Whether you take 3 lefts or 3 rights to get to your destination matters zero if all you're looking to do is get to the destination. But i'll agree to disagree.I'm sorry, it is NOT semantics. They are 2 opposing ideas.
Whether you take 3 lefts or 3 rights to get to your destination matters zero if all you're looking to do is get to the destination. But i'll agree to disagree.I'm sorry, it is NOT semantics. They are 2 opposing ideas.
Which shows how badly you take to a critique, let alone criticism. I rest my case.Whether you take 3 lefts or 3 rights to get to your destination matters zero if all you're looking to do is get to the destination. But i'll agree to disagree.
That's not accurate. Here, the forum policy is that critique is not wanted unless the photographer explicitly asks for it. Some photographers place a request for critique in their automated signature that appears at the bottom of their posts. Some place the request in the first post of their thread. And some use the forum's moniker displayed next to the thread title to request critique.Here, a poster has to disclaim they want critiques
Agreed!I'm sorry, it is NOT semantics. They are 2 opposing ideas.
If what you provided was indeed a critique, those 40 years taught you nothing.Which shows how badly you take to a critique, let alone criticism. I rest my case.
How is that not what I said?That's not accurate. Here, the forum policy is that critique is not wanted unless the photographer explicitly asks for it.
Here, a poster has to disclaim they want critiques
The best I can do is suggest that you review a formal definition of the word, disclaim. Once you've done that, hopefully you'll understand the difference between your post and mine.How is that not what I said?
You got me. I work in web operations and we have to use disclaimers throughout the site to inform users of promotions, offers, details and so on. We have to clarify what we want to "disclaim" to our visitors (i.e. inform). But now that I see the error, I understand why: Disclaimers as we know them today were derived from the older stance of using the negative voice such as "Doesn't include, isn't, not" whereas we have shifted this to the positive voice of "includes, valid through". Good call out, thanks, I get to inform the rest of our team of this in our call later.The best I can do is suggest that you review a formal definition of the word, disclaim. Once you've done that, hopefully you'll understand the difference between your post and mine.
There was no intention to "get" you; the intention was only to inform you. Glad to know you got it figured out.You got me.
I'm very impressed that you can so easily make up words.
- exiguous
- persicacity and how it is different from perspicuity
- manicule
- Irredentism
- prolixity
- snollygoster
- tergiversate
- trypophobia
That's so true that sometimes beyond the words being used, the tone of voice, body language, facial expressions and even laughter can have very different meaning between two cultures.I've noticed that what seems like a friendly response in one culture can be misunderstood as not so friendly in another culture.
Not just between cultures....but between individuals. Also each person deals with others based on prior experiences, etc. Some people assume most people are friendly and helpful, some people assume most people are out to get them, some people assume that other people are indifferent....and some people assume others are wrong until proven correct!That's so true that sometimes beyond the words being used, the tone of voice, body language, facial expressions and even laughter can have very different meaning between two cultures.
Ah, those business meetings in English at one of my previous employers, Lexmark, when the team in Kentucky decided to bring the Irish, the Scots, Aussies, folks from India and more Europeans to our UK:US.Not just between cultures....but between individuals. Also each person deals with others based on prior experiences, etc. Some people assume most people are friendly and helpful, some people assume most people are out to get them, some people assume that other people are indifferent....
Ah...but we are WAY off topic.....
Some websites have a policy that all photos are subject to critique. When a subscriber creates an account at them, they agree to that policy. I have no idea what the policy is at the website Barry is referring to. Regardless of the policy, online bullying should never be permitted.If critique wasn't asked for and someone wants to offer it, then they should seek permission before doing so.