Being labeled a "Lurker"

[Charlie Drizzle]

Originally Posted by Klondike

Charlie, guys like you are an extremely valuable commodity at OCC. I hope that the lack of thanks will not deter you from continuing to post from your vast collection. When you dangle terms like "tens of thousands" with reference to how many pics you have taken, my pulse quickens a bit. It would be my privilege to have in my collection the complete works....

Klondike

LOL, I don't think you'd want the 'complete works'. I hope you noted that I said, "of which I have tens of thousands of pics, maybe hundreds of thousands on various subjects", especially the 'various subjects'. I'm not a professional, never had any camera courses, but I always loved taking pictures and have sometimes found it to be a ticket to other things. In the late 60's, while working in the nearby 'metropolis', I'd sometimes happen across a car wreck to and from work. I'd stop and shoot a few pics, then sell the undeveloped roll of film - delivered - to the newspaper. Sometimes they'd use it and sometimes they'd just tell me it was over exposed. I also shot pics at the drag races and car shows. When I got my first coverage in one of the hot rod mags I thought I was king. Once you get a 'tear sheet' it's easier to get a 'press' pass. All I ever wanted was to get up close in the pits at the drag races. I've got over 2 dozen 16"x12"x12" boxes that are full of negatives. Of course some of the rolls are not fully exposed. I didn't understand how to use the camera settings but I knew how to focus and when to use the different ISO types, so when ever I'd move from sun to overcast I'd change film, lol. I'd buy film in bulk to save some money and process the negatives myself. I'd then use a lupe to see which ones to have printed. At one time I had 3 14" rolls of sleeves for negatives. It wasn't until the mid 90's that I bought a Kodak S20 negative scanner, the best non-commercial scanner ever made. Unfortunately the software for it doesn't work with anything beyond Windows 98. So I had to buy another scanner or use one of the older(full) computers. Fortunately a few companies still make scanners that will handle the older 2 3/8" x 2 3/8" negatives and the even older 2 5/8" x 4 1/4" negatives. I've still got the Brownie 'Hawkeye' camera that I used as well as a carton of blue Sylvania flash bulbs. Am I a pack rat or hoarder? What's the difference, lol?

Anyway, I used to shoot anything and everything, girls, cars, fireworks, motorcycles, buildings, animals, family, you name it. When I retired in 2002 I started scanning some stuff in my spare time when I wasn't working in the garden. A few years ago I gave DVD's to family members with several thousand family pics. My count of 'tens of thousands' of pics of the 'adult' nature is speculative but I think realistic if not conservative. I base it on the fact that I've been riding bikes for what is now 50 years. For the past 40 years I've attended an average of a half dozen 'big' biker rallies each year in addition to other events. I used to carry at least 8 rolls of film to each event, many times more. Since the advent of 'digital' I used to carry a whole carton of floppy disk, and 3 batteries, when I was using the first Sony Mavica, in addition to the 2 Minolta 650's. And later when I started using the Olympus E10 and the current Canon, I carry 2 disk and 3 batteries. For example, the Black Bike Week event that I'm currently posting from was shot in '97, thus the FC97xxx file names and consist of 824 pics of which I've re-scanned about 400. When I originally scanned them I used PowerPost A&A 11b to post them in one of the 'alt.binaries.black' newsgroups, so they've been posted elsewhere before in a lower resolution.

BTW, Mudbug, you need to go back and edit the last sentence in your post to say 'NOT' all that terrible, lol. I've said it before but it can't be said too often, many 'Thanks' to the moderators here. No forum can survive without the support of a good group of moderators.

P.S.- Mudbug, I see you edited your post before I got this message finished, bravo.

[codyman]

i dont care a bit about the thanks or anything i post just hoping members will enjoy the stuff i post.

[Charlie Drizzle]

'danberose', maybe the word 'owe' was the incorrect term to use. My vocabulary is limited, mostly to words like ain't, y'all, this'n, and such. Maybe 'courtesy' would be more appropriate, frankly I'm afraid of misspelling words over 4 letters. But being from the South, there's some of us that are still big on that kind of stuff. If someone does something for me and I appreciate it I say 'thank you'. LOL, a young girl, probably 12 or 13, held the door for me the other day at our local burger joint. I felt kind of awkward going thru it given that I was brought up to hold the door for women and old folks. But as awkward as I felt, I'd have been a total 'sum'b*tch' if I had not said 'thank you', and as prim and proper as the young girl appeared, she probably would have been thinking, 'you ungrateful old bastard' if I had not. I'm thankful people are still being taught those manners. Even though the internet has allowed us to live our lives in secret I try to treat it as I would IRL.

[danberose]

Charlie - of course you're right that one should try to behave online like in real life, and also in affirming the importance of manners. I probably should try to discern between different up-loaders - those who are original and those who are not. Original up-loaders do deserve to be thanked. I'll try to improve in this sense. I don't behave like a complete toad online, but as contact is non-personal I suspect that many people act in such a way too. Hence the lack of thanks, for example. IRL most people say thanks when being given something.

[alphaboo]

Have been a member prior to the thanks button, a good idea that limits the wow she's hot comments, I tend not to remember to use it. I am not in the habit.

I am not really interested in thanks but i can see how it could make the poster feel like his effort in aquiring and posting a photo has not gone unappreciated.

So I think the thanks button is a good idea but those who forget to use it should not be considered too harshly. it is only those who purposely don't use it who should be chastised.

[john peterson]

Not for nothing, I don't think anyone should be saying anything. I posted pics with absolutely no response, and didn't say a word, everybody chill!

[Charlie Drizzle]

Originally Posted by john peterson

Not for nothing, I don't think anyone should be saying anything. I posted pics with absolutely no response, and didn't say a word, everybody chill!

Your 'history/profile' doesn't reflect what you just wrote. I see 4 post in 2 years, all just comments, no attachments, but 7 'thanks' to 1 of those comments.

[EC]

Originally Posted by john peterson

Not for nothing, I don't think anyone should be saying anything. I posted pics with absolutely no response, and didn't say a word, everybody chill!

You realize we can see your post history, right?

[SplashMountain]

For how long is one labeled a "lurker", and thus banned from viewing images full-size? This has been the best forum I've found online the niche of exhibitionist and voyeur. Aside from flickr, and this forum groups a lot of flickr images into one place. It's neat that some members, such as Klondike, have flickr pages too and can give first-hand details about the situation.
However, I don't understand why the mods should ban somebody just because they've viewed a certain amount of images in one day. I guess I'll start doing "thanks", if that will give me chance of viewing more pics in one day. As for pics to donate, I have none. Unless i get them from elsewhere. That's what some users do, I realize.
For what it's worth, there's my opinion!

[Abac123]

I guess that's me done with OCC and I'll have to stop recommending it to anyone as this leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

I do not have any original work, meaning I can do one of two things:

A. Re-upload everything I have downloaded here in order to bypass this "ban" which I'm sure will be frowned upon
or
B. Start uploading watermarked and pro images, which WILL be frowned upon.

There aren't many sites which meet ALL THREE of the following criteria:
Free
Watermark-less
Amateur
and that means I am unable to do anything but A. or B. above.

I'm not rolling in money, I sc**** by every month. I certainly don't have a whack of money lying around to "bribe" my way out of this ban.

Roses are red
Violets are blue
Banned from OCC
Youporn will do