The TPF Inner Circle - Google+

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Regardless of whether or not you join the "Inner Circle", please be careful posting your photos on Google+...from their terms & conditions:

"By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.

You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.

You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or media. You agree that this license shall permit Google to take these actions."

Good point. The best practice is to watermark the hell out of the images anyway. That way they can use them, but 1) they probably don't want to at that point or 2) you atleast get a plug for it when people see your website plastered as a watermark. I am guilty of being lazy though and not doing this, but I always make sure the files are low-res. Thanks for the positive addition.

 

[Overread16 4]

Yeah but unless you put big watermarks over them Google or 3rd parties they sell to can still use the image and make any adjustments to them that they want. I also notice that they don't state a revocation on those rights (similar to Facebook or Photobucket) so even if you remove content from their services they still retain the licence.

 

[fjrabon]

That was the original plan. However, I figured that the people who responded and did not get added, would feel insulted or snobbed. I didn't realize it would be so hard for people to wrap their heads around this concept. If a group of people want to start a Google Circle for the Beginners forum, then great. I am not going to piss and moan about it or whine because I wasn't invited or included. It comes as no surprise, that there is a need for many people on here to turn everything into a big negetive debacle, when there is no need for it. It would have been EASIER for me to post the thread that way, but it would have been equally as easy for people to not post if they weren't interested in joining right?

Your biggest issue is the thread title. You're a photographer, you should understand that the first glance someone gives something leaves the strongest impression. You named this 'inner circle', with all its elitist connotations. People aren't getting past that. No matter how much you try to explain it they're not. It's like having to explain a photograph to someone, they've already made up their mind 90% at first glance, it's how people work.

I'm not saying your idea is bad or good. I'm saying this is why you're getting all the crap you're getting. because the initial impression is elitist, and you get to pick the elite. I understand that's not what you intended, but this is just like when a photographer doesn't intend for his viewers to see the photo the way they do. The photographer can blame the viewers for not seeing his vision, or he can blame himself for not executing what he wanted to get across.

 

[e.rose]

I think an easier way to do this without getting all the sh*t from everyone else would have been to say:

"Hey, who here uses G+? I'm starting a TPF G+ circle and I want to add people to it!"

Then quietly select who you actually *want* in your circle... and then when you're satisfied share that circle for other's to use.

Wouldn't that be accomplishing the same thing?

I think people are freaking out because they don't understand how the G+ circles work... but I think I get what you're trying to do... and if that's the case, then stating it the above way probably would've saved you a lot of grief.

Cause really, that's all your doing... is creating a circle of people you want to communicate with via G+... and then just passing that list off to others who want to tweak it. It's not like the changes that others make to their version of the circle affect yours at all... so... yeah.

I get what you're doing (I think)... there just probably was a less "controversial" way of doing it, haha.

That was the original plan. However, I figured that the people who responded and did not get added, would feel insulted or snobbed. I didn't realize it would be so hard for people to wrap their heads around this concept. If a group of people want to start a Google Circle for the Beginners forum, then great. I am not going to piss and moan about it or whine because I wasn't invited or included. It comes as no surprise, that there is a need for many people on here to turn everything into a big negetive debacle, when there is no need for it. It would have been EASIER for me to post the thread that way, but it would have been equally as easy for people to not post if they weren't interested in joining right?

True, haha.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Here is another viewpoint from professional photographer Colby Brown, as well as some relevant links.

Google+: The Survival Guide for a Photographer's Paradise | Colby Brown Photography

 

[Sammie_Lou]

Also, if you get the Google+ app for your phone, make sure you don't have it automatically syncing to Google Picasa (which, by the way, has the same thing in the terms and conditions as Google+). I installed the Google+ app on my phone, then when I logged in on my computer the next time, there were all of the pictures that I'd taken on my phone (EVERY single one) with a little thing asking if I'd like to share them with my Google+ circles. Creepy. Google is slowly taking over the world...

 

[e.rose]

(which, by the way, has the same thing in the terms and conditions as Google+).

Of course it does, it's all owned by Google.

I installed the Google+ app on my phone, then when I logged in on my computer the next time, there were all of the pictures that I'd taken on my phone (EVERY single one) with a little thing asking if I'd like to share them with my Google+ circles.

