazu (natürlich nicht die andere Meinung "dass wir Pensionisten den Berufstätigen den Speicherplatz wegnehmen". Dann sollte man eine Regeländerung auf max. 10, 20 oder 50 Bilder pro User durchführen, ich wäre dafür gewesen, nach vorheriger allgemeiner Diskussion.
10) Das Löschen aller Bilder eines Ipernity-Users aus einer Gruppe durch den Administrator sollte nicht sein. Man sollte (ich sollte) das aber auch nicht zu ernst nehmen.
Da gäbe es noch mehr, alles wie gesagt nur meine persönliche Meinung.
Allen eine schöne Osterzeit und Spass beim Fotografieren!
raingirl club has replied to Berny clubSetting up moderation of all contributions for a group is found under" Administration/Limits & moderation/Do you want to review contributions before posting them/Yes, I want to systematically review all the contributions"
Ich überlege nun, diese 24 Mitglieder demnächst anzuschreiben, und zu fragen, ob sie mit der Auflösung dieser Gruppe einverstanden sind. Imo gibt's reichlich AKTIVE Wettbewerbsgruppen bei IP, und insgesamt immer noch viel zu viele Gruppen mit sich z.T. überlappenden Themenkomplexen - da kann ein bißchen Frühjahrsputz nicht schaden.
Zum obigen Kommentar von Berny, speziell Pkt. 2+3:
Ich selbst habe hier 3 Gruppen gegründet: "Enchanted trees", "Chairs" und "Pareidolia".
Diese Themen liegen mir persönlich sehr am Herzen, deshalb habe ich mich bemüht, in den jeweiligen Gruppenregeln sehr präzise zu formulieren WELCHE ART Bilder in diesen Gruppen willkommen sind. Nach vielen Jahren Betreuung dieser Gruppen ist das Ergebnis ernüchternd bis ermüdend: die Gruppenregeln werden offensichtlich gar nicht gelesen. Am auffälligsten ist das bei "Pareidolia", offenbar wissen viele Leute gar nicht, was das ist und laden alles mögliche in diese Gruppe. Auch am Verständnis, daß nicht JEDER BAUM ein "verzauberter Baum" ist, hapert es. Und nicht jeder Stuhl der irgendwo am Rand eines Landschafts- oder Architekturfotos versehentlich rumsteht, gehört in meine Stühle-Gruppe. Also behalte ich mir vor, Bilder die nicht den Gruppenregeln entsprechen, kommentarlos zu löschen. Ich erwarte einfach, daß jemand, der Mitglied in irgendeiner Gruppe wird, sich die Zeit nimmt, vorher die geltenden Gruppenregeln zu beachten.
raingirl club has replied to Heidiho clubAs to people loading inappropriate photos into you group "Pareidolia", I hope you have your group set up so that you can moderate (check each photo) before them make it into your group. I don't know how many people know about this option. Right now, when one creates a group, the default option is to NOT moderate the photos leaving admins having to delete photos after the fact. But you can switch that thorugh the administration tab. You can find it and switch to moderating everything here: Setting up moderation of all contributions for a group is found under
"Administration
Limits & moderation
Do you want to review contributions before posting them
Yes, I want to systematically review all the contributions"
Please excuse me if you already know this. I hope that repeated or more information is not a bother.
I have read twice all that was said.
My own opinion is now rather limted, I only speak four of the IPER languages.
So lets be clear and simple.
Who ?
I suppose he/she pays his/her annual fees.
Why this immense silence around the name of the "artist" who started it all ?
Sorry, I still do not understand the factual reasons for your demise.
Or is there another word for it ?
You were simply banned,IMHO.
Who is affraid of Virginia Wolfe ?
Let me know if "us" has become an "elastic meaning.
Wish you a nice day and better advice than mine for I do not like the way this thing goes on.
J. Gafarot
Boarischa Krautmo club has replied to J. Gafarot clubfor one simple reason: It's not about any artist who started anything.
It's about ipernity and it'spurpose and evolution.
