• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Rationale for no-"For Chuck" posts?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Larry Smith

New member
I would appreciate an explanation for the prohibition of posts addressed specifically to Chuck Westfall.

Since he intends to participate, and is the primary if not only "real" conduit most of us have to Canon re. suggestion-consideration, etc., ...it seems that he would appreciate "flagging" of posts relative to such, rather than relying on happenstance stumbling-over posts to which he might wish to reply.

This "open letter" approach, specifically addressed, also alerts all members to the fact that some info may be forthcoming, from someone who is particularly well established as an authority.

I, for one, find this very helpful.

Why the "ban"?

Thanks,

Larry
 

Sid Jervis

pro member
Forum rules in most of the places that I visit look upon "For Bert" messages as rude; It is like walking into a room full of people and shouting that you only want to address one specific person. I am not defending this, just letting you know what I have experienced.
When I wanted a question to be answered by CW I sent him an email and got a fast response. Open letters don't often receive the best replies.
$0.02
 

Larry Smith

New member
Rudeness vs. group participation

Sid Jervis said:
Forum rules in most of the places that I visit look upon "For Bert" messages as rude; It is like walking into a room full of people and shouting that you only want to address one specific person. I am not defending this, just letting you know what I have experienced.

I disagree. It is like addressing a question to a person standing in the front of a room before an audience,...an audience of people interested in what thoughts/ideas may be exchanged, who have gathered together expressly for the purpose of benefitting from such exchange.

When I wanted a question to be answered by CW I sent him an email and got a fast response.

And everyone else who might have benefitted from the question you thought to ask, and from Chuck's response,...learned nothing from the exchange. This is a forum,...not a link-up service for private messages. ( ... an expressly "open" forum at that, if we are to believe the web-site title, and the expressed philosophy of the founders. Suggesting "private" off-forum discussion seems to defeat the purpose.)

My O.

Larry
 

Sid Jervis

pro member
As I said:
I am not defending this, just letting you know what I have experienced.

It is like addressing a question to a person standing in the front of a room before an audience
I understand that we listen to CW's words with interest. I doubt that this forum is anything like being before an audience, if it is, then it shouldn't be;
We are all members and all provide input.

And everyone else who might have benefitted from the question you thought to ask, and from Chuck's response,...learned nothing from the exchange.
They will as soon as I have researched the subject further.

Suggesting "private" off-forum discussion seems to defeat the purpose.
Some items cannot, or might not be suitable for discussion in the open forum.
Surely if we were not meant to use email or private messaging, I think that they would not be enabled.
$0.02
 
Last edited:

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
These are some great points. I do appreciate this discussion and will clarify the policy after getting Chuck's POV.

Concerning private letters to him, consider this:

First, it loads his email box. He has enough to do and is not so good for scheduling. Of course you'll get an answer, but an answer posted here benefits everyone, including Chuck, since he doesn't need to repost that to someone else!

We want to maximize the opportunity to get the best information and to give feedback from and to Canon respectively.

So let's harness this special opportunuty as a unified community.

Asher


Sid Jervis said:
As I said:


I understand that we listen to CW's words with interest. I doubt that this forum is anything like being before an audience, if it is, then it shouldn't be;
We are all members and all provide input.

They will as soon as I have researched the subject further.

Some items cannot, or might not be suitable for discussion in the open forum.
Surely if we were not meant to use email or private messaging, I think that they would not be enabled.
$0.02
 

Larry Smith

New member
Asher Kelman said:
These are some great points. I do appreciate this discussion and will clarify the policy after getting Chuck's POV.

Concerning private letters to him, consider this:

First, it loads his email box. He has enough to do and is not so good for scheduling. Of course you'll get an answer, but an answer posted here benefits everyone, including Chuck, since he doesn't need to repost that to someone else!

We want to maximize the opportunity to get the best information and to give feedback from and to Canon respectively.

So let's harness this special opportunuty as a unified community.

Asher

In Chuck's individual case, Chuck's POV should get preference, of course. What we have been discussing so-far is a site-imposed restriction, w/o addressing any given individual's preference as to posts to his own name.

Re. "audience" :

If you have a restricted, members-only, convention,...of rocket scientists, let's say, ... the member who has the microphone at a given moment is the "speaker". The other members, hopefully listening with rapt attention from their seats,...constitute "the audience".

Larry
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
The 4 RULES as of today!

Etiquette for questions for Canon

1. Don't address posts "to Chuck Westfall".

That, CW feels might inhibit others from responding with valid responses. He wants and needs maximum discussion, so that the problems "auto-level" to what is relevant.

2. Don't send him personal emails, unless you owe him money, he invited you to dinner, you found his 1DsIII or you dented his car! He prefers and requests ALL Canon-related issues to just be posted here. It protects his time and he doesn't have to rewrite the same answer all over here. Please respect that specific request!

3. Rely on the fact that CW regularly follows active Canon threads.

4. Understand that CW has many other responsibilities, including meetings (shortly for several weeks), that demand attention: so be cool!

I'm glad this discussion took place and that we are able to clarify our etiquette.

It is up to all of us to maintain Chucks kind effort toward us. Thanks everyone,

Asher
 

Sid Jervis

pro member
Larry Smith said:
If you have a restricted, members-only, convention,...of rocket scientists, let's say, ... the member who has the microphone at a given moment is the "speaker". The other members, hopefully listening with rapt attention from their seats,...constitute "the audience".
I appreciate your comments, and the simile works up to the point where you mention rocket scientists, with all respect I would suggest that we are certainly a more diverse group than my concept of rocket scientists.

I believe that we have a less formal environment than a convention, in the forum it is possible for parallel input to exist without too much of an issue.
We are all members, but obviously we have differing skills and experience.

