Has DVXUSER Jumped The Shark?

[FrameFarmMedia]

For me having real names or company names gives people skin in the game. Some level of accountability that doesn't exist with anonymous posters. Facebook has more genuine interactions that twitter. Linkedin has the most courteous and professional interactions of them all because it has the most transparency on who is on the other end of the keyboard. I like to know who I am talking to but its not just names its having a resume attached or some examples of work and experiences . I do look up peoples work or experience to assess the validity of their information. As much as CML can be an ego clash I have an idea of who I should pay attention to and who likes to make noise or be contrarian based on who they are and their company/resume. Is the poster a hobbiest dealing with little risk but on the cheap or a working professional that is making a career based on the advice given. These things are important to me and something i value more in other platforms for information. The number of people who comment on cameras and lighting without ever having used them or run tests but watched a few youtube videos to regurgitate is an industry wide problem. I'd like to come up with a way to solve that. It used to feel that the more experienced users posted the most but maybe thats just my impression from 10yrs ago. Maybe I've outgrown DVXUSER as one of the people who used to be a DVX user and has grown leaps and bounds in my career since that time.

 

[OldCorpse]

The “real names” idea strikes me as plainly stupid. I would vote against it. And if it were implemented, I would quit this site immediately - and I have been on this site since 2006 and have almost 3000 posts. In all that time I have never been PM’d by a mod with any kind of caution, or warning, or temporary ban, or censure. Oh, if you need to know whether to take a person’s opinion seriously, it’s more important that they have a long track record and tons of posts, so you know exactly what you are getting - just having a name doesn’t do much in comparison.

There are tons of reasons why anonymity might be preferrable. Yes, you are more free to speak honestly - and no, it’s not the case that if the opinion is controversial, therefore it’s “wrong and trollish” and “consider why”. For example, my background is the world of agenting, producing, writing. I also do a lot of film/TV reviews on this site. I express strong opinions about content. There is no way I’d do that honestly with my real name, because many of the people involved in the content I’m reviewing might have been former clients of mine, or my friend’s or the agency, or people I worked or collaborated with. Would I say honestly about an actor with whom I’ve had a professional relationship, that they did a really, really bad job in a given film? NO.

A real name policy is a policy that will stifle any dissent or contrary opinion or unpopular opinion (at any given moment and fashion of the times). You will not get an honest opinion from that engineer from company X about their product. Maybe you have no interesting opinion or nothing exclusive to reveal, and feel therefore that since you say nothing of such consequence, it’s fine to use your real name. But there are others who do have something of consequence to say, so please don’t make policies that restrict that just because you do you. IF YOU WANT TO USE YOUR REAL NAME DO SO, BUT LEAVE THE OPTION FOR THOSE WHO DON’T. See? That way both can be accomodated.

Lack of anonymity will lead to bland, “safe” and uncontroversial posts. But mostly, it will lead to silence.

In today’s climate you simply don’t know who will take offence at what and for what inconceivable reason - which is why employers regularly google prospective - or even current - employees and can get rid of them not for any real offence but “just to be safe”. JUST TO BE SAFE. Any controversy = bad, therefore the safest is to not hire. Regardless of actual offence or validity of opinion - just the PERCEPTION of controversy - without any specific complaint leads to “why take a chance”. Who in their right mind would say anything under their own name? Many, many won’t. Which is why this leads to silence and low traffic. If you know you are being monitored, and there’s a record, you won’t participate, period. Or at least many won’t.

Employers often ask for FB and Twitter accounts - as happens I am on neither, and never have been, not because of any other reason than it’s a time sink and I do not wish to waste time on those platforms. People are astounded that I don’t have such accounts. It’s “suspicious” - so what, should I start an Instagram or other platform accounts just to “perform socially” and post nothing but bunnies and cats and flowers, so a future employer won’t look at me suspiciously because I don’t have an FB account? Sorry, it’s dumb. It doesn’t lead to any “truth and safety”, it leads to “deception and self-preservation”, and mostly to silence and lies. Good going “real names” policy outcomes! Remember - unintended consequences.