This is not a complaining-thread but (hopefully) a constructive one. What are people's expectations towards groups? It seems to me a bit of moderated discussion might be helpful.... especially to prevent things from going on in an unliked way.
regards
Markus
Berny club has replied to J. Gafarot clubAnd that's part of the problem with Ipernity in general. An undercurrent tendency, that never seems to go away, towards the authoritarian with touches of "holier-than-thou" attitude. They are right/you are wrong. End of. Not good. Ip. need to revise this and change course.
Administrators and moderators of public groups have a special responsibility according to ipernity group guidelines.
The management of public groups, whether managed by their founders or by appointed administrators/moderators, requires maximum attention, care and diligence if groups are not to harm the overall welfare of ipernity as well as its public image, as unfortunately happens with countless neglected public groups.
Furthermore, groups that, as a result of negligent, derelict and/or overburdened (issue: number of "own" public groups) administrators, are more like a neglected graveyard, riddled with content from inactive and/or resigned members and out-of-date member lists, are anything but attractive. Even if the contributions posted there are of high quality, they cannot increase the value and attractiveness of such groups.
That orphaned groups run also without administrators, conscientious observations and searches do not confirm. One may be able to post images there, but the necessary internal maintenance of those groups is logically absent. Instead of suggesting images for such groups, I would recommend reporting them to the ima team. For those who really care about ipernity and its continued existence, this comparatively small effort should be worth it.
With or without words... Joining and leaving are declarations of will.
A member joining a group makes a statement.
A resignation, for whatever reason, sends an equally clear signal and should therefore be well considered, because, like joining, it is a clear declaration of intent, may in any case be legitimately understood as such, even if a member does not remove its contents from the group when resigning.
Because
If a member does not remove his/her content when leaving a public group, administrators and/or moderators are entitled, if not even obliged, to delete the content left behind for the welfare of the group, as well as the overall welfare of ipernity as it makes no sense to leave groups but not delete one's own content/s. Everyone may see this differently for themselves, but for me personally, the welfare of the groups and especially the overall welfare of ipernity has the highest priority.
Last but not least, the fact is that ipernity is an international community of photography and art lovers. To reduce the platform to the level of "I just want to have fun" does not do justice to its true purpose and would mean its certain demise.
Happy Easter, everyone.
ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… club has replied to * ઇઉ * club* ઇઉ * club has replied to ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… clubSo please, in your own interest, do not judge things that, simply in consideration of the author of the article, the readers and discussion participants, have not been communicated even more in detail and/or deepened by me here.
Btw, I am not "any" group admin who does as s/he pleases, but always keep in mind to serve the overall welfare of ipernity to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Anyone who believes this to be a violation of the Terms of use, the Group Guidelines, and ipernity's Guide of good conduct, please comply with legal process and contact the ima Executive Board, as every defendant has the right to due process in which he/she can (have) defended.
Thank you.
ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… club has replied to * ઇઉ * clubUnd über dich habe ich überhaupt nichts geschrieben, sondern lediglich deine Meinung in einem Punkt nicht geteilt und entsprechend meine Gedanken dazu geschrieben. Du musst sie nicht teilen, ich halte sie aber für genauso dem Gesamtwohl der Seite dienlich wie du deine. Auch wenn ich es sicher nicht so formuliert hätte...
* ઇઉ * club has replied to ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… clubTo me, good communication always means a sincere effort to identify with other people' s way of thinking and feeling to understand them as best as possible, instead of criticizing their way of expressing themselves, as long as it is not insulting and/or discriminatory.
Last but not least, I'd like to point out again that out of consideration for the author of the article, readers and discussion participants, I didn't go deeper into those details that you call 'encroaching'.
Posts by group members and/or non-group members who have been inactive for at least three years should and may be removed from groups, no matter how much they fit the particular group topic, since of whom or what use are they anymore?
No reputable company leaves posts on their internet platform from members who have been inactive for at least three years. Many even kick out inactive members after just three months as you surely know...
ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… club has replied to * ઇઉ * clubHuh?