We are all aware that many things have to be considered when posting in an open forum, some things may not be sensible as subjects.
I am happy with the current (rules) situation, and if it changes, I am still likely to be happy.

Regards
 

Tom Henkel

New member
I have to agree with Asher on this one. Keep in mind that whenever Chuck Westfall responds to a post he is representing Canon in an official capacity. He's working! He's limited by time and what information he can offer. While we would all love to have direct access to Chuck Westfall to answer our questions, handle our complaints, and give us advice based on his inside knowledge -- he simply can't be that sort of resource.

Bottom line, if we want Mr. Westfall to continue occasionally post here, we have to make it easy for him to do his job and we have to respect the limitations of what information he can offer.

Tom
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
raymw said:
So, All forum members are equal, except some are more equal than others.

I didn't understand that! What am I missing?

When a guy from the electric company comes to visit, he neither eats the pizza, drinks your beer nor changes TV channels.

So why would you expect him to have to wash the dishes? Of course not! He doesnt play with you by your house rules, he's just doing his job! That nice guy arrives to do a great and essential service and then goes on to his next job!

Etiquette is just that, a clear guide so we don't forget what roles we play and what other people's needs are when the just come to help us.

Asher

P.S., I thought I was articulate!
 

Ray West

New member
Hi Asher,

Many of us are busy, many get hundreds of emails. My understanding was that it was a completely different situation than as you described in the 'nice guy from the electricity company' scenario. Extending it a bit further, I thought we were all of equal standing in our house. (Except maybe for the house owner and a few others who generally have to do the washing up, and put the crockery away.)

If a nice man, a representative of a company, (and I guess we all represent something,) decides to come to the house, they come in usually 'cos its a nice place to be, and some sort of interchange may or may not take place between the inmates. Some folk may gain from what the nice man does, but equally the nice man gains from taking part in what goes on inside the house.

If, however, something is wrong, and you need to call in an 'expert' to fix your washing machine, say, then that is different. If that expert decides to live in your house, then the house rules apply to him too, and he should not be treated otherwise, just because he is the 'washing machine repair man'. If the expert decides not to live in the house, because he is not treated in any special way, then the inmates have lost access to the possibility of quick wm repairs, assuming the expert was capable or interested in doing them, but the wm company has lost a valuable source of user feed back on the quality of their wm's, and suggestions for improvements on future models. Of course, it also allows some other wm expert to take up residence.

Of course, on this side of the pond, our washing machines never need repairing ;-)

Best wishes,

Ray
 

Larry Smith

New member
Sounds good to me!

Asher Kelman said:
The 4 RULES as of today!

Etiquette for questions for Canon

1. Don't address posts "to Chuck Westfall".

That, CW feels might inhibit others from responding with valid responses. He wants and needs maximum discussion, so that the problems "auto-level" to what is relevant.

2. Don't send him personal emails, unless you owe him money, he invited you to dinner, you found his 1DsIII or you dented his car! He prefers and requests ALL Canon-related issues to just be posted here. It protects his time and he doesn't have to rewrite the same answer all over here. Please respect that specific request!

3. Rely on the fact that CW regularly follows active Canon threads.

4. Understand that CW has many other responsibilities, including meetings (shortly for several weeks), that demand attention: so be cool!

I'm glad this discussion took place and that we are able to clarify our etiquette.

It is up to all of us to maintain Chucks kind effort toward us. Thanks everyone,

Asher

Thanks Asher, for getting Chuck's input on this.

I asked for a rationale, and he gave a good one(s). ;-)

We want him to be comfortable here, for sure, ...and not to impose on his participational-generosity.

I'm also impressed with the rapid satisfaction of my curiousity abut the issue.

I appreciate the sincere and reasonable addressing of the question, rather than some arbitrary dismissal of it.

Gonna like this forum!

Larry
 
D

Doug Kerr

Guest
Asher Kelman said:
The 4 RULES as of today!

Etiquette for questions for Canon

2. Don't send [Chuck Westfall] personal emails . . .

I'm sorry Asher, but trying to restrict my personal e-mail correspondence is a bit of a reach for the forum administration.
 

John Hollenberg

New member
Doug Kerr said:
I'm sorry Asher, but trying to restrict my personal e-mail correspondence is a bit of a reach for the forum administration.

Don't you think it would be more than a bit rude to ignore this specific request from Chuck? I don't see this as a "forum administration" issue. If anyone else made the same request I would certainly honor it.

--John
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
My very good friend Doug,


Of course, you don't mean me!

This is a matter of personal choice to accept or not, his wishes. I translated them to rules: a purely functional tool, not a trace of autocracy.

We accept rules to drive on the right side of the road. Quite arbitrary, since, after all, the Brits manage to kill themselves, at the same rate, simply by driving on the opposite side of the road!

Same here. Except, there's no jail time or community service (anyway you have stacks of credits! I think you might even give me leeway on this one. That's my hunch!

Asher

Doug Kerr said:
I'm sorry Asher, but trying to restrict my personal e-mail correspondence is a bit of a reach for the forum administration.
 
Last edited:

Michael Tapes

OPF Administrator/Moderator
I have a long personal and industry relationship with Chuck. We spoke at length yesterday and I am happy to report that he is very pleased to participate in the discussions here at OPF. He thanked me for my "guidance"i n the threads directed toward him, and clearly Asher's "rules" now sum up how we should handle the situation with any industry representative that chooses to participate in OPF.

Let's get on with discussing Photography, now...
 

Daniel Harrison

pro member
the 4 rules are good! And in good humor :) Really, if this doesn't change this will become the "Dear Chuck" forum. where random people come from around the world to ask Chuck Westfall questions.
 

Sid Jervis

pro member
That wouldn't be a good thing for CW or for forum members.
I am sure that we can guess what would happen if that was the case :-(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top