# The TPF Inner Circle - Google+



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

Not sure if anyone has any interest in this, but I am starting a circle for TPF posters. 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. I do not wish to add every poster because I do not wish to clog up the circle with newbie users who will not bring any contribution to the group as a whole, or who will end up just being spammers. However, as people grow on the forum, they could be added. 


Once I have added everyone to this circle, I will then send out the full circle listing to every member so that you, in turn, can add everyone else to your circle with the push of a button. This circle will be for sharing photos, posting photography related links and discussion and the occasional non-photo topics. If you are interested, and feel that you are a well known forum member, feel free to private message me with a link to your Google+ profile, and I will add you to the circle. If you message me for inclusion, please bump the post.


EDIT: Moderators, I wanted this to be in a high traffic area, if this is unacceptable, feel free to move the post. Thanks.


----------



## Sonoma (Nov 29, 2011)

I think you're just opening a can of worms, but by all means please proceed!  Should be interesting.


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 29, 2011)

I need to use G+ a bit more, but I am in if I am selected as one of the "cool members". 

BUMPAN FOR INCLUSIONS


----------



## Derrel (Nov 29, 2011)

"*I would never* *wanna* *belong to* *any club that would have* *someone like me* *for a* *member." --Groucho Marx*


----------



## mrpink (Nov 29, 2011)

I have google+ but have rarely used it.  Matt Francosky is my "handle" add me if you wish.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

I never used it much either until I was added to a local photography group and then it became pretty interesting. People posting for camera walks and meetups and selling gear etc.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Nov 29, 2011)

*Who the hell are you?*



ie Why should anyone care to be in your circle?


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

Why do you think that?


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

First of all, it wouldn't be MY circle....it would be OUR circle. If you are still behind on the power of social media, I don't have the time or the faculties to explain that to you. Thanks for the bump though. :thumbup:


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 29, 2011)

I think Cloudwalker is still an anti-sub-non-conformist.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

Let me clarify as well. This is not about being cool or not cool it is about being selective and adding the people who have become consistent contributing members to the forum here, because it would be logical to assume that they would be contributing members to a social circle aimed at networking photographers.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

o hey tyler said:


> I think Cloudwalker is still an anti-sub-non-conformist.


 Thats alright, he is entitled to post what he wants. I am detemined not to let this slide into some s**t slinging match. People will come out of the woodwork and trash it. That is expected with every post on here. However, at the end of the day, the purpose of the original post will still run its course. If nothing else, the people stirring up problems simply help thin the pack a bit.


----------



## Sammie_Lou (Nov 29, 2011)

Call me crazy, but what's the point of TPF members conversing on Google+ rather than just conversing here??

Also, I think it's funny that this is in the beginner's forum, yet you said "I do not wish to clog up the circle with newbie users". The beginner forum is going to be FULL of "newbie users". Yes, it's high traffic...but most of the traffic is the demographic that you don't want included in "our circle" (which is really _your_ circle, since you're the one deciding who is invited and who isn't). 

I'll just stick with the official TPF...


----------



## Overread (Nov 29, 2011)

More traffic? All the regulars use new posts already  You don't need it in beginners for the traffic at all 

But now its not and its nice down in Off Topic 


Ps - each time you use Google or one of their services you give the world to them a little bit more


----------



## photo guy (Nov 29, 2011)

I'm with Sammie_Lou.  I will just stay on TPF since you didn't like some of my earlier C&C posts.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

Sammie_Lou said:


> Call me crazy, but what's the point of TPF members conversing on Google+ rather than just conversing here??
> 
> Also, I think it's funny that this is in the beginner's forum, yet you said "I do not wish to clog up the circle with newbie users". The beginner forum is going to be FULL of "newbie users". Yes, it's high traffic...but most of the traffic is the demographic that you don't want included in "our circle" (which is really _your_ circle, since you're the one deciding who is invited and who isn't).
> 
> I'll just stick with the official TPF...



This thread is a prime example of the difference. The circle would allow communication among a pre-screened group, whereas on here, every post devolves into a steaming pile of crap due to all of the unneeded bickering and potshots. 

As for using the beginners forum for high traffic, it is my understanding ( correct me if I am wrong ) that the newbies are being helped by....wait for it......the experienced?