Users who are inactive for more than 3 years and aren´t be a club member will be deleted so there is no need for any administrator or moderator of a group to remove these items from a group because their accounts will be deleted and so their items will be removed from a group.
But if this is your way to moderate a group I won´t be publish any of my invited documents to a group which was moderated by you because why should I add them if you remove them after 3 years just because my documents are just being invited (and not me as person, just my documents). This is an ipernity function to invite documents to a group so an user hasn´t to join each group where he will or would like to store documents in.... and with your acting you just make this function useless.
Who said you as a group admin should remove posts from users which are inactive for three years? And how did you decide on who was inactive? Did you see when I upload my last public doc? It was on 20 Mär 2021 - and the next one was at 10 Nov 2020 and then 22 Jun 2020. Did you really think I wasn´t active at ipernity between these large time frames?!? And will you remove my docs if I upload only for family and friends just because you aren´t one of them and don´t see my uploads? Where did you read about to remove items from your so called "inactive members"? You like it to talk about rules and laws. So where is it at www.ipernity.com/about/grouprules?
I appreciate and value the work of administrators. I think a good admin is probably one of the key ingredients of a successful group and administering a group obviously takes quite a bit of time and dedication. I am grateful to those that take on this service to the community and I have myself benefited from their efforts on many occasions. I have the greatest respect for an admin who takes care of several groups and does so actively, being present, providing moderation, leaving invitations for images that can enrich the groups and taking action when he/she believes the group needs change. I might not always agree (as I have mentioned in the case of what I believe are overly strict rules for the HFF group), but I am still grateful that they take the time to think of better ways to run the group.
Having said that, certainly members who are not admins are still entitled to offer feedback and present arguments either in support or against a change of rules? I can see where they would not be very much appreciated if they disagreed merely on the basis of their limited self-interest, but if they offered meaningful criticism based on fairness, logic and the interest of the group and of the community at large, they ought to be given the possibility to express their views and have them taken into account. Not only out of simple respect for them, but also because Ipernity, as a community, has come so far, and has not floundered under difficulties that could have overwhelmed it, precisely because it is remarkably and unusually open to participation, suggestions, and constructive criticism.
I had read the group guidelines when I joined Ipernity, but, having as yet very little idea of how groups worked because the platform I came from didn't have them, I realize that I had not fully appreciated the Guidelines content. Now, I find it an interesting read and a well thought out and clearly written document. It invites members who join a group to respect its rules, obviously, but it also sets out guidelines for the administrators that are quite relevant in this discussion.
Admins are indeed invited to "always keep in mind to serve the overall welfare of ipernity", but they are also instructed to:
- "Give the group members space, respect their views, mediate."
- " Always act politely and appropriately. Never banish a participant without warning beforehand. Give him/her ample opportunity to comment."
They state that: "This increases the quality, relevance and popularity of your groups."
Guidelines also point out that rules should be clearly stated and "appropriate" to the object and life of the group and the community in general. Generally speaking, one might assume that group participants, if they are active and take an interest in the group, would share the admin's goal of promoting the activity and the "health" of the group.
In my opinion, it always pays for admins to discuss proposed rules changes with group members beforehand. Maybe some members will just grumble without offering any useful contribution to the discussion, but most will probably think it through, try to keep fairness in mind and might at times even have better suggestions to offer. Also, a new rule that has been "canvassed" with group members beforehand will most likely prove much easier to enforce. If members have already discussed the pros and cons and seen that the new rule has the support of the group, they will be that much more likely to adhere to it and do their best to make it work. discussing proposed rule changes might take up a bit of the admin's time, but in the end, in my opinion, will make his her job easier and the group life healthier.
* ઇઉ * club has replied to Annalia S.• Involve others
Group guidelines recommend that an administrator coordinate internally with, if available, the co-administrator(s) and/or moderator(s) as needed, not with group members "Confer with them (co-administrator/s and/or moderator/s) regularly."
• Moderate
"Give group members space, respect their views, mediate."
