[filmscanners] Re: My interest is Film Scanners!

["Arthur Entlich" <artistic-1@shaw.ca>]

Hopefully, this won't spawn a whole bunch of further discussion and
recriminations about the complaint.

I would, however, like to make my periodic comment whenever this issue
of off-topic discussions come up with newcomers, as a long term list member.

I think Tony's tolerance of off topic discussion is to be commended.
IMHO, he usually has a good handle on when to place limits.  And,
overall, I think the contributors to this group respect him, and usually
the chatter dies down within 24-48 hours.  Some people receive digests
or respond to list mail in order they receive it, so they may respond to
a message a day or two old before realizing Tony has asked the
discussion to be capped, and therefore the death is a bit slow and
painful ;-)

However, I also want to say something about these off topic discussions,
since I certainly can't be accused of not having participated in
several, and even for having started some over the years.  Those last
three words are important:  "Over the years".  Some of us have been
involved in this list for literally years.  Most of us who are long term
readers and contributors, have probably read and, in some cases,
responded to every question and issue involving scanning several times,
if not dozens. I know I have.

Just like the real world, long time members on this list get to know one
another's personalities and "causes" over time, we have chats,
discussions, disagreements, outright fights and sometimes fling insults
at each other.  So its not only a scanner list but also a social
gathering on the net.  A lot of this traffic goes on behind the scenes
in private mail, but some of it is aired publicly and some is just
public debate that may not relate to scanners, but still may have some
interest to some people.

For the long time "residents" (who often are some of the more
experienced and knowledgeable) it is what keeps them from leaving the
group completely.

So, as much as I too have been finding myself using the delete key a
fair amount the last week or so, because these discussions aren't my
cuppa', I recognize in any public forum, even one that is supposed to be
specialized, there will be personal "wheat" and "chaff" to sort through.

The contributing members here, do so of their own generosity.  We get
paid no stipend for answering newcomers questions for the 40th time, and
yet some of us still do so.  If a scanner question is asked and it is
fully ignored by everyone, and only off topic "noise" is generated, then
I think there is a problem, but that is a rare occurrence.

If you don't like the direction things are headed, you can always
redirect discussion with an interesting scanner related comment or
question, but as much as I may sometimes share your impatience regarding
a long off topic thread, I think you need to understand that without
people willing to give of and share their expertise freely, this list
would pretty much be of no value at all.

I guess if you find it intolerable, you could find consultants who will
provide you with info for a fee, or you can buy a good book on the
subject, but it tends to be a bit less interactive and interesting that
way. ;-)

Lastly, rarely does an off topic discussion last for more than a week,
before things get back to scanner discussions, so you may just have to
wait it out, and use that delete key.

Art




Geoff Clack wrote:

> Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:45:20 +0200, <anthony@atkielski.com> wrote:
>
>
>>There are precious few programmers whom I'd consider true software
>>engineers.  For example, I expect a software engineer to be able to compose
>>a paragraph without grammar or spelling errors, and most programmers cannot
>>do that.
>>
>
> Shouldn't that be 'grammatical or spelling errors'? :-)
>
> Forgive me, but I've just spent far too much time working through
> filmscanners Digest for Fri 25 Oct, 2002, all 229k of it, in the hope
> learning about filmscanners. I can't say that the experience has been
> helpful.
>
> With a little list discipline the task would have been much easier.
> Example (picked at random): Why did Laurie find it necessary to
> repeat all of Tony's contribution of Wed, 23 Oct 2002 14:28 +0100
> (BST) in his Wed, 23 Oct 2002 12:22:56 -0500 response? Etc., etc.
>
> And why, when Tony (I wouldn't want his job) requested that people
> rein in their hobby horses have they kept on at full gallop?
>
> OK, so I'm an upstart newcomer (you were at one time). But I have a
> job to do and I can't afford to waste time.
>
> Ah well, back to Photoshop. Must remember to convert to CMYK before
> saving the TIFs.
>
> Regards
>
> Geoff.
>
> PS. My business partner's interest in computers is limited to where
> the on/off switch is. His use of programs/applications is intuitive.
> Unencumbered by technical knowledge he is by far the most productive
> and original designer that I know. Think about it.
>
>
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body