I am not deciding who is invited and who isn't specifically, I am merely setting a ground rule so that the circle does not turn into a mess. The main reason for only wanting credible members is because typically, people are more forthcoming and transparent on their personal info on an exclusive social network as opposed to a wide open forum. Therefore, for the privacy of anyone wishing to join, I would want the notion to be that this is a group that is a bit more trustworthy and established than someone with 5 posts that all reference checking out their website, or what the best camera to buy is. 

Its really not that complicated, although I will entertain your need for starting controversy in threads that you don't really have any positive contibution to. My reasoning for this is that it may be more easy to understand to the future readers of this thread. It is also posts like these that simply make my suggestion all the more appealing.

Also, it should be noted that I am in no way shape or form asking people to choose Google+ over TPF. I am merely asking them to make it one more useful, inspiring or simply entertaining tool in their arsenal.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> Sammie_Lou said:
> 
> 
> > Call me crazy, but what's the point of TPF members conversing on Google+ rather than just conversing here??
> ...


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

photo guy said:


> I'm with Sammie_Lou.  I will just stay on TPF since you didn't like some of my earlier C&C posts.


 Thats silly ( not your decision to not join, but your reasoning ) I, as well as many others, have disagreed on many posts. There have been heated debates and all that. Another example of the people I am looking for, are the ones who can rise above that and let things be. Not hold grudges and start fights with people simply because of disagreements. To be honest, I recognize your name, but do not recall any fights or major disagreements with you (but then again, I tend not to dwell on things so its hard to say ).


----------



## cgipson1 (Nov 29, 2011)

I will just use TPF... sounds a little too elitist to me!


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 29, 2011)

In this thread: People expressing negativity over something they are not being forced (by any means) to join rather than actually allowing people that do want to join communicate about joining. 

Kind of self fulfills what Goonies was saying. By having a group of thoughtful, contributing members, we'd avoid all sorts of bull**** like this.


----------



## MLeeK (Nov 29, 2011)

If you are taking it off TPF, isn't it now a G+ group and has nothing to do with TPF? 
In the interests of controversy-which we are great at here-wouldn't that become a violation of trademark or copyright? TPF is owned by... well whoever owns the forum... 
And would you only take reputable photographers from TPF? There are a LOT of forums out there with a LOT of great brains and talent in photography on them... 
If you wanted to do an elite group of TPF's inner circle, why not discuss with the forum owners and moderators creating that forum/group here. The forum has that capability. You could either choose to invite your elite few or allow people to apply for membership to that group, but it'd still be here on TPF...


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 29, 2011)

MLeeK, I don't think the intent was to re-brand TPF into a G+ group. I think it was just a way for some of the long time, or new but very helpful members communicate in a more controlled and respectful manner. I don't see how it would be in violation of any copyright. It's essentially a means to socially network members together that share similar interests. 

I personally don't see any reason to discuss it with the owners, because they are present on the forums ~.001% of the time, and TBQF it's none of their business really.


----------



## Overread (Nov 29, 2011)

You wouldn't even need to talk to the mods - there is a groups feature on the site already (though nobody remembers it exists )

As for splinter groups - nothing new there I know of 2 forums and am aware of at least another 3 or so that are based off members from TPF over time. If you want to form your own groups that's fine, no harm done and nobody gets hurt. However please refrain from widespread advertising of your groups on the site itself.


----------



## sm4him (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> *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





GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> I am not deciding who is invited and who isn't specifically, I am merely setting a ground rule so that the circle does not turn into a mess. The main reason for only wanting credible members is because typically, people are more forthcoming and transparent on their personal info on an exclusive social network as opposed to a wide open forum. Therefore, for the privacy of anyone wishing to join, I would want the notion to be that this is a group that is a bit more trustworthy and established than someone with 5 posts that all reference checking out their website, or what the best camera to buy is.



Actually, you ARE deciding who gets in and who doesn't, and it IS Your circle, by virtue of the way Google+ works. For instance, *I* know that I am a "reputable and trustworthy" poster...but if you were to disagree, I would not end up in YOUR circle. That's just the way it is.  I'm not even saying it's wrong, but it is not correct to say it would be "our" circle...I can't choose to put people in someone else's circles on G+, and nobody can put themselves or others into MY circles...so while you create it and call it the Inner Circle, mine might have twice as many people and I might call it "Those nuts from TPF."

I have NO problem with you creating a TPF circle on Google+...but it wouldn't be OUR circle. And, I did take a bit of umbrage with the call for invite requests being put in the beginner's section, simply for the traffic.  That really did smack of elitism..."look at what I'm starting for privileged people, that you newbs can't be a part of!"

