is this place getting clicky?

[Terry_Lasater]

Makes me long for the days when someone would post a thread asking "what's that clicking sound?" (pun intended) in their DVX and we'd all rush to reply, in conspiratorial fashion, that their camera must be broken.

We'd let them off the hook only after we had them completely freaked out and our sadistic tendencies were satisfied.

Ahhh... the good ol' days.

 

[OldCorpse]

im seriously interested/curious, for those who are completely against having their real name displayed. what is your reason? and don't give a snide brush off like "it's no one's business what my name is"


I know you said you're serious, but I still think you are joking. Or at least I hope so. I mean I cannot believe there's anyone out there that doesn't understand why using real names is worse than using pseudonyms. There's oh, only about a million reasons that's so and it's boring to even go into it again, but it starts with the fact that if you use a pseudonym, you can be honest about realities in ways you simply cannot when you don't have the protection of your pseudonym. People talk about their business in ways they could not if they used their own names - and a million trillion billion other reasons. I cannot even imagine how anyone can not have a clue about this. You get the TRUTH in ways you simply cannot duplicate otherwise. Besides there are tons and tons and tons of studies that show the same thing. Try this, for example. IT HAS BEEN SHOWN, that pseudonymous contributors (rather than anonymous) are the BEST for online communities that foster good contributions - far and away better than real identities. I mean, it's pants on the head retarded to suggest "real names" as the better solution here. No identity policy is going to be without flaws, but the one that allows a mix of participants, especially pseudonymous contributors, is going to be the very best, if you are interested in quality of contribution. And for all its flaws, dvxuser has that. Christ, is it "explain the obvious" week again? Seriously, it's embarrassing that anyone had to even explain this.

 

[Pookie]

Makes me long for the days when someone would post a thread asking "what's that clicking sound?" (pun intended) in their DVX and we'd all rush to reply, in conspiratorial fashion, that their camera must be broken.

We'd let them off the hook only after we had them completely freaked out and our sadistic tendencies were satisfied.

Ahhh... the good ol' days.

Ahh the "good ol days for sure (there I go bitching again...).

Sadly, the PC crowd would never allow such shenanigans here any more.

Not many of the old gang here any more eh Terry? I think I know what wiped out the dinosaurs though....

 

[Rick Burnett]

Originally the "price" of entrance to DVXuser was owning a DVX100, and given the cost was a few thousand dollars, it kept the median age higher (few high schoolers could afford the cost).
DVXuser as it was known is dead, and due to the affordability and number of options presently available, it is fast becoming just one of many forums about video. This thread is a perfect example of one that would never have appeared a few years ago, there was no need. Members had the maturity to understand that arguing and bitching were part of the whole package, and took whatever was said with a grain of salt. Today, the median age of members has dropped well below where it was, and the maturity level has also dropped. Before, admittance was the cost of a DVX100, let's say $2500.00, today under $500.00 will buy you an HD camera of some form to shoot with. To simply be blunt, questions from a fifteen year old "cinematographer" are obvious to look at, and the inability of the new[er] members to search instead of feeling the right to ask questions that have been answered many many before will always get tiring to anyone who has been here for any length of time. The members here now range from squeaky new, to established shooters with many projects under their belt, but it's the new members who need to understand that it's realistic to conclude that whatever their question... it's been answered many times before, by many people, and to ask the same things over and over will get you lets say... less than gracious answers.
When I started, you watched and listened to the experienced people and learned from the bottom up, and were given additions to your workload as you learned more. You got help along the way of course, but to ask the most basic of questions without busting your butt to figure it out first was a sure way to be tossed. Today, everyone wants the answers without doing the work first themselves, over and over if necessary. They also want to be handled gently with nothing but positive re-enforcement and encouragement... what happens when there's no one around to help them out in the real world? Work on any shoot and ask the director or cinematographer questions because you didn't learn the basics... go ahead, ask. The number of people asking for example "is my T2i too light to use on a Glidecam and how much weight should I add" has been answered be me alone probably over ten times already, but they keep asking instead of doing a simple search...
The median age here is probably well below 20 years now, there are now probably over 20 moderators now (a sure sign of the changes), and the "lifers" that were once very active here before now just pop in occasionally, not necessarily due to other activities keeping them away, but ....
DVXuser is gone, it was a great place attracting people enthusiastic about filmmaking shooting at 24, but the dilution of the new cameras supported is having an effect that has turned these forums into something quite.... beige.
The questions being asked have pretty much all been answered before, many times, but they keep being asked, with the demands of only answer me in a positive, supportive, sensitive way or my feelings will be hurt because you're being so mean and you'll destroy my self esteem and I'll never be successful and it will all be your fault I was never famous.
The original post contained the following "I spend more time here looking over posts than I do Facebook". Facebook... there's what is really wanted it seems, how many "friends" do I have? No offence.