I cannot imagine the idiocy of someone who thinks anonymity is undesirable - it’s the same kind of bonehead who thinks privacy is unimportant, because “if you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide”. History tells us - abundantly - that anonymity and freedom of expression go hand in hand. Civilization would be impossible without it. We all know regimes that have tried the “no anonymity” route and totalitarianism is not a success. There’s a reason, that such regimes - f.ex. China - make great efforts to strip people of anonymity. And this applies not just to political speech, but to ALL speech. If there is no option to express an opinion anonymously - IN ANY AREA - it represents a fundamental failure.

Yes, anonymity can lead to more trolling. But that’s the price you pay. It’s exactly the same as the dilemma and tradoffs of free speech. Free speech can lead to a lot of nonsense and bad speech. But the alternative is much worse. It’s exactly as the dilemma with freedom itself. It means some will use their freedom for negative things - but the alternative is much worse. There is no “safe” space - because the safest is the grave. Life, and freedom means positive and negative. Embrace it. Deal with it - minimize the trolls, establish policies, but keep it free. And anonymity is the bedrock of that freedom, without it, freedom cannot exist.

You want to use your real name - knock yourself out. YOU HAVE THAT OPTION RIGHT NOW. But if you make a policy of “real names only”, that leaves me, and people like me, without options - and at that point I’m gone.

 

[Ben Scott]

I cannot imagine the idiocy of someone who thinks anonymity is undesirable -

I hope the rest of your posts are as solid gold as this.

All just reads like it was typed from a bunker while the poster finishes a tin foil hat. A perfect example of someone being rude while being anonymous.

 

[Peter C.]

Good points. I find the most off putting (which I'm sometimes guilty of) is these forums become a room filled of egos shouting "my opinion is more valid than yours".

 

[combatentropy]

And your sarcasm and mockery are not rude?

 

[FrameFarmMedia]

You will not get an honest opinion from that engineer from company X about their product. Maybe you have no interesting opinion or nothing exclusive to reveal, and feel therefore that since you say nothing of such consequence, it’s fine to use your real name. But there are others who do have something of consequence to say,

Lack of anonymity will lead to bland, “safe” and uncontroversial posts.

Who in their right mind would say anything under their own name?

I cannot imagine the idiocy of someone who thinks anonymity is undesirable -

Thats the point. I want truth and honesty not something of consequence or controversial. Factual information and experience is what I am after not an argument. I want to know if the person pushing a product works for that product or for a competing product. Or has even used the product. Without anything to back up your listed experience you could just as easily be a basement blogger who has never once worked no set or with talent etc. If you want to live your life in fear of others then be my guest. I tend to say things online I would say to peoples faces. If I have an opinion I stand by it publicly and if I am unwilling to I have to examine why that is. I guess thats how I was raised so I don't need an alter ego online to hide behind. If you are asking others to value your opinion it needs to be given weight. Experience in the real world should be valued more than a post count.

 

[Liam Hall]

If you're accusing someone of theft, you ought to name your sources.

Or your real name would be subject to a defamation suit. In the UK.

Ask the boys at Newsshooter how they feel about sites like NoFilmSchool.

 

[Ben Scott]

EDIT: Oh ffs quoted wrong person.

EDIT EDIT: No I didn't and now I deleted it by accident agh!

In summary the post went something something something your post calling those who have a different opinion idiots and boneheads etc is a walking argument against anonymity and completely at odds with your past last year re:

I suppose the biggest factor in my reaction is the fact that I tend to see arguments and opinions more purely on an intellectual plane. But if someone thinks that when you express a different view, it is an *attack* on them it can spiral into a quarrel instead of an argument and it all goes into tangents. That's why I so often urge people to focus on the argument - and as vigorously as possible - and not on the person who makes the argument.

 

[Ben Scott]

Thats the point. I want truth and honesty not something of consequence or controversial. Factual information and experience is what I am after not an argument. I want to know if the person pushing a product works for that product or for a competing product. Or has even used the product. Without anything to back up your listed experience you could just as easily be a basement blogger who has never once worked no set or with talent etc. If you want to live your life in fear of others then be my guest. I tend to say things online I would say to peoples faces. If I have an opinion I stand by it publicly and if I am unwilling to I have to examine why that is. I guess thats how I was raised so I don't need an alter ego online to hide behind. If you are asking others to value your opinion it needs to be given weight. Experience in the real world should be valued more than a post count.