I really don't mean any of that to sound harsh...I think it's a fine idea to add some TPF folks to your Google+ circles...but why not just say, "hey, if you're on G+, look me up! THEN, from the people who add you, you can decide which of them to put in YOUR "Inner Circle."

Oh, and by the way, to anyone else interested...Hey, if you're on Google+, look me up!   Sharon Monett, or sbm4him


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

MLeeK said:


> If you are taking it off TPF, isn't it now a G+ group and has nothing to do with TPF?
> In the interests of controversy-which we are great at here-wouldn't that become a violation of trademark or copyright?



No More than creating a "Canon Shooters" circle would be a trademark or copyright violation of Canon. Friendship and socializing isn't copyright-able or trademark-able.

I am not sure if it would evolve into adding more photographers. Currently I have a circle with local photographers. For the sake of clarity, I keep them seperate. That way I can keep track of the posts being read.

Perhaps the forum does have that ability and perhaps it doesn't. I can assure you that its not easier than consolidating all of your social groups into one platform. The reason this would be different than the forum is because the main reason that I ( and many other established posters on here ) return to this forum, is to help others. This circle would not have that purpose. It would be a social circle more than an education circle. Sharing photos, thoughts, links without the critiques, loaded topics, or trolling. This would not be a replacement for coming to this forum, it would simply be an extension of that. If The forum moderators wish to set up something like that, more power to them. In an absence of that, I chose to go with what is readily available and able to be used for this purpose.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

sm4him said:


> Actually, you ARE deciding who gets in and who doesn't, and it IS Your circle, by virtue of the way Google+ works. For instance, *I* know that I am a "reputable and trustworthy" poster...but if you were to disagree, I would not end up in YOUR circle. That's just the way it is.  I'm not even saying it's wrong, but it is not correct to say it would be "our" circle...I can't choose to put people in someone else's circles on G+, and nobody can put themselves or others into MY circles...so while you create it and call it the Inner Circle, mine might have twice as many people and I might call it "Those nuts from TPF."
> 
> I have NO problem with you creating a TPF circle on Google+...but it wouldn't be OUR circle. And, I did take a bit of umbrage with the call for invite requests being put in the beginner's section, simply for the traffic.  That really did smack of elitism..."look at what I'm starting for privileged people, that you newbs can't be a part of!"
> 
> I really don't mean any of that to sound harsh...I think it's a fine idea to add some TPF folks to your Google+ circles...but why not just say, "hey, if you're on G+, look me up! THEN, from the people who add you, you can decide which of them to put in YOUR "Inner Circle."



No harshness taken, and I respect your opinion. I will disagree though. Once I push the circle out to the members, they can then add whomever they want to that circle. It now becomes THEIR circle. If they trust someone and want to add them to the circle so that the person receives their postings, then great. However, that person will not see any of my posts because I don't know them and/or may not trust them.  As for a smack in the face to beginners, it all depends how you look at things. If you look at everything in a negetive light, then you will see it that way. I look at it as motivation for people to act appropriately on the forum and be a contributing member. Not a trouble maker. Not a troll. Not a spammer.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

Overread said:


> You wouldn't even need to talk to the mods - there is a groups feature on the site already (though nobody remembers it exists )
> 
> As for splinter groups - nothing new there I know of 2 forums and am aware of at least another 3 or so that are based off members from TPF over time. If you want to form your own groups that's fine, no harm done and nobody gets hurt. However please refrain from widespread advertising of your groups on the site itself.



There will be no widespread advertising. Simply this thread. 

Also, I can't state this enough, this is not a replacement for TFP. Even if the mods do not care, I want to make that intention clear to whoever reads this.


----------



## e.rose (Nov 29, 2011)

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.


----------



## Sammie_Lou (Nov 29, 2011)

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._"


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

e.rose said:


> 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!"
> 
> ...



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?


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

Sammie_Lou said:


> 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.
> 
> ...


 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.


----------



## Overread (Nov 29, 2011)

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 (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> 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 (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


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



True, haha.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

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 (Nov 29, 2011)

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 (Nov 29, 2011)

Sammie_Lou said:


> (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.  



			
				Sammie_Lou said:
			
		

> 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. 



			
				Sammie_Lou said:
			
		

> 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 (Nov 29, 2011)

fjrabon said:


> 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!). 



GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> 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 (Nov 29, 2011)

cgipson1 said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...


