Mystical Kyoto - Japan's city of a thousand temples

[JimMcClain]

Not me. Not a single picture posted here, just a link off-site. Totally nothing more than pure click-whoring. Absolutely unacceptable here.

While I appreciate that you agreed to my point, to categorize it as "click-whoring" seems a bit harsh. I'm sure Phil had his reasons for posting only a link, I don't think any of them could include maliciousness. Unacceptable to me too, but my point is not to make a new rule, but to help others see that TPF has a purpose and a goal and I don't think that is to get us in and then out very quickly to another website.

 

[Fred Berg]

I am not going out of my way to be an ass. I hope you can resist the urge too. I know you better than I know Phil and I haven't looked up all of your posts either. It's not a requirement. It doesn't invalidate my point.

As mentioned, I would normally agree with your point and have even raised the issue of links without supporting content being posted with the moderators (feedback section). Nevertheless, some common sense needs to be applied in certain cases, as well as a little room for manoeuver.

 

[Derrel]

Not me. Not a single picture posted here, just a link off-site. Totally nothing more than pure click-whoring. Absolutely unacceptable here.

While I appreciate that you agreed to my point, to categorize it as "click-whoring" seems a bit harsh. I'm sure Phil had his reasons for posting only a link, I don't think any of them could include maliciousness. Unacceptable to me too, but my point is not to make a new rule, but to help others see that TPF has a purpose and a goal and I don't think that is to get us in and then out very quickly to another website.

Using the world's largest photo forum but NOT POSTING ONE,SINGLE PHOTO, but instead linking all TPF members who opened his false advertising post to his OFF-SITE gallery of 142 photos is the very definition of click-whoring. Period. It takes FIVE SECONDS to drag and drop an image into a TPF post box. Apparently, that was too much work for the OP. Sorry if you feel the use of a popular word that accurately describes the OP's behavior is too blunt for you, Jim. Click-whoring has been met with swift and decisive elimination of links very recently. As it should be. Again, ALL it takes is a simple drag-and-drop to post a few pictures here on TPF....apparently though, that was not even on the OP's mind.

I don't see ANY room for cutting of slack here when ZERO images were posted. ZERO pics. NOT one, single image. EVERY click here was wasted, and sent TPF members on a goose chase to the OP's own Flickr pages, so he can boost his Flickr hit counts using TPF members' time. That is not cool.

 

[Derrel]

Philmar Kyoto - Google Search

Here's his cut and paste from dPreview: Mystical Kyoto - Japan s city of a thousand temples Landscape and Travel Photography Forum Digital Photography Review

here is his cut and paste to skyscrapercity.com
Philmar s Kyoto adventure loved the monkeys - SkyscraperCity

here is his cut and paste to Urbantoronto.com
Mystical Kyoto - Japan s city of a thousand temples Urban Toronto

HERE is his CUT AND PASTE, TODAY, TO YET ANOTHER place on the web, Digitial Photography Forums.com
Mystical Kyoto - Japan s city of a thousand temples -- Urban Life Travel in photography-on-the.net forums

See the pattern here, Jim?????

 

[JimMcClain]

I don't see ANY room for cutting of slack here when ZERO images were posted. ZERO pics. NOT one, single image. EVERY click here was wasted, and sent TPF members on a goose chase to the OP's own Flickr pages, so he can boost his Flickr hit counts using TPF members' time. That is not cool.

Philmar Kyoto - Google Search

Here's his cut and paste from dPreview: [link removed]

here is his cut and paste to skyscrapercity.com [link removed]

here is his cut and paste to Urbantoronto.com [link removed]

HERE is his CUT AND PASTE, TODAY, TO YET ANOTHER place on the web, Digitial Photography Forums.com [link removed]

See the pattern here, Jim?????

Yes, I stand corrected. You were absolutely right. All those sites you mentioned and more on the Google search results... that is indeed click-whoring. It's far worse than I thought. My apologies.

 

[sashbar]

Not me. Not a single picture posted here, just a link off-site. Totally nothing more than pure click-whoring. Absolutely unacceptable here.

While I appreciate that you agreed to my point, to categorize it as "click-whoring" seems a bit harsh. I'm sure Phil had his reasons for posting only a link, I don't think any of them could include maliciousness. Unacceptable to me too, but my point is not to make a new rule, but to help others see that TPF has a purpose and a goal and I don't think that is to get us in and then out very quickly to another website.

Using the world's largest photo forum but NOT POSTING ONE,SINGLE PHOTO, but instead linking all TPF members who opened his false advertising post to his OFF-SITE gallery of 142 photos is the very definition of click-whoring. Period. It takes FIVE SECONDS to drag and drop an image into a TPF post box. Apparently, that was too much work for the OP. Sorry if you feel the use of a popular word that accurately describes the OP's behavior is too blunt for you, Jim. Click-whoring has been met with swift and decisive elimination of links very recently. As it should be. Again, ALL it takes is a simple drag-and-drop to post a few pictures here on TPF....apparently though, that was not even on the OP's mind.

I don't see ANY room for cutting of slack here when ZERO images were posted. ZERO pics. NOT one, single image. EVERY click here was wasted, and sent TPF members on a goose chase to the OP's own Flickr pages, so he can boost his Flickr hit counts using TPF members' time. That is not cool.

With due respect Derrel (and I must say I like your posts and respect your vast photographic knowledge) Phil has posted MUCH MORE images ON THIS SITE than you have in the last three years. What is even more important, it was top, top class images, many of them would not be out of place in Nat Geo.

I personally do not own this site, do not benefit from the traffic and could not care less about clicks, I am just one of the members and therefore think that guys like Phil are a great benefit for the forum. Respect the talent guys.

 

[Derrel]

With due respect Derrel (and I must say I like your posts and respect your vast photographic knowledge) Phil has posted MUCH MORE images ON THIS SITE than you have in the last three years. What is even more important, it was top, top class images, many of them would not be out of place in Nat Geo.

I personally do not own this site, do not benefit from the traffic and could not care less about clicks, I am just one of the members and therefore think that guys like Phil are a great benefit for the forum. Respect the talent guys.

He's posted more images than me? Are you sure about that? How many photos do you suppose I've posted here since 2012, sashbar?

Tell me--how many images have I posted here, just since 2012. Take a guess, sashbar. Please, give me a number. Post your guess in this thread.

I respect talent. But I do not respect spammers.

 

[TreeofLifeStairs]

I've got to agree with Derrel and Jim on this. The fact that he has not made a post since he left his op leads me to believe the same. Even in the the op he didn't give any additional info about his trip or even what to expect if we followed the link (other than it was of Kyoto).

 

[Magxs]

I don't have any problems clicking on a Flickr link, I'd do it myself as well.

On topic; very, very good shots! I faved a couple and gave you a follow!

 

[Philmar]

CRISIS AVERTED: I posted a few teasers for you.

 

[JimMcClain]

Thank you. Very nice work too.

 

[JacaRanda]

CRISIS AVERTED: I posted a few teasers for you.

Wow, you took the high road. Classy! Not sure I could have gone that route being called any type of whore. But then again, back in the day nevermind.

 

[Philmar]

Excellent images as always from Philmar. Top class. Macaque in the frame is priceless. Absolutely money shot. Were I a Nat Geo editor I would have grabbed it and run.

You mean without paying me for it?

 

[sashbar]

Excellent images as always from Philmar. Top class. Macaque in the frame is priceless. Absolutely money shot. Were I a Nat Geo editor I would have grabbed it and run.

You mean without paying me for it?

Well, a lot of photogs will pay just to get on my pages.