A lot of us like that for its convenience.

Google is slowly taking over the world...

Good. My only regret is that they don't get along with Apple, or my world would be wonderful! It's like being really good friends with two people that HATE each other. I'm always so emotionally torn!

 

[cgipson1]

Your biggest issue is the thread title. You're a photographer, you should understand that the first glance someone gives something leaves the strongest impression. You named this 'inner circle', with all its elitist connotations. People aren't getting past that. No matter how much you try to explain it they're not. It's like having to explain a photograph to someone, they've already made up their mind 90% at first glance, it's how people work.

I'm not saying your idea is bad or good. I'm saying this is why you're getting all the crap you're getting. because the initial impression is elitist, and you get to pick the elite. I understand that's not what you intended, but this is just like when a photographer doesn't intend for his viewers to see the photo the way they do. The photographer can blame the viewers for not seeing his vision, or he can blame himself for not executing what he wanted to get across.

That was my biggest issue with this! The way the initial post was phrased was very elitist... and I found that offensive (whether I was invited or not!).

I am calling it the Inner Circle because I am only willing to add reputable and trustworthy posters who have ample postings and which I have interacted with before. In other words, people who have earned a spot in the Inner Circle.

Oh woe to all the unwashed masses that won't be included in this photographic secret society!

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Your biggest issue is the thread title. You're a photographer, you should understand that the first glance someone gives something leaves the strongest impression. You named this 'inner circle', with all its elitist connotations. People aren't getting past that. No matter how much you try to explain it they're not. It's like having to explain a photograph to someone, they've already made up their mind 90% at first glance, it's how people work.

I'm not saying your idea is bad or good. I'm saying this is why you're getting all the crap you're getting. because the initial impression is elitist, and you get to pick the elite. I understand that's not what you intended, but this is just like when a photographer doesn't intend for his viewers to see the photo the way they do. The photographer can blame the viewers for not seeing his vision, or he can blame himself for not executing what he wanted to get across.

That was my biggest issue with this! The way the initial post was phrased was very elitist... and I found that offensive (whether I was invited or not!).

I am calling it the Inner Circle because I am only willing to add reputable and trustworthy posters who have ample postings and which I have interacted with before. In other words, people who have earned a spot in the Inner Circle.

Oh woe to all the unwashed masses that won't be included in this photographic secret society!

Sounds like some deep-rooted adequacy issues ( meant as a joke by the way, not maliciously ). Inner Circle is a long used term referring to ones closest friends and confidants. I think that this is a very fitting description of what was trying to be achieved. ( Also the reason why google even USES circles as the descriptive device for their groups ) We can argue about this all day long, but the fact of the matter is, you know as well I do, the most active posters on this forum. Its not some mystery. In fact, a few of the naysayers that have posted here would fit the bill. The main reason for having to have a knowledge of someone, as stated, was for security reasons. It also acts as a bit of a cut-off so that we are not simply taking the entire list of members of this forum and starting a massive circle with all of the excess fat that shows up on these forums in the form of useless, negetive and downright malicious posts. This has nothing to do with whether someone is a beginner or not a beginner. Unfortunately, there is no other way for me, or the other members of the circle to guage you as a person unless we go off of historical experience on the TPF. Thats just the blatant reality of it. We can argue about people being offended or having their feelings hurt or whatever, but its really not that difficult to see this in a realistic manner.

 

[dots]

Sounds totally ghey+


cheers,

 

[cgipson1]

Sounds like some deep-rooted adequacy issues ( meant as a joke by the way, not maliciously ). Inner Circle is a long used term referring to ones closest friends and confidants. I think that this is a very fitting description of what was trying to be achieved. ( Also the reason why google even USES circles as the descriptive device for their groups ) We can argue about this all day long, but the fact of the matter is, you know as well I do, the most active posters on this forum. Its not some mystery. In fact, a few of the naysayers that have posted here would fit the bill. The main reason for having to have a knowledge of someone, as stated, was for security reasons. It also acts as a bit of a cut-off so that we are not simply taking the entire list of members of this forum and starting a massive circle with all of the excess fat that shows up on these forums in the form of useless, negetive and downright malicious posts. This has nothing to do with whether someone is a beginner or not a beginner. Unfortunately, there is no other way for me, or the other members of the circle to guage you as a person unless we go off of historical experience on the TPF. Thats just the blatant reality of it. We can argue about people being offended or having their feelings hurt or whatever, but its really not that difficult to see this in a realistic manner.