 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 (Nov 29, 2011)

Sounds totally ghey+


cheers,


----------



## cgipson1 (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> 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 (Nov 29, 2011)

(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 (Nov 29, 2011)

cgipson1 said:


> GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...


 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 (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> 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 (Nov 29, 2011)

dots said:


> (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.


----------



## Sammie_Lou (Nov 29, 2011)

Have you been on Facebook lately?? They now have "groups", which function pretty much the same way as Google "circles".


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

cgipson1 said:


> GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:
> 
> 
> > I think the even bigger problem is that I assumed that the people that the thread was intended for, would know who they were.
> ...


 Good point.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

Sammie_Lou said:


> Have you been on Facebook lately?? They now have "groups", which function pretty much the same way as Google "circles".


 Yes, they function similar, and they only did it when they started to fear market share. However, they are not the same. Facebook's entire interface is archaic and not very user-friendly as it has always been. Don't get me wrong, I use facebook. I just think they missed the boat on this and feel that they have some things they could work on.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 29, 2011)

Goonies, it seems that the wording and phrasing and title of your original post have earned you *triple,double-secret probation!!!!!!!!!!!

"No good deed goes unpunished."*


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 29, 2011)

Sammie_Lou said:


> Have you been on Facebook lately?? They now have "groups", which function pretty much the same way as Google "circles".


----------



## fjrabon (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > fjrabon said:
> ...



I understand your reasons, I'm just explaining to you why people are taking it the way they are.  Inner circle sounds like you picking your cool friends.  I understand that's not how you intended it.  But that's why you're getting the reaction you are.  Again, you can blame people for taking it the wrong way, or you can look at the way you initially worded it.  

I personally couldn't care less about the group one way or the other, I don't use G+.  But I did kind of think it was weird for you to get so defensive about it, when people interpreting the group the way they did was at least partially, if not entirely, due to the way you phrased it, where you put it, etc.  The second I saw the way you titled the thread I thought to myself "well that's going to start a crapstorm, LOL."  This was a completely predictable reaction.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> Why do you think that?



Just my way of talking, nothing personal. Although I wish people would stop "liking" me for saying stuff like that 

But you do kind of answer yourself next. OUR circle is right here. Why do we need a circle outside this circle?

It won't be any better. 

As for the power of social media, please explain. No one has yet been able to make me see the light of day in that regard. Aside from making people lonelier, I don't get it.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 29, 2011)

As c.cloudwalker wrote: _Why do we need a circle outside this circle?  It won't be any better._

*Diz-actly!*


----------



## dots (Nov 29, 2011)

You could add Steve.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

fjrabon said:


> GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Nov 29, 2011)

My knee jerk reaction to this is what a pile of crap. I have been on so many boards where there are always some people who feel they must take on the role of King of the Hill and they need to so the masses are special and happy and salvation can take place. 

It cracks me up how many do this and how many drink the kool aid as a result.


----------



## dots (Nov 29, 2011)

yea



GeorgieGirl said:


> My knee jerk reaction to this is what a pile of crap. I have been on so many boards where there are always some people who feel they must take on the role of King of the Hill and they need to so the masses are special and happy and salvation can take place.
> 
> It cracks me up how many do this and how many drink the kool aid as a result.


----------



## dots (Nov 29, 2011)

I found an amazing social media tool, in the late 1990s. E-mail.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 29, 2011)

GeorgieGirl said:


> My knee jerk reaction to this is what a pile of crap. I have been on so many boards where there are always some people who feel they must take on the role of King of the Hill and they need to so the masses are special and happy and salvation can take place.
> 
> It cracks me up how many do this and how many drink the kool aid as a result.


 What koolaid have you been drinking? King of the Hill? Salvation? Get over dramatic much? It cracks me up at how many people have wasted their time on this thread. If nothing else this has been a very nice case study in what is wrong with this forum.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 29, 2011)

o hey tyler said:


> In this thread: People expressing negativity over something they are not being forced (by any means) to join rather than actually allowing people that do want to join communicate about joining.
> 
> Kind of self fulfills what Goonies was saying. By having a group of thoughtful, contributing members, we'd avoid all sorts of bull**** like this.



"If wishes and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all be rich!!!"

"Oh, Toto, we're not in Kansas anymore!"

"Hi, my name is Polly. Polly Anna."

"Gosh, the world is so,so full of mean people. It hurts my widdwl feeeeewings."