EXACTLY. There's no cutoff where real life personality stops and online alias takes over. It's all the same thing and I comport myself identically and without fear of 'The Man' about to come crashing down on me. It has never stopped me speaking my mind whenever I have felt the need.

 

[Liam Hall]

The “real names” idea strikes me as plainly stupid. I would vote against it.

Do we all get a vote?

And if it were implemented, I would quit this site immediately

That would be a shame. I like your rather crotchety, occasionally self-indulgent and often overly long posts.

and I have been on this site since 2006 and have almost 3000 posts.

JB had a tiny percentage of that amount, but each post was gold.

A real name policy is a policy that will stifle any dissent or contrary opinion or unpopular opinion

I use my real name and often pose contrary opinions.

IF YOU WANT TO USE YOUR REAL NAME DO SO, BUT LEAVE THE OPTION FOR THOSE WHO DON’T. See? That way both can be accomodated.

Fine, if you want to HIDE behind anonymity you should not have the same posting rights as people who are honest and transparent about who they are.

Lack of anonymity will lead to bland, “safe” and uncontroversial posts. But mostly, it will lead to silence.

Hmm... ...you're coming across a little passive-aggressive here. I'd like to think those of us who use our real names can write witty and insightful posts. Clearly, YMMV.

In today’s climate you simply don’t know who will take offence

I don't care who gets offended. As noted earlier, I care about honesty and transparency.

Employers often ask for FB and Twitter accounts - as happens I am on neither, and never have been, not because of any other reason than it’s a time sink and I do not wish to waste time on those platforms. People are astounded that I don’t have such accounts. It’s “suspicious” - so what, should I start an Instagram or other platform accounts just to “perform socially” and post nothing but bunnies and cats and flowers, so a future employer won’t look at me suspiciously because I don’t have an FB account? Sorry, it’s dumb. It doesn’t lead to any “truth and safety”, it leads to “deception and self-preservation”, and mostly to silence and lies. Good going “real names” policy outcomes! Remember - unintended consequences.

I often work for extremely sensitive clients, Governments, Royal Families etc. I have been warned numerous times to watch what I write on social media as MI5, the Secret Police or whoever will be tracking it. You know what, I don't care. I don't write racist, sexist, fascist, dickhead things. If I write some horrid s*%t that gets picked up in later years, well, tough.

I cannot imagine the idiocy of someone who thinks anonymity is undesirable.

This isn't Twitter. I get why whistleblowers need anonymity. This is a camera tech forum.

 

[Ben Scott]

And your sarcasm and mockery are not rude?

Which bit?

 

[Liam Hall]

For me having real names or company names gives people skin in the game. Some level of accountability that doesn't exist with anonymous posters. Facebook has more genuine interactions that twitter. Linkedin has the most courteous and professional interactions of them all because it has the most transparency on who is on the other end of the keyboard. I like to know who I am talking to but its not just names its having a resume attached or some examples of work and experiences . I do look up peoples work or experience to assess the validity of their information. As much as CML can be an ego clash I have an idea of who I should pay attention to and who likes to make noise or be contrarian based on who they are and their company/resume. Is the poster a hobbiest dealing with little risk but on the cheap or a working professional that is making a career based on the advice given. These things are important to me and something i value more in other platforms for information. The number of people who comment on cameras and lighting without ever having used them or run tests but watched a few youtube videos to regurgitate is an industry wide problem. I'd like to come up with a way to solve that. It used to feel that the more experienced users posted the most but maybe thats just my impression from 10yrs ago. Maybe I've outgrown DVXUSER as one of the people who used to be a DVX user and has grown leaps and bounds in my career since that time.

Wise words.

 

[Peter C.]

Ben has put his finger on the atmosphere issues here that discourages new users. I've seen it in other forums where group of old members who treat a forum as their place. Being welcoming and open to other people having different opinions than their own is important.