Simply informing group members of a change in group rule(s) gives them opportunity - space - to provide feedback. However, feedback should be given in an appropriate and never in a top-down manner. Practical example: If a group member calls a rule change nonsense and lowers the status and authority of an administrator because the latter is not also the founder of the group he/she administers, the group member is undoubtedly overstepping his/her rights, powers, authority, etc.
If a group member continues to exceed the limits of decency despite the Guide of good conduct (Be polite and respectful of other users), the ipernity Group guidelines and clear notices and attempts at mediation, the group administrator is ultimately entitled to exclude such a member and has the choice between temporary or permanent exclusion of the member in question.
Without being obliged to do so, I personally would like to involve group members in an exchange of ideas, for example in the case of a rule change that seems necessary. However, experience has shown that the vast majority of group members do not seem to be interested in such an exchange. In this respect, Markus aka Boarischa Krautmo's question seems more than justified: "What are groups for?"
"What are groups for?"
It is undeniable that countless groups are in sheer chaos (neglect) and therefore do more harm than good to ipernity's public image as well as its overall welfare.
But is it really the "latest incidents regarding groups" that "allow us to rethink the function and meaning of groups"? Wasn't and isn't the "recent incidents" causally about something else entirely?
ipernity's group guidelines are as clearly defined as its guide of good conduct. And both are well elaborated.
Just as clearly and unambiguously defined is generally applicable law, which does not consider hatred and hate fomenting to be a peccadillo.
Thank you - for all.
to be continued here
Why do members confirm that they have read and agree to ipernity's terms of use when they sign up, even if they haven't read them at all?
Next question:
(a) Who is responsible for the smooth running of ipernity?
(b) Who is held responsible for malfunctions when members request and enforce changes/"tweaks" to their own liking?
Last question:
(a) Why are people and things measured with double standards?
(b) Why are some allowed to do what others are not - and vice versa?
Final correction:
I am not criticizing top-down "communication" and am not asking for a change in communication between "function owners and simple members," as you put it.
Rather, I legitimately, and for the sake of universal peace, expect everyone to abide by ipernity's rules and its recommendations for appropriate interaction, and not just with me.
Is that really too much to ask?
Boarischa Krautmo club has replied to * ઇઉ * clubThe mentioned incident was only the trigger but not the cause. There showed up a certain discontent amongst members with "rules" and "politics" in a broader sense.
Insisting on a "it is as it is"-point-of-view and offering a "like it or leave it"-choice will disencourage members.
To understand ipernity completely it should be seen as an organic and self-organising system. For legal reasons there is no customer-provider relation. It is a gathering of people with at least one common interest: To run this site.
This means embedding of all, even differing, expectations. People want and need to be seen and respected.
So back to the beginning: It's all about communication - and I am quite sure there is potential for improvement.......
And maybe this thread is a try.
* ઇઉ * club has replied to Boarischa Krautmo clubWith respect, I think it is an illusion to believe that by changing the terms of use, the group guidelines and the guide of good conduct (or group rules) according to the wishes of a few all members can be satisfied, as "you can make some people happy all the time, all the people happy some time, but you can't make all the people happy all the time". Or are we God? And rule changes do not change the real causes of the dissatisfaction of some.
Besides, there will always be people who don't (want to) comply just as they don't want to be told what to do. And with that, I'm out. My time and energy are precious and limited.
In the founding phase, when many are active, this is completely unproblematic. In the meantime, however, we have more than 2.6 million registered accounts at ipernity. Only 8,750 accounts are still open. An estimated 2,500 are active.
This means that there are still about another 4,000 accounts that will be deleted after 3 years of being unused. This is a requirement of the General Data Protection Regulation as well as of economy. If one of these 4,000 account holders was an admin, his office automatically passes to another group member. We in the team don't notice this at all because the software does it automatically in the background.
This means quite logically: all the groups that have ever been founded spill out like a wave onto the remaining active members.
This gives another meaning to a prudent rule that is written in the Group Guidelines:
That's not really a problem although it makes little sense, at least in the last example. But it makes a huge difference for all active members whether we have to administer 5,000 groups in a qualified way or 50,000.