"Mr. Sulu, engage bullchit deflectors!  Increase power to maximum bullchit deflection."


----------



## dots (Nov 29, 2011)

Who's disallowing communication? You big girl's blouse. Where are all the raised hands? Boxed out by 3 people taking the Michael and small dog from Kansas?


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Nov 29, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:
			
		

> What koolaid have you been drinking? King of the Hill? Salvation? Get over dramatic much? It cracks me up at how many people have wasted their time on this thread. If nothing else this has been a very nice case study in what is wrong with this forum.



Bingo. Enjoy your role. 

Go in peace.


----------



## Sonoma (Nov 29, 2011)

I hate to say I told you so, but, you did open a BIG can of worms.  It has been interesting thus far though.  Maybe doing the PM thing would be better at this point.


----------



## mwcfarms (Nov 29, 2011)

Lol sorry I am thoroughly amused by the dram this thread has caused today, It provided for study break reading! People need to chillax


----------



## mwcfarms (Nov 29, 2011)

mwcfarms said:
			
		

> Lol sorry I am thoroughly amused by the dram this thread has caused today, It provided for study break reading! People need to chillax



Damn auto enter on iPads where can I get me some of dat kool aid?


----------



## MTVision (Nov 29, 2011)

Sammie_Lou said:
			
		

> 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.
> 
> ...



Sounds like facebook


----------



## Derrel (Nov 30, 2011)

Why don't we all form a big circle, holding hands of course! and then we all sing Kumbayah!?!?! That would be so,so totally awesome!

This thread is a pretty amusing mix of reactions both positive but mostly negative, miscommunications, jumped conclusions,poor reading comprehension, some bad writing,and just a whole bunch of differing ideas and opinions. Very interesting...in many ways...a total failure from the O.P.'s point of view probably...but we can all learn from our mistakes, right?


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 30, 2011)

Derrel said:


> a total failure from the O.P.'s point of view probably.


 While it definately became much more dramatic than I expected, it wasn't a complete failure. Had I just went and sent messages to people, I probably would have ended up with a few of these drama queens in the circle. I would say that makes it a success .


----------



## Sonoma (Nov 30, 2011)

Sonoma said:


> Maybe doing the PM thing would be better at this point.


 


GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> Had I just went and sent messages to people, I probably would have ended up with a few of these drama queens in the circle. I would say that makes it a success .



DOH!!


----------



## mishele (Nov 30, 2011)

LOL Good times......=) If it offended you not getting included in a group like this........you have bigger problems to worry about...LOL


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Nov 30, 2011)

I think its a riot. I really do. I also think its insulting to anyone who participates here and my opinion has not changed. Some of us are more tolerant of diversity and again, on many sites just like this, there are always a few who want to deliver their message that the masses are just not good enough. There were many reasons cited by the OP thoughout this thread to pursue this idea supoorted by notes and comments about this that and the third about how deficient site members are, and long before I replied, so much so that I can't construe the train of thought as anyhting other than what one person labed it: elitest.

As for me, I don't need splinter groups to make me feel all warm and fuzzy, and I also don't need to be away from those who post here with less experience or with questionable social skills. And the mods do a pretty good job with spammers. 

I personally don't care for the condescention....I'll go right back to para 1...

*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. I do not wish to add every poster because I do not wish to clog up the circle with newbie users who will not bring any contribution to the group as a whole, or who will end up just being spammers. However, as people grow on the forum, they could be added. 

*How ridiculous. :chatty:


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 30, 2011)

GeorgieGirl said:


> * I am only willing to add reputable and trustworthy posters who have ample postings and which I have interacted with before. *



Exactly. If it is elitist to only want to add people to a circle of friends that .....wait for it......I ACTUALLY KNOW, then I guess I am elitist. I am not sure where you get the idea that I am claiming that site members are deficient. You are clearly deficient in your reading comprehension skills and trying to project some sort of ignorance on my part. Again, it is people like you who make this thread justified.  Hmmmm turns out that the ignore button DOES work rather well. I may reconsider this whole thing after all.....:lmao:


----------



## bentcountershaft (Nov 30, 2011)

I only want in if you can guarantee there is a much drama there on a daily basis as there is in this thread.  And I won't post there, I'll just read it.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 30, 2011)

bentcountershaft said:


> I only want in if you can guarantee there is a much drama there on a daily basis as there is in this thread.  And I won't post there, I'll just read it.