 

[OldCorpse]

The problem with “I don’t say racist, fascist, X-badthing” and therefore don’t need anonymity, is that you don’t need to say racist, fascist x-badthing to experience bad consequences. By the way, saying racist, homophobic etc. things is against TOS here, so it has nothing to do with anonymity. That’s not the issue in the least. I’m anonymous and I don’t say racist etc. things and have no such desire - being anonymous doesn’t facilitate it in any case, since it would quickly get anyone, anonymous or not, banned (rightfully). So what does that have to do with anonymity? Trolling is a breach of TOS and will be dealt with - putting that in the benefits of real names strikes me as flawed. I am anonymous - but I am still subject to TOS... and I have no problem with that, which was the point of my mentioning in the first post, that I’ve been here since 2006 and have almost 3000 posts and yet there never was a need for a mod to censure me. Clearly, it appears that I don’t do those bad things and being anonymous didn’t turn me into a BadGuySayingFascist/BADthings.

Meanwhile, I have no problem stating that an idea is stupid - why not? Are ideas a protected class? That’s the whole point, there should be open season on those, and calling a spade a spade, if it’s stupid, I’ll call it stupid (in my opinion). That’s my opinion, and you’re welcome to say it’s a stupid opinion - I have no problem with that. I’ll argue my position and you argue yours. That’s how it’s done - plus you don’t need to have your real name, or not while making the argument - it’s a non-issue.

The notion that somehow only saying bad things will get you into trouble is... stupid. Insofar as it’s not reflecting reality. “I don’t say bad things, so I don’t need anonymity” is a moronic position. Regardless of whether you’re anonymous while taking that position. Example from real life: “Bob” was discussing (on a set) the films of a well-known director who is super successful with a specific demographic X. Bob was of the opinion that those films are on an extremely poor level techically. Another person (as happens, from the demographic X) immediately got angry claiming Bob was racist against X and that what he must be saying is that since it’s mostly X demographic that watches those movies, those people are too dumb and unsophisticated to know how badly done those movies are. Bob denied that, but the argument escalated. Soon, an actress of demographic X refused to work with Bob, and others joined in solidarity. Bob couldn’t protest his innocence - how would he do it? The producer listenend sympathetically to Bob’s side, but hey, he has a movie to make and Bob is now, however innocent, too much of a distraction. Unfortunately, this reputation followed Bob subsequently and nobody was willing to dive deep into what was behind it. Bob missed out on a lot of work.

Here’s the reality. Those who think “I’m innocent, therefore safe” are as wrong as can be, buying into a “just world fallacy”. The kindest thing one can say, is that is a naive position. The world is not fair. You can be accused or presumed guilty and yet be innocent. No, justice need not prevail. No, the world is not a fair place. Bob, was a victim, but other people recognize that and keep their mouths shut. Bob was unfortunate in not recognizing that there was controversy potential in expressing some views - however innocent. The problem is that you can’t know perfectly what might or might not become controversial - “Bob” is you one day. And leaving a trail of comments in digital media? What was completely innocent 10 years ago might suddenly become twisted into something not PC and someoned digs up your post, and you’re cancelled. Again - nothing to do with saying controversial things. You didn’t KNOW it was controversial. It BECAME controversial. And, like that producer, your future employer says to himself “sure, Bob may be innocent - or in fact I KNOW is innocent - but I don’t need that distraction on my set, and I’m going to hire Amy instead” (who happens to be a racist - unlike Bob - but was lucky to keep her mouth shut).

Recognizing that reality is why the fifth amendment exists. Our founding fathers were too wise to fall for the just world fallacy. And even so, to this day, boneheads say “oh, s/he’s invoked the 5th, must be guilty, because if they were innocent, they wouldn’t need to”. The reality is that even if you are innocent, your words can be twisted such that it CAN and WILL be used against you. Which is why *supreme court justices” advise to invoke your 5th amendment rights - especially if you are innocent. Oh, I don’t say controversial things, so I cannot be cancelled, and I don’t need anonymity... and I don’t need the 5th amendment, “what do you need officer, I’ll talk all day long, I’m innocent, no problem!”. Understand, that ANYTHING you say “can and will be used against you” - that’s the whole point. You could be talking about kittens and how nice they are and someone will be able to twist your words and suddenly you’re a sexual pervert and no, innocence may not protect you. So, what do you do? You remain silent. So, I - and people like me - will not post on any forum under our own names. The result is silence. SILENCE is golden. If you want to be Bob, under your own name, it could end up exactly as with Bob if you discuss director X negatively - so be silent. And since anything can be twisted - your ONLY option is to be silent. Now, if Bob is anonymous, he can discuss director X negatively and it’s fine - Anonymous Bob is still not free to be a racist (say, criticizing director X, BECAUSE director is of X ethnicity) - Anonyous Bob will be banned for breaking TOS; but Anonymous Bob is protected when discussing director X in non-racist terms. That’s why being anonymous allows for a lively forum - and still not nasty because TOS still obtains - while real names tends to silence and people leaving.