That's why it's sometimes better to bury a group that falls to you than to just pass it on. Tidying up, which we always encourage, reduces the burden on all of us, so that in the end there is more time for what we really enjoy.
An old group created years ago, and where are no more than few members, and contributions are old, deserve to become deleted. But of course by negotiating with the group administrator, if the person has a Club subscription, and has been active at ipernity recently.
What comes to the rest of the groups, my advice is to vote with your feet! Please do not feed badly administrated groups with your contributions! Try to be a responsible group member.
And most importantly, do something to get things changed. If one finds a promising group, which is neglected, then please do not just start a competitive group on the same topic. First try to find out whom to contact with to get the existing group back on tracks. Contact the active members of that group. Find out if there are common interest to improve the existing group. And then contact the ima team to maybe even take over the group.
But these are only suggestions... I have written number of articles myself on this subject. My own decision has been to limit my membership onto very few groups only. And if anyone suggests me to add my images into so called "theme groups" that does not require being a member, then I only add if the suggestion comes from the group admin, and I find the group active enough in my opinion.
But ipernity is for fun, to evade from real life, isn't it?
As in any community rules are necessary, but I don't think here they are very restrictive, they only comply with international laws.
Like in real life we gather all kind of people with their differences, an excellent opportunity to learn from each other and improve our understanding of differences, our tolerance.
Should we all have common sense in our actions, be gentle kind constructive souls in our way to interact with others... is this asking too much?
And respect for those who take their time to improve our photo home for the benefit of all members.
About groups less quantity and more quality, I approve non active groups to be removed as duplicates merged into one, this is in the interest of all members and instead of being picky about little things we should care about the whole picture instead.
Bergfex club has replied to Xata clubAt FOTOCOMMUNITY, for example, which was formerly my photographic home, such creative chaos as here would never have been possible. There, Ute Allendörfer kept a strict eye on things to make sure they were in order. Which in turn also had advantages. For example, if you search for 'portraits' in FOTOCOMMUNITY, you also get portraits: www.fotocommunity.de/photos/Portrait?
Even on Flickr it works: www.flickr.com/search/?text=Portrait
What happens at ipernity, see for yourselves: www.ipernity.com/search/photo?w=0&q=Portrait
Now I'm already hearing, "Bernhard, ipernity ticks differently." I know. But do visitors also know that? And if they did know. What would they see then?
So let's not search for photos, but for groups: www.ipernity.com/search/group?w=0&q=Portrait
Let's just take the first hit: www.ipernity.com/group/48994
What do we see?
www.ipernity.com/doc/guanaco.1ca/50683022/in/group/48994
www.ipernity.com/doc/guanaco.1ca/50682152/in/group/48994
www.ipernity.com/doc/anna.schramm/50672082/in/group/48994
www.ipernity.com/doc/guanaco.1ca/14662817/in/group/48994
www.ipernity.com/doc/guanaco.1ca/11697521/in/group/48994
www.ipernity.com/doc/francois-manchon/50654242/in/group/48994
www.ipernity.com/doc/guanaco.1ca/50634830/in/group/48994
www.ipernity.com/doc/francois-manchon/50627084/in/group/48994
www.ipernity.com/doc/1027993/50588366/in/group/48994
Hmm. . . . "A portrait is a painting, photograph, sculpture, or other artistic representation of a person, in which the face and its expression is predominant." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portrait
9 administrators consider landscapes or even a butt to be a face. Are the rules at ipernity really too strict?
But joking aside: Which portrait group would you recommend to be linked on the 'Explore' page as exemplary for ipernity in such a way that we don't have to be ashamed?
Xata club has replied to Bergfex clubI see there are 47 groups about portraits, but most of them inactive or insignificant.
In my opinion groups should not allow too many contributions in order to prevent from hit and run postages... and for a less time-consuming moderation.
About aministrators of group www.ipernity.com/group/48994:
Only Love Song is an active member.