There is a simple solution here, don't answer their questions and let someone else do it. If you are so tired of answering the same questions over and over, quit reading them. You certainly aren't doing anyone any favors by already being upset with someone who may have had trouble with the search engine here. I've searched for things I KNOW are here with it and couldn't find them. No one is forcing you to read their problems. Many times, answers are buried within 100 pages of a thread and are very difficult to find. I feel sorry for the person who is interested in the Zaza slider and wants to make sure they don't miss anything in that MASSIVE thread.

Even you complaining about the person talking about the light weight on the stabilizer. Do you think making this kind of comment is helpful:

"You obviously have no idea."

You seriously lack tact in your responses. Luckily an older member then you, tomthemacman, took the time to really explain what's going on, even going so far as to explain the physics for anyone that cares. That's the type of helpful information that makes DVXUser a great place for people to learn. Maybe you could learn from that type of response.

 

[Pookie]

There is a simple solution here, don't answer their questions and let someone else do it. If you are so tired of answering the same questions over and over, quit reading them. You certainly aren't doing anyone any favors by already being upset with someone who may have had trouble with the search engine here. I've searched for things I KNOW are here with it and couldn't find them. No one is forcing you to read their problems. Many times, answers are buried within 100 pages of a thread and are very difficult to find. I feel sorry for the person who is interested in the Zaza slider and wants to make sure they don't miss anything in that MASSIVE thread.

Even you complaining about the person talking about the light weight on the stabilizer. Do you think making this kind of comment is helpful:

"You obviously have no idea."

You seriously lack tact in your responses. Luckily an older member then you, tomthemacman, took the time to really explain what's going on, even going so far as to explain the physics for anyone that cares. That's the type of helpful information that makes DVXUser a great place for people to learn. Maybe you could learn from that type of response.

You see, this is my point regarding Mods, if you read Barry's comments, which it seems you didn't, you would realize that you're duplicating his reply, I can only imagine you did this to back him up somehow.

btw, taking comments out of context is bad form.

If you would like me to read through your posts, I'm sure I can find numerous "examples" of you exhibiting less than stunning replies yourself.

Barry has already commented on the new users and their "warlike attitude".... "There is not a doubt in my mind that the massive influx of new users has chased away many of the veterans, and the warlike attitude that many of the new users have exhibited sure hasn't helped anything", so perhaps there is something to my "bitching" isn't there?

btw, taking comments out of context is poor form.

 

[Rick Burnett]

You see, this is my point regarding Mods, if you read Barry's comments, which it seems you didn't, you would realize that you're duplicating his reply, I can only imagine you did this to back him up somehow.

If you would like me to read through your posts, I'm sure I can find numerous "examples" of you exhibiting less than stunning replies yourself.

Barry has already commented on the new users and their "warlike attitude".... "There is not a doubt in my mind that the massive influx of new users has chased away many of the veterans, and the warlike attitude that many of the new users have exhibited sure hasn't helped anything", so perhaps there is something to my "bitching" isn't there?

Actually, my response to you is specifically spawned from your response on the thread you mentioned where someone asked about weight on a stabilizer. I had actually read your response there even before seeing the comments posted here since it got sidetracked about jackets earlier. Reading the way you respond to people, I just don't see how it's being helpful to making DVXUser anything like what you miss. People learn by example, and you certainly don't seem to be setting a great one in my opinion within the same time frame you are criticizing others. That question about stabilizers didn't seem to have any "warlike attitude" that I saw. Not until you started making comments like "You obviously have no idea" which certainly is inflammatory.

