Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

We have a discussion continuing at the moment about a new section: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-129-1.html

The section is not a discussion forum so much as an 'ask the experts panel'. It removes the noise from some of the more general discussion forums as well as restricting some of the more opinionated, or ignorant less well informed, vendor biased contributors. It does not detract from other parts of UHH, but may improve the flow of quality advice and information.

However, when we consider the open discussion forums it raises a few questions. There is an assertion that there are no stupid questions. There are certainly stupid answers, but how do we characterize those things, and if they do actually exist how do we deal with those that ask them or respond in such a manner?

Dictionary definitions may vary, but I'm using the following definitions:

Ignorance is simply a lack of knowledge, we are all ignorant about something, some of us about many things, but ignorance can be cured.

Stupidity is the inability to learn, a lack of intellectual capacity to comprehend a situation or information no matter how it is presented, nor how frequently.

So, are there such things as stupid questions? If so what characterizes them? Without naming names, do we have regular contributors to UHH that pose stupid questions? We certainly have questions that come from ignorance, but that is the whole point of asking questions in many circumstances, to seek enlightenment. There is no shame in not knowing something. Are there other motivations for posing questions that could be characterized as stupid? If so what are they?

Are there such things as stupid answers? If so what characterizes them? Without naming names, do we have regular contributors to UHH that post stupid answers? Is it incorrect misinformation? Is it a strong vendor bias whether relevant to the original question or not? Is it snarky or sarcastic comments? Is it just something that is intended to be humorous but maybe misses the mark? Is it something that is simply egocentric?

We certainly wish to encourage discussion, and not to intimidate other members in my personal opinion, but if are there members that frequently ask stupid questions or provide stupid answers what would characterize those kinds of questions and responses?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If they were serious about having professional moderators address 'pro stuff', they'd have the pro from Olan Mills on the team ...

BebuLamar

There is really no stupid question but there are questions that can not be answered or can only be answered by the person who asked.
There are a lot of stupid answers and those are primarily answers to questions that were not asked.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

There was a pro at Olin Mills?!?! LoL
SS

Rongnongno Loc: FL

We are not looking at the validity of the question as 'ignorant' or 'stupid' to start with.

We have a restriction on what to ask, meaning that one has to identify first what they need. This relates to a minimal knowledge of the op need.

This directly affects 'ignorance' and 'stupidity':
- Ignorance: The op is smart enough to identify his/her need. A question oddly phrased due to a lack of (tech/photo) vocabulary will be accepted. This is the reason for asking the person's level in photography from novice to pro - as a requirement when asking.
- Stupidity: If one is unable to raise his/her awareness of a need there is no question possible.

Remember mentors are answering pointed questions, not generality examples:
- "what is bokeh?" Will be transferred to the main section. There will be no answer (other than a moderator comment, if any).
- "how can I use bokeh to improve my images" will be answered.

If we have no one to answer in a specialized question (underwater by example) the thread will be transferred to the appropriate underwater photography section. A transfer like this one implies three things in turn:
- Moderators must be aware of all UHH private sections
- That section is advertised to the OP simply by being transferred there
- A section need for a specialized, professional mentor on that specialty

Bill_de Loc: US

Any question asked out of ignorance looking for a real answer is a good question. IMHO

Any honest discussion about photography, be it the art, a technique, equipment, etc., should have a place here.

Posers who spew nonsense in the guise of photographic discussion should be restricted to the Chit Chat section. But as long as people cater to this kind of thing, it will continue.

The new Pro section is a good idea, but I'm not sure the structure will work. It might be nice to be able to direct your question to a particular person. Google usually leads me to the answers I am looking for. But if I had a question, depending on the specific topic, I would know who to ask.

What I really want is Springtime.

--

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Reading the topics so far, it's not clear the world is beating a path to the door of this better mousetrap (nor will they ever). I have a few thoughts, the preponderance of rules and requirements is the first and most obvious ...

Rongnongno Loc: FL

This has taken place already and is just fine.

As to the other... Don't you wish, we have not passed half of it yet.

rocket111

Great Post. Being new to digital photography ( 2 years ) I have asked a few questions. But first I try and find the answer on line. And if I still don't understand I will ask Ugly. It has been a great help. Looking at other folks photographs gives me lots of new ideas. Ya there is always a asshole out there. That's OK. But I would say the vast majority of folks will do there very best to give good answers. And a wide variety.
Once again I will say great post. 😎

BB4A

Who are “they”? I thought the whole point of a forum was that it was a place where “We” (interested parties in the topics posted on the forum) could meet, exchange ideas, and hopefully learn something new or interesting about our shared interest?

I freely admit that I see questions that I wouldn’t ask, and answers that I wouldn’t give, on this forum... but I confess that I never suspected that there was some dark intrigue, wherein which I and the other witless pawns were being manipulated by “They” who are in charge.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

I am well aware that you are dead set against this section for some reason.

To answer your 'concern' and rectify the negative vibe you try to imply here is what is needed, under the form of links.

Requirements These are a minimal in order to provide an intelligent answer to a question so, sorry, you are wrong in your evaluation. Some mentors wanted this to be much more restrictive and I nixed it.
[http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-510418-1.html#8641042]Moderation[/url] If you take the time to read, the op has more options than denials. One can ask anything from deleting a topic to have it transferred or locked. Item 2 and 3 are about behavior, not restriction.

The section under that part is a list of what will happen, not a restriction. It is a direct application of the requirements when posting a post.

So unlike your post the restrictions are simple, limited in scope and do not allow abusive behavior toward the mentor.

That's it.

Take it or leave it.

BB4A

In answer to Bill_de about Springtime, I suggest you take a leaf out of the Arctic Tern’s Playbook. That 4 ounce little bird sees more daylight every year of its life (and they live up to 35 years), than any other creature on the planet.

https://oceanconservancy.org/blog/2016/06/08/five-reasons-to-love-the-arctic-tern/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI5fvZxs6P2QIVh43ICh29GwM9EAAYASAAEgIeGPD_BwE

Bill_de Loc: US

Well, if I was a Tern I would have been dead for many years.

--

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Go to the section and check the list of moderators. You have all the links needed under the 'read me' thread. Each mentors is under instruction to provide a Bio and when possible a link to a web site or collection of their work.

The 'They' are you refer these folks to is offensive toward them in my opinion. They volunteered or were referred to me before going through a review made by three mentors AFTER I collected the information needed (WEB link and resume/bio). The three mentors are randomly selected so not the same. As the pool grows, the less influential the initial mentors become. This prevents bias.

I placed safe guards to prevent odd birds within the mentors... Still I get the feeling one made it through. My fault here.

As to witless pawns, this is really insulting the whole UHH community. It is a choice to go there and use the services offered. Those who make that choice are not pawns or witless. Those who do not, according to your own post are not pawns or witless either.