8 others are not club members and inactive since
Dann Godet : June 2020
Boston-madrid: March 2010
Circo de invierno : June 2018
Sethi : September 2013
Kli & Cie : April 2014
Lumpenproliterat : May 2011
Jean Bosco Malanda : October 2014
Jero Piñeiro : November 2012
www.ipernity.com/group/267495/doc is not bad, but mixing people with animals is not very happy in my sense because it is a different kind of portraits... so no.
That leaves the www.ipernity.com/group/portrait group. Maybe 3 pics per day is too much, but at least and as far as I went there were only portraits there... and some good ones.
Berny club has replied to Bergfex clubBerny club has replied to Xata clubBy the way, it's not always easy to decide wether an image fits or not. What would you think about the following images, are these portraits? Both were in this group:
www.ipernity.com/doc/xata/39583534
www.ipernity.com/doc/xata/49133466
ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… club has replied to Berny clubSami Serola (inactiv… club has replied to Berny clubBlack and white portraits
Schwarz-Weiß-Porträts (?)
Portraits en noir et blanc (?)
etc.
It would make the group look more international, and help finding it via search for groups as well. if one uses words in other languages than English.
Berny club has replied to Sami Serola (inactiv… clubBergfex club has replied to Berny clubMy personal opinion on your questions:
(a) No, not to delete all the groups. I see this matter like pruning a fruit tree. If you do it well, light comes back into the crown and sap into the fruiting wood. Then even an old tree can look good again and bear well.
(b) About the two pictures: This is a matter for the admin's discretion. Regarding the woman, I would say yes, the scenery with the old men is more a kind of street photography.
Additional question from me: Would you agree to remove the admins who have been inactive for a long time? If so, at what time limit?
Berny club has replied to Bergfex clubXata club has replied to Berny clubSami Serola (inactiv… club has replied to Berny clubI will suggest the group added to Discover Groups.
At the same time, Ipernity has always been consistent -- admins and moderators are given the latitude to run their groups as they see fit with little to no interference from IMA. Micro management at such a level would stifle someone's interest in starting a group and offend admins, moderators and members alike. Rather, when it comes to rules, the optimal approach is macro management of issues with legal implications (e.g. copyright issues) to protect the site and membership from potential liability. The micro approach is left to admins and moderators. Thus one group may require membership to post images, another may require activity such as contributions within a defined time frame and others may allow non-members to post with no time frame at all. To elaborate, I believe when talking about removing the contributions of inactive members and/or non-members, * ઇઉ * was referring to people specifically not active for three years in her groups, which is her choice. At the same time, uploads for family and friends or personal use only will not be removed unless our legal requirements require such action, which is infrequent and rare.
Last, Kiezekickerde brings up a valid point re: invites since this function allows non-members to post to groups. For some groups such an invite still requires moderation but for others it doesn't. Usually before I accept an invite, I ascertain if the group is appropriate (e.g. I'll decline an invite to a group specializing in flowers if my photograph has nothing to do with flowers) and to see if the invite was made by an admin or moderator (if not, I usually decline). Perhaps it might not be a bad idea to consider a programming option that would limit invites to admins and moderators only based on their preference, which could be included when setting up and running a group if it's not too difficult. If not, then we must do our best to maintain a happy-medium.
To me, a heavy-handed, one size fits all approach, and undue censorship would deprive the site of fun and collegiality. Of course, people have the right to disagree and that's fine, adding to the richness of the site. Thank you Boarischa for publishing this thought-invoking article and to everyone for adding to the debate even if it was passionate in some cases. People may not always agree on everything but that's what adds to the beauty of diversity. Best wishes to all for a great week ahead,
William
ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… club has replied to William Sutherland clubWell, it does not need to get coded because ipernity has already this option...