And hey, I'll be the first to admit I've seen you be helpful on many occasions. I'll be the first to admit that I've probably made posts that are less then stunning, no doubt. I don't think anyone here expects everyone to be perfect. Moderating is really a thankless job where each of us spend our time having to deal with "warlike attitudes" and "policy violators" to try and make the place better, because left to it's own, it would devolve into something no one would want to use. I want it to be a good experience for people.

 

[SPZ]

Its a matter of personal attitude, nothing more.Different personalities. This is such a big community right now with people with different attitudes and ethos, that for me shows that somehow this place amongst all the growth of recent years still could keep the philosophy of early days: that other recent discussion about "trying" for example, was interesting and civil, and showed different points of view showcasing different personalities. Having both kinds of feedback ends up being more of a benefit for all. .The Clicking sound conspiracy is synonymous that this sort of attitude exists for a long time here. I have to admit I was also part of the ones that joked on those clicking threads. I'm much more passive and try to be helpful these days. But if I see a repetitive thread with really juvenile phrasing and if i spot bad attitude (not a foreign user trying to write "english"- those i can understand) I just skip it. I don't have a problem to help those with basic questions, if i genuinely feel they are struggling and have made an effort to solve their problems. There are also many subjective questions in this forum, and its great to see different opinions shared, even the harsh ones. In questions such as: "Please look at my short and comment" threads, its like American Idol: if we all were Paula Abdul, it wouldn't help the user. If we all were Simon Cowell (In a bad day), who says it "like it is" (but also has his misjudgements and mistakes) , it wouldn't help much either. All Randy Jacksons probably would work , but then again, its by having the other two extremes that the dinamic of debating works. But with civility and respect between all. Or everything becomes like a brawl at a bar!

EDIT- I have to give a big praise to the moderators. I earn nothing with this compliment, I've also been a pain in the @ss sometimes but you guys are doing an excellent job. Here i really see moderation, allowing debate, even passionate exchanges, until only when things get just too out of track. You don't inadevertedly close threads like in other similar forums, and allow that healthy debating can keep that "passionate" approach. Great job, and one of the main reasons that, while incredibly busy, i still come to visit. This is probably one of the few forums out there that are truly contributing to the democratization of filmmaking and overall improvement of filmmaking worldwide- free flow of information sharing, DIY camera mods, support and acesssories, experimentation, trial and error... This, I hope, never changes.

 

[Zak Forsman]

Thank you for the kind words, Sérgio.

 

[Barry_Green]

btw, If you'd like to get into an in depth discussion of Steadicam hardware, aesthetics and techniques, don't hesitate to get in touch...

and there you prove my point perfectly. You could be here contributing in-depth and valuable discussions of Steadicam aesthetics and techniques... But instead, you choose to spend your posts attacking the mods. Again. See the difference? You could contribute to the community, or you could snipe and whine. One type of post is valued, and the other is unwelcome.Maybe you expect us to apologize on behalf of the hardworking unpaid volunteer staff who work hundreds of unpaid volunteer hours to bring you this COMPLETELY FREE forum? Sorry but yeah, I think that's a bit much to ask. So once again: those who want to be here, who want to contribute, and who want to help, welcome. Those who want to complain and drag us down and snipe and gripe, are not so welcome. Shouldn't be hard to understand.

 

[Eric Boellner]

I know you said you're serious, but I still think you are joking. Or at least I hope so. I mean I cannot believe there's anyone out there that doesn't understand why using real names is worse than using pseudonyms. There's oh, only about a million reasons that's so and it's boring to even go into it again, but it starts with the fact that if you use a pseudonym, you can be honest about realities in ways you simply cannot when you don't have the protection of your pseudonym. People talk about their business in ways they could not if they used their own names - and a million trillion billion other reasons. I cannot even imagine how anyone can not have a clue about this. You get the TRUTH in ways you simply cannot duplicate otherwise. Besides there are tons and tons and tons of studies that show the same thing. Try this, for example. IT HAS BEEN SHOWN, that pseudonymous contributors (rather than anonymous) are the BEST for online communities that foster good contributions - far and away better than real identities. I mean, it's pants on the head retarded to suggest "real names" as the better solution here. No identity policy is going to be without flaws, but the one that allows a mix of participants, especially pseudonymous contributors, is going to be the very best, if you are interested in quality of contribution. And for all its flaws, dvxuser has that. Christ, is it "explain the obvious" week again? Seriously, it's embarrassing that anyone had to even explain this.