No offense taken.. and I was being at least partly facetious with my comments.. so no offense meant, either! I do feel that your choice of words could have been improved upon.. but than not everyone is as much a literalist as I am, either!

I agree that the forum does have more than it's share of backbiting, backstabbing nonsensical posts... that can't be argued! And many of those that will feel like they should be included in your "inner circle" are often the culprits. But whether they meet your criteria.. well, only you will know that!

Good luck with it...

 

[dots]

(i'm joking, of course ..as you would gather if you were part of my circ..oh nevermind).

Goonies - your idea seems sort of 'running away' rather than building on the TPF to be what you need. What can be done on G+ (collectively) that cannot here..with use of the ignore function or a thicker skin/different attitude?

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Sounds like some deep-rooted adequacy issues ( meant as a joke by the way, not maliciously ). Inner Circle is a long used term referring to ones closest friends and confidants. I think that this is a very fitting description of what was trying to be achieved. ( Also the reason why google even USES circles as the descriptive device for their groups ) We can argue about this all day long, but the fact of the matter is, you know as well I do, the most active posters on this forum. Its not some mystery. In fact, a few of the naysayers that have posted here would fit the bill. The main reason for having to have a knowledge of someone, as stated, was for security reasons. It also acts as a bit of a cut-off so that we are not simply taking the entire list of members of this forum and starting a massive circle with all of the excess fat that shows up on these forums in the form of useless, negetive and downright malicious posts. This has nothing to do with whether someone is a beginner or not a beginner. Unfortunately, there is no other way for me, or the other members of the circle to guage you as a person unless we go off of historical experience on the TPF. Thats just the blatant reality of it. We can argue about people being offended or having their feelings hurt or whatever, but its really not that difficult to see this in a realistic manner.

No offense taken.. and I was being at least partly facetious with my comments.. so no offense meant, either! I do feel that your choice of words could have been improved upon.. but than not everyone is as much a literalist as I am, either!

I agree that the forum does have more than it's share of backbiting, backstabbing nonsensical posts... that can't be argued! And many of those that will feel like they should be included in your "inner circle" are often the culprits. But whether they meet your criteria.. well, only you will know that!

Good luck with it...

Yeah, I am sure it could have been re-worded and checked with a fine-toothed comb, but what can you do? I think the even bigger problem is that I assumed that the people that the thread was intended for, would know who they were. I mean, you just ask yourself. "Hey, have I been around for a while to where most people recognize my avatar or name? Am I fairly a decent person in how I act and treat people on here? Am I someone who wouldn't be considered a loose canon? Do I not hold long rooted grudges or make useless or asinine posts on a regular basis? " If the answer is yes, then you are most likely someone who would have been invited. Thats why I left it in the hands of those interested to message me. I figured, by my description, that a complete forum newb or someone that I have absolutely never interacted with, or someone who is a resident s**t stirring troll, would not message me.

 

[cgipson1]

I think the even bigger problem is that I assumed that the people that the thread was intended for, would know who they were.

lol! So you expect the good, humble people who are always helpful, and never injecting chaos... to have egos large enough to "know" that they are they ones you are referring to? Seems backwards to me!

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

(i'm joking, of course ..as you would gather if you were part of my circ..oh nevermind).

Goonies - your idea seems sort of 'running away' rather than building on the TPF to be what you need. What can be done on G+ (collectively) that cannot here..with use of the ignore function or a thicker skin/different attitude?

If you block people, they can still see everything you post, just not the other way around. It is not my job to design a site that functions how I want to. I am using the tools at my disposal. Also, why does everything have to be black and white?? I do not want to either ignore or not-ignore people. I may still enjoy interacting with people, but that doesn't mean I would invite them over to my house or to go out shooting etc. Facebook made this same mistake in their approach and this is why Google+ even has a glimmer of hope.