Is the photo section now defunct?

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 08 May 07 - 07:44 PM

"thinking while posting seems to get me confused sometimes"

Dunno John, seems to be a lot of posting without thinking takes place here...


:-P

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 08 May 07 - 07:35 PM

I think I had seen the flikr thread, but couldn't remember which of the multi photo sites had been up. Thanks for the reminder.

That thread incidentally is past 200 posts, so people might want links to:

BS: flickr photos--do you have a page? – PAGE 1

or"

BS: flickr photos--do you have a page? – PAGE 5

Page 5 is the current last page, but of course that's a moving target.

A link to:

BS: flickr photos--do you have a page? – DESCENDING

… should track with additions, but I don't care much for that display since it puts the last post and the new post areas at opposite ends of the page.

(I like to see what I'm commenting on while composing a reply - but maybe I should adjust my practice as thinking while posting seems to get me confused sometimes.)

John

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: bbc
Date: 08 May 07 - 05:52 PM

Well, there *is* this thread, John--flickr photo pages. And there are 2 Mudcat groups on flickr, as well.

best,

bbc

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 08 May 07 - 03:34 AM

I did note comments regarding the need to withhold submittal of new photos until the crash cleanup could be completed. I have dutifully deferred submitting any just to do my best to be helpful.

I must note that we have had photos in hand and ready to submit, because as soon as I told my "social manager" that we shouldn't, she busily searched all our available ones to find which ones we had that would be the best to not send.

I've been quite happy having an excuse, since for the prior half-dozen years I had to admit to sloth, laziness, and general incompetence (although I might have pled "humanitarian motive" due to ugliness); but now I can honestly say it's intended as a helpful gesture.

We do have a "festival site" for our camping group, but haven't set up a "personal page." After trying a couple of "free" and other "cheap" sites, we have been much more satisfied with our current one at SmugMug. It costs us $35 (US) per year, which we consider worthwhile