 By drama standards, it will most likely be dull and lifeless......I can only hope.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Nov 30, 2011)

Wait. What's this Google + thing?   



I think I'll have to Yahoo! it and find out!


----------



## Overread (Nov 30, 2011)

bentcountershaft said:


> I only want in if you can guarantee there is a much drama there on a daily basis as there is in this thread.  And I won't post there, I'll just read it.



Darn it stop encouraging them 
I wouldn't mind only they don't put their toys away ever after playing with them and its a pain having to clean up after!



Also -- I've totally talked to people from here in private, without telling any of you about it!! I've even ---- joined other photography forums and not told you and made posts and stuffs. I'm worried if I'm becoming elitist or just sane - - one of the two its worrying me.


----------



## swampmonkey (Nov 30, 2011)

c+ c please 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 i know i posted this in the wrong section,but i wanted this to be in a high traffic area


----------



## Overread (Nov 30, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Wait. What's this Google + thing?



It's like facebook but google

Another tool in their attempt to take over the world by knowing everything about you - from your websites you view, to the people you associate with and down to your favourite colour and character from MLP. In the end they'll rule the world - sadly people let them


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 30, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Wait. What's this Google + thing?
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'll have to Yahoo! it and find out!


:lmao: using your packard bell computer?


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 30, 2011)

Is swampmonkey another name for troll?


----------



## memento (Nov 30, 2011)

OOH... OOH... OOH... OOH...



















I am beyond L337

I am L447!

Can I join *peeks over shoulder and whispers*, the inner circle?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Nov 30, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> > Wait. What's this Google + thing?
> ...



No! I am not rich! I have a Commodore 64 and a 14 baud modem connecting to Compuserve.


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Nov 30, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> GeorgieGirl said:
> 
> 
> > * I am only willing to add reputable and trustworthy posters who have ample postings and which I have interacted with before. *
> ...



Difference between you and me for starters is that I have never hit an ignore button on any site I have ever participated in for any member. People can say what ever they want and I have never needed or even desired to censor that person even in the face of extreme diasagreement or in advesity.

As for you, it appears from all your writings that you have indeed conveyed the impression that you are purposely not including a variety of memebrs for a variety of reasons. You can have what ever club you want, I could care less and that is not the point I am making. The point is that you intentionally came to this site, made a public statement about intents to start a select club that you will preside over while indentifying publicy again that you will be simultaneouly judging the members here for thier suitabilty to join you. Its quite the statement that you intentionally did not act discreetly and PM people you judged fit to meet your profile. To me the open message of your plans was a way of hoping people who want to be 'worthy' were going to beg you to join them. If you then tell them they are not good enough...Holy Cow if that's how it goes down.

In conclusion, as a result of the questionable efforts and potential consequences, not only do I think that how you presented your idea is not a legitimate use of this site, and that's my own opinion, I think your added and continued comments that cite your negativity of the varied participation styles, attributes and efforts by the members certainly weighs heavily to my opinion that your acting in a righteous manner. For all the dislikes you have of others, and you are pretty vocal about them throughout this thread, you can't expect that everyone finds you and what have said and done socially acceptable as a result.

Putting your hands over your ears and saying over and over I can't hear you isn't going to change that one iota.


----------



## Overread (Nov 30, 2011)

I just want to point out that - as a mod - I expect to be invited to this inner circle and their discussions. I don't have Google + and I won't be getting it, but I still demand the invite and full logs of the conversations.....


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Nov 30, 2011)

Overread said:


> I just want to point out that - as a mod - I expect to be invited to this inner circle and their discussions. I don't have Google + and I won't be getting it, but I still demand the invite and full logs of the conversations.....



Good point...Does TPF read the PM's as other sites do?


----------



## Overread (Nov 30, 2011)

Hmm I'm not sure what my not even close to serious post has to do with reading the site pms - far as I know I can't read them  its an admin thing and even they have to jump through hoops to get at them (and leave a papertrail in the software). Suffice to say we don't read pms and the only time we are likely to see them is if a user reports them to us.


----------



## swampmonkey (Nov 30, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> Is swampmonkey another name for troll?


 
What? No circle for me?&#58386;


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Nov 30, 2011)

Overread said:


> Hmm I'm not sure what my not even close to serious post has to do with reading the site pms - far as I know I can't read them its an admin thing and even they have to jump through hoops to get at them (and leave a papertrail in the software). Suffice to say we don't read pms and the only time we are likely to see them is if a user reports them to us.