In group administration, part "Limits & moderation", under the section "Who can suggest adding content to this group?" you can decide between "All the members of the group" and "Only the administrators and moderators of the group". ;-)
Berny club has replied to ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… clubୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… club has replied to Berny clubIn einigen meiner Gruppen, die thematisch sehr eng gesteckt sind, lasse ich keine Einladungen durch Gruppenmitglieder zu - weil die in der Vergangenheit überwiegend Fotos eingeladen haben, die ich als nicht passend dann aussortieren musste (entweder per Moderation oder durch klicken auf das "X", falls die Gruppe nicht moderiert ist) - das war dann irgendwann eine doofe Arbeit, die ich dadurch vermeiden konnte, dass nur ich als Gruppenadmin und die Moderatoren die Möglichkeit haben, Fotos in eine Gruppe einzuladen.
Ich kann letztlich beiden Sichtweisen was abgewinnen...
www.ipernity.com/group/silhouettes/discuss/196244
The facts should be made clear. Competing groups should become fairly compered:
www.ipernity.com/search/group?w=0&q=silhouette
Not only by the number of members and contributions, but also based on their quality like about/rules translated, including titles. If it is the best group which then has no active administrator, then the admins of competing groups could become made as admins of it. No point to have multiple competing groups on the same subject.
Then people could become summoned to use only one group.
But I do understand that sometimes people have difficulties to get along with each other. So, it is only a dream to get some order here... Maybe chaos is the better option. Life is chaotic anyway.
And this opinion is based on facts that I know. I have spent hours to get some group admins to understand how about/rules can be provided on multiple languages. Even that is a difficult task! Have even had to do that on behalf of some. And sending messages to people takes time as well. And negotiate and convince people...
Berny club has replied to Sami Serola (inactiv… clubwww.ipernity.com/group/310291 ("Monochrome", moderated, 2nd admin left)
www.ipernity.com/group/landscape ("Landscape - Landschaft - Paysage")
www.ipernity.com/group/2634216 ("Showcase Ipernity", only with admins invitation)
www.ipernity.com/group/2037780 ("Shipwrecks - Schiffswracks - Épaves", moderated)
www.ipernity.com/group/bridge ("Brücken /=|=\ Bridges " with other admins)
www.ipernity.com/group/48994 ("Porträts in Schwarz-Weiß (Monochrom")
www.ipernity.com/group/steamtrains ("Steam Engines and Steam Locomotives",
www.ipernity.com/group/thestreet ("The Street", moderated)
www.ipernity.com/group/cuba-photo ("Cuba Photo")
www.ipernity.com/group/graz ("Stadt Graz")
www.ipernity.com/group/vietnam ("Vietnam")
www.ipernity.com/group/96055 ("Rusty & Ruins")
www.ipernity.com/group/868219 ("Strommasten ~ power poles ~ Poteaux électriques")
www.ipernity.com/group/magic_moments ("Magic Moments")
and others
All these groups are active.
ୱ Kiezkickerde ( ͡°… club has replied to Sami Serola (inactiv… clubUnd um euch auch mal eine andere Lösung zu zeigen, wie das früher auch mal funktionierte, nehme ich immer das Beispiel "Alter Elbtunnel" in Hamburg. Dafür gab es, als die Gruppen bei ipernity eingeführt wurden, recht schnell zwei Gruppen, die exakt jenes als Thema hatten, also thematische Doubletten waren:
www.ipernity.com/group/elbtunnel
www.ipernity.com/group/262949
Natürlich wäre es damals besser gewesen, beide Gruppen zu einer zu vereinen und die andere zu schließen. Da es damals aber noch deutlich mehr Leute in Hamburg gab, die ipernity nutzten, haben wir zum damaligen Zeitpunkt keinen Grund gesehen, dass man nicht auch zwei Gruppen zu dieser Hamburger Sehenswürdigkeit haben könne. Man müsse sie eben thematisch nochmal etwas feiner aufteilen und klarer definieren, was in die jeweilgen Gruppe gehört und was nicht.
Im Ergebnis ist es nun so, dass in der einen Gruppe ein sehr spezifischer Blick in die Tunnelröhren zu finden ist, und in der anderen Gruppe alles sonstige zu dieser Sehenswürdigkeit. Und da gibt es beispielsweise Aufzüge für Autos, diverse Wandtafeln, geschwungene Treppen, alte Feuerlöscher, alte Hydranten (die komplett ohne Pumpen arbeiten können, denn das Wasser kommt ja quasi von oben aus der Elbe) und noch vieles mehr.