Honestly, OldCorpse, you'd have wasted much less effort on this embarrassingly needless explanation if you hadn't filled it with about 80% vitriol and just stated clearly why you think a real name only policy is a bad idea.

 

[ZazaCast]

I feel sorry for the person who is interested in the Zaza slider and wants to make sure they don't miss anything in that MASSIVE thread.

FYI.... I try to keep the best information in the very first post & am always checking to answer any questions someone might have. :happy:

 

[Rick Burnett]

FYI.... I try to keep the best information in the very first post & am always checking to answer any questions someone might have. :happy:

And you do a great job of it. It still amazes me when someone writes "Whew, I just went through all the posts and I have a question!" That's a lot of reading.

 

[CallaghanFilms]

Makes me long for the days when someone would post a thread asking "what's that clicking sound?"...

I thought the same thing.

But we weren't so off...many of us hear shaking clicks issuing from this, the DVX.




Edit:
Now does that mean It's broken...?

 

[Darren Levine]

im seriously interested/curious, for those who are completely against having their real name displayed. what is your reason? and don't give a snide brush off like "it's no one's business what my name is"


I know you said you're serious, but I still think you are joking. Or at least I hope so. I mean I cannot believe there's anyone out there that doesn't understand why using real names is worse than using pseudonyms. There's oh, only about a million reasons that's so and it's boring to even go into it again, but it starts with the fact that if you use a pseudonym, you can be honest about realities in ways you simply cannot when you don't have the protection of your pseudonym. People talk about their business in ways they could not if they used their own names - and a million trillion billion other reasons. I cannot even imagine how anyone can not have a clue about this. You get the TRUTH in ways you simply cannot duplicate otherwise. Besides there are tons and tons and tons of studies that show the same thing. Try this, for example. IT HAS BEEN SHOWN, that pseudonymous contributors (rather than anonymous) are the BEST for online communities that foster good contributions - far and away better than real identities. I mean, it's pants on the head retarded to suggest "real names" as the better solution here. No identity policy is going to be without flaws, but the one that allows a mix of participants, especially pseudonymous contributors, is going to be the very best, if you are interested in quality of contribution. And for all its flaws, dvxuser has that. Christ, is it "explain the obvious" week again? Seriously, it's embarrassing that anyone had to even explain this.

you see, you just made the choice to be entirely offensive in your response, my post had no attack in it, it was a simple honest question, and you chose to not behave yourself.

let's look at this JPEG you brought up as your proof that pseudonyms are better for forums... first off, they characterize the pseudonyms as a pirate, a robot dinosaur, and wonderwoman(that's credibility?).... i can only imagine at that point this jpeg was designed for children, which i could understand, because someone young enough should NOT have their real name on the net.

this jpeg promoting pseudonyms is pushing that because they feel that giving yourself a character, a personality to hide behind, makes you more confident in your posting abilities.... ok, well... this is a professional forum full of crew people... on set do you introduce yourself as oldcorpse and refuse to tell people your real name because it will reduce your confidence in doing your job?

and then this 'data' that they use to 'prove' that pseudonyms are better for the community... their data shows that there's a whole 10% difference in positive signals from real name posters to pseudonym posters, but wait a second, positive posts aren't the problem were talking about here, it's the negative posts that get in the way of the positive posts, and look at that, the pseudonym and anonymous posters have each 2% more negative posts than real name people, because they don't behave themselves when hiding behind their robot dinosaurs.

and wait, it gets better, because we have to group anonymous posters with pseudonym posters as well!(unless you seriously want to suggest that we all be pirates and wonderwomen) and between those two we have an average of 47.5% positive posts.... less than the 51% for real name positive posts. so you see, just because they put big flashy text saying real names bad, pseudonyms good, and make pseudonyms green in the chart and real names red, doesn't mean that they're not reading their own data wrong.

you could argue that means that proves that forcing real names won't change anything but that 2% of negative posts. well... two reasons why not: first, because those numbers they are averaging within each subset, not the total 100% of the community, and secondly, because as we can see, there are vastly more pseudonym/anonymous posters(they are, after all, pushing everyone in that direction), so their 11% of negative posts is a vastly larger number than the real names 9% because of the larger sample size. Meaning that if everyone switched to real names, according to that jpeg of yours, we would see a possibly exponential decrease of negative results.

and number of posts per person is another story, because more posts does not mean better, as we have been discussing here as well.(and isn't it just a tad bit odd to you that both of their results for pseudonym posters cam out to 61%?)