...Gee, sorry to be such a kill-joy.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Nov 30, 2011)

GeorgieGirl said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm I'm not sure what my not even close to serious post has to do with reading the site pms - far as I know I can't read them its an admin thing and even they have to jump through hoops to get at them (and leave a papertrail in the software). Suffice to say we don't read pms and the only time we are likely to see them is if a user reports them to us.
> ...



Isn't that a bird?


----------



## Overread (Nov 30, 2011)

This thread needs more smilies :greenpbl:


----------



## dots (Nov 30, 2011)

Sure as sh*t don't take my slagging to heart. This is a global (virtual) open-plan office and we're all just getting through the day 


cheers


----------



## mwcfarms (Nov 30, 2011)

OMG Overread can see the all the dirty messages I been sending to people.  Better go clean out the sent message box. Hahah.:lmao:


----------



## o hey tyler (Nov 30, 2011)

butts.jpeg?


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 30, 2011)

Overread said:


> I just want to point out that - as a mod - I expect to be invited to this inner circle and their discussions. I don't have Google + and I won't be getting it, but I still demand the invite and full logs of the conversations.....


 You definitely would have been invited. Your Google+ conspiracy theory made me assume you would not be interested.


----------



## cgipson1 (Nov 30, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > I just want to point out that - as a mod - I expect to be invited to this inner circle and their discussions. I don't have Google + and I won't be getting it, but I still demand the invite and full logs of the conversations.....
> ...



You state "WOULD have been invited".. does this mean that your Google+ Circle plans are off... or ??


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Nov 30, 2011)

cgipson1 said:


> GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:
> 
> 
> > Overread said:
> ...


 No, it means he was being facetious, since he loathes Google. However, for what its worth, had he shown interest, he would have been invited. The circle is on and is growing albeit a bit slower than expected.


----------



## camz (Nov 30, 2011)

What the hell is going on in here? 

Seriously does anybody really use Google +.  I've had it but I don't really tune in to the network as I searched for friends or clients and I don't seem to find a significant number them, so I deemed it useless for now or or until it hits the snowball fan. 

Is the initiation to the club better then ten paddles wacks to the upper rear thigh?


----------



## cgipson1 (Nov 30, 2011)

camz said:


> What the hell is going on in here?
> 
> Seriously does anybody really use Google +.  I've had it but I don't really tune in to the network as I searched for friends or clients and I don't seem to find a significant number them, so I deemed it useless for now or or until it hits the snowball fan.
> 
> Is the initiation to the club better then ten paddles wacks to the upper rear thigh?



depends on who's doing the paddle whacks.. and how cute she is!


----------



## camz (Nov 30, 2011)

Yeah I heard planet Venus did a better job on spanking....Mars :thumbdown:


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Dec 1, 2011)

Bumpidy bump bump


----------



## Overread (Dec 1, 2011)

No matter how much you bump it you won't be getting any paddle whacks from here -- you'll have to get those in your Inner Circle


----------



## McNugget801 (Dec 1, 2011)

camz said:


> Seriously does anybody really use Google +?



lots of amazing photographers are using it 

I couldn't fine this part of the TOS in the previous 7 pages but I did skim....

_11.1 Y_*ou retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.*_ 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. _*This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.*


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Dec 1, 2011)

McNugget801 said:


> camz said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously does anybody really use Google +?
> ...


 Exactly. The only problem it causes, is if you are a photographer that needs to grant EXCLUSIVE rights to a photo. This may create a bit of a problem. I think that a way around this (I am pretty sure anyway ) would be to link to the image. Typically when you link to an image it will show the image in an extra large page preview thumbnail. Then if someone clicks it, they can see the enlarged image.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Dec 1, 2011)

Overread said:


> No matter how much you bump it you won't be getting any paddle whacks from here -- you'll have to get those in your Inner Circle


 On the contrary, I think this thread has been one big paddle whack on me....


----------



## manaheim (Dec 11, 2011)

Without reading through 4 total pages of bickering, let me say that I think many of you naysayers may not fully understand how G+ works.  It's not going to rob TPF of anything, really... it has just become another avenue for photographers to get some play.  Frankly, I think it's become mostly incestuous...  but it's still early to tell how it will work out.

It's a harmless idea and probably has some merit, imo.


----------



## Rick Waldroup (Dec 12, 2011)

Cyber circle jerk


----------