Personally, I find it of no use to know people’s identity in evaluating the validity of their argument. I don’t care if you are Einstein or The Village Idiot, if you tell me 2+2=5 I’ll call BS. You could be a famous director, distinguished DP, whatnot, it makes absolutely zero difference to me. You are only as good as your argument. And I know far more about you and your biases or virtues, or flaws from 3000 posts than from perusing a CV. But you do you. If you think 2+2 might equal 5 because they’re A Famous Mathematician, you do you. I’ll stick to my own judgment, thank you, no argument from authority for me, thanks.

Yep, many people don’t invoke the 5th. Many people post heedlessly, under their own names. “Look Ma, no consequences”. Great! That’s also what the guy who jogged at night along the autobahn said. Until one day he ended up dead. Hasn’t happened yet! Means I’m safe! And you know the future how? That post that’s 100% innocent today, how will it be viewed 5, 10 years from now in a brave new PC world? Oh, you have a crystal ball - how nice! I prefer to remain anonymous. But you do you.

That said, hey, I’m JUST ONE opinion. You may think my opinion stupid - that’s fine! If now the powers that be decide real names is the way to go for dvxuser - fine, no problem, I’ll just bounce, no harm no foul, it’s been a fun ride since 2006, but all things must come to an end and I’m happy either way. Plus, purging my posts would free up tons of space - I can’t argue that my posts are way, WAY too long anyhow

 

[combatentropy]

Which bit?

This bit:

I hope the rest of your posts are as solid gold as this.

All just reads like it was typed from a bunker while the poster finishes a tin foil hat.

Also there is a dismissiveness in your tone in other posts, like when you wrote off the opposing side as simply this:

I am really not into protecting people's anonymity just so they can behave badly online with impunity.

 

[Joshua Cadmium]

My two cents from someone who has been here a while, but more as a lurker.

I still think politics should be banned (and this is coming from someone who is very much into politics.) I think it's just too easy to offend one another, especially where words can lack the nuance that in-person communication has. If politics are allowed, maybe for limited circumstances, I think strong ground rules need to be set so that there is not political drift and so that everyone is treated as fair as possible.

I think we do need more people to step up as mods (hopefully that is already happening) and that the mods should actively discuss all of their biases - political, religious, racial, etc. There should be moderation that is representative of as many views as possible.

I also think it would be interesting to try to have scheduled zoom meet-ups. It might breed better community.

 

[Mitch Gross]

Man, what a thread. Some of the best & worst coming out here.

I used to come on DVXUSER all the time, but not so much anymore. I've posted a ton in the past and while it is not always straight technical information I'd like to think that the number of little orange squares below my name is a nice indicator as to what people think of my contributions.

While I understand OldCorpse's position, I do not agree with it. I participate with my real name here and elsewhere and always have. Have some of my posts gone a little far now and then and come back to bite me? Yup. And I wouldn't have it any other way. I deal with crews, clients, resellers, manufacturers, etc. They value that I stand by my words, even if they take me to task on some of them now and then. As for any issues of "Is it really him?" or "What if there are two Mitch Gross' here?" and so on, these issues have been worked out on various forums & services years ago. Any argument as to their function & efficacy is a straw man. I'm all for real names and there's a secondary, selfish reason for it that I guess a lot of you don't realize. Using your real name is an excellent form of marketing. You are "building a brand" whether you like it of not, and while I originally joined forums such as DVXUSER for my own personal entertainment my involvement here has absolutely raised my stature to some as a knowledgeable person who is adept at explaining complex technical concepts. DVXUSER helped me career-wise, and that would not be true if I did not use my real name. Y'all are missing out.