See how easy that was? did i attack you outright? no. did i explain something with clarity? i think so. do you have to agree with me? of course not. should you behave yourself so that we don't ask you to come out from hiding behind that oldcorpse? i would hope you think yes.

cheerios,

 

[CallaghanFilms]

For all I've offended, I say:
"That's Callaghan with two l's and a g."



Just putting a word in for we ash.holes who do use real names...

 

[Renee]

My biggest issue is that using real names is simply a fallacy. Nothing about it changes anything.

How, as a website, are you going to prove that user X is who user X says they are?
Credit cards? Not everyone has one. It's also messy, most users don't want to pay for anything or give up their numbers, and could be dangerous for reasons we've seen recently. (Playstation network)

Nationstate issued IDs? How are you going to prove the ID is real, with a whole WORLD of identification and Photoshop? What about remote places that may be lucky enough to have a computer, but don't issue identification?

Or would you suggest we go the Facebook route, and just make sure the name a user chooses is "real enough".
Well that's a loophole right there! My name is totally John Smith. ;D

And what if my mom wanted me to be a stripper, and my name really is Cherry Sundae? Now I have to prove it, because it's not real enough. But John Smith, the worst troll in the whole internet, is getting away scott free.

Maybe one day there will be a good method for the use of real names, one that makes sense.

But as it is right now- "enforcing" real names does nothing to really hold people accountable any more than using monikers.

 

[David Jimerson]

Boom.

Customized jackets for the coolest clique at 'User... the DVX Dukes. Grab your comb, switchblade, shades and enlist today. To get in you have to beat me in a muscle car race around dead man's turn. You know, down the hill from lover's lookout. Don't be a square.


View attachment 46385View attachment 46386

PS: once in, you'll be given your standard issue cheerleader girlfriend.

Wait, are you the cool, rebellious kids or the jocks?

 

[CallaghanFilms]

Wait, are you the cool, rebellious kids or the jocks?

...or D) All of the Above

 

[Darren Levine]

My biggest issue is that using real names is simply a fallacy. Nothing about it changes anything.

How, as a website, are you going to prove that user X is who user X says they are?
Credit cards? Not everyone has one. It's also messy, most users don't want to pay for anything or give up their numbers, and could be dangerous for reasons we've seen recently. (Playstation network)

Nationstate issued IDs? How are you going to prove the ID is real, with a whole WORLD of identification and Photoshop? What about remote places that may be lucky enough to have a computer, but don't issue identification?

Or would you suggest we go the Facebook route, and just make sure the name a user chooses is "real enough".
Well that's a loophole right there! My name is totally John Smith. ;D

And what if my mom wanted me to be a stripper, and my name really is Cherry Sundae? Now I have to prove it, because it's not real enough. But John Smith, the worst troll in the whole internet, is getting away scott free.

Maybe one day there will be a good method for the use of real names, one that makes sense.

But as it is right now- "enforcing" real names does nothing to really hold people accountable any more than using monikers.

at the moment the question was just about the the impact such an enforcement would have, obviously there would be annoyances in implementing it, and in many ways like you brought up i agree it wouldn't be 100% effective, but i was asking the question as to why you might be against it, whether it be for moral reasons, personal reasons, etc... not about the challenges of making it actually work.

basically asking the reason to feel the need to not be known by something other than who you really are. (like, a restraining order from someone who was stalking you and you can't have your name anywhere online because of them, THAT would be a very real reason)

 

[Renee]

That's true. I think that's a great reason- restraining orders.

I guess for me I feel it's just a non-solution. I don't think it solves the problem- I think it only makes it APPEAR as if the problem is solved, while it still happens in the background. And some people just might not care, and still are rampant trolly assholes, even if you know who they are! :]