Ergänzend zu der dann deutlich schärferen thematischen Abgrenzung der beiden Gruppen zueinander haben wir die jeweils andere in der Gruppenbeschreibung verlinkt.
Und das funktioniert auch heute noch ganz hervorragend, in keiner der beiden Gruppen ist auch nur ein einziges Dokument, was eigentlich in der anderen "Alter Elbtunnel" - Gruppe thematisch besser aufgehoben wäre. Und ergänzend dazu laden wir uns gegenseitig in die jeweils andere Gruppe passende Dokumente ein, wenn wir auf diese stossen.
Heute, mit der deutlich geringeren Mitgliederzahl bei ipernity, würde man sicherlich eine der beiden schließen und wieder den Zustand herstellen, dass es nur eine Gruppe für den Alten Elbtunnel gibt, in der dann alle Dokumente zum Thema rein kommen
Aber dieser Zustand ist heute in der Form leider nicht mehr herstellbar, da es bei diesem Nischenthema leider so ist, dass viele der damaligen Nutzer zwar noch ein ipernity-Konto haben, es aber nicht mehr aktiv nutzen. Deren Dokumente bereichern also noch beide Gruppen, aber einen Umzug in die jeweils andere Gruppe würde kaum jemand der ersten Teilnehmer in der Gruppe heute noch mitmachen - womit der dann einen verbleibenden Gruppe zwangsläufig sehr viele Dokumente verloren gehen würden, die nun in den beiden Gruppen gesammelt vorliegen.
Das ist imho auch ein Punkt, den man beim zusammenlegen von Gruppen bedenken sollte - speziell dann, wenn die Gruppen ein Nischenthema behandeln, eine Gruppe alleine also heute nicht mehr in gleicher Form überlebensfähig wäre - weil sie zu wenig Beiträge enthalten würde. Für Beiträge in den angesprochenen Gruppen braucht es eben vor allem Hamburger oder Touristen, die nach Hamburg kommen. Erstere gibt es auf ipernity kaum noch, und zweite gerade gar nicht und auch sonst eher selten auf ipernity.
Insofern ist nicht immer das löschen bzw. zusammenlegen von verschiedenen Gruppen der bessere, erfolgsversprechende Weg, sondern vielleicht auch eine schärfere Trennung von bisher themengleichen Gruppen hinsichtlich dessen, was in die jeweilige Gruppe gehört.
-------------------------
Generell finde ich, dass Gruppen bzw. Gruppenadministratoren viel mehr zusammen als konkurrierend arbeiten sollten.
Hier nehme ich dann gerne das Beispiel meiner Gruppe Hamburg - www.ipernity.com/group/hamburg - in deren Gruppenbeschreibung ich alle mir bekannten Gruppen, die zu Hamburg passen, aufgenommen habe. Seien es Stadtteile, seien es Sehenswürdigkeiten, seien es Vereine oder andere Dinge, die in Hamburg sind. Unabhängig davon, von wem die jeweilige Gruppe administriert wird. Und auch unabhängig davon, wie gut diese (aktuell) administriert wird. Zum einen verhindere ich so, dass weitere Gruppen mit gleichem Thema gegründet werden, zumindest dann, wenn jemand zuvor nach "Hamburg" sucht, wenn er eine neue Gruppe mit Bezug zu Hamburg aufmachen möchte. Naja, und wenn derjenige dann halt nicht sein eigenes Ego über ipernity stellt und trotzdem eine eigene Gruppe aufmacht, obwohl es bereits eine entsprechende bei ipernity gibt, die halt von jemand anderes betreut wird (weil - "ich muss ja unbedingt selbst der Admin sein!!!!1" ja so wichtig ist...).
Ich finde, das könnten speziell alle Gruppen von Städten, Ländern etc. ähnlich machen, ich glaube, dann würde es deutlich weniger Doubletten geben...
Sign-in to write a comment.