I don't think that DVXUSER should exclusively be a technical forum. We (in particular OldCorpse as he mentioned) discuss various movies on artistic and thematic levels. There was a pretty lively discussion of Joker when it came out and not much was about it being shot on a large format camera, but I don't think anyone was particularly offended by the conversation. I think what should be discussed here is all things related to making motion picture productions. That's purely technical, craft, artistic, politics as it impacts production (tax breaks moving work to different regions, Brexit changing how crews can staff and move between certain places, etc.), world events as they impact video production (COVID shutdowns, safety procedures, works moving to streaming services), and social issues as they impact video production (diversity hiring, union v right-to-work, accessibility issues). If it has something to do with video production then I think it should be fair game.

I also think that while we can keep the old engine that powers this forum, there are some subtle adjustments that can be made within its structure. I would bet that most of us regulars immediately click on the "NEW POSTS" tab upon logging in, which means that we see EVERYTHING. Currently the breakdowns for sections of the forums are mostly by manufacturer brand, followed by some other general topic areas. If there was a layer for viewing all of the new posts divided into more general sections of interest then those who wished to avoid certain areas could do so with greater ease. TECHNICAL, CRAFT/ART, INDUSTRY might do it, but others may have some better ideas as to ways to divide groups.

Personally I'm not so sure I understand why people have an aversion to areas of discussion on this platform. No one needs to read any given thread and there are plenty I just scroll by because I either don't have any interest or frankly I can't particularly stomach reading some of the contributions that day. That's my choice and it's a pretty easy one to make.

Lastly I'll make a brief comment on the John Brawley banning. I've known John for years and I have known about the back & forth he's had with the mods for some time. His was a different interpretation of the rules from theirs and it was never out of malice or rudeness. I do not agree with the reasons for his banning and I feel that he was quite reasonable where others were not. I also feel that DVXUSER is a lesser place without his participation, on the topic that got him banned as well as in a host of areas where his technical experience and stature in the industry benefitted the users of this forum. I have been banned in the past from another forum and later reinstated, mostly out of a misunderstanding. It didn't particularly affect my reputation, but it sure pissed off enough other members of that forum enough that it led to the forum choosing to reconsider what had happened and why.

 

[Ben Scott]

Really really long post about various things...

All of this is just so antagonistic and set up to have an enemy. Nothing in here AT ALL about the subject of the forum, about the craft, about learning. It's all about arguing, the strength of an argument and 'let me tell you what's what' and 'I will call you out' yadda yadda yadda. Mix in a bit of jingoism and a pinch of worrying about 'The Man' and frankly it represents all the things I like to avoid on here. I'm just here for the production talk.


Also though set up in the US, this is clearly a global site with members from every continent. I could not care less about your discussion of the 5th Amendment when I want to talk about the flange distances and lens mounts. In fact taking your previous invitation to look at your older posts to get the measure of a person I could not find one single post about production, about cameras, about workflow or techniques.

I'm not saying this to escalate any row with you. I'm just trying to show you a glimpse of what other people want and take from this place.

 

[Ben Scott]

This bit:

Originally Posted by Ben Scott View Post
I hope the rest of your posts are as solid gold as this.

All just reads like it was typed from a bunker while the poster finishes a tin foil hat.


Also there is a dismissiveness in your tone in other posts, like when you wrote off the opposing side as simply this:


Quote Originally Posted by Ben Scott View Post
I am really not into protecting people's anonymity just so they can behave badly online with impunity.

I'm very sorry to say if you feel that is rudeness it's going to be a horrible life for you online. Especially when it was in reply to being called an idiot and bonehead. I felt it was rather restrained.

And there we go with 'the opposing side' stuff. I'm not the opposing side. This isn't a football match. It's a different opinion.

 

[Ben Scott]

I think what should be discussed here is all things related to making motion picture productions. That's purely technical, craft, artistic, politics as it impacts production (tax breaks moving work to different regions, Brexit changing how crews can staff and move between certain places, etc.), world events as they impact video production (COVID shutdowns, safety procedures, works moving to streaming services), and social issues as they impact video production (diversity hiring, union v right-to-work, accessibility issues). If it has something to do with video production then I think it should be fair game.

I think that is spot on.

Also your point about marketing is completely true. Because of you I bought a 7Q and then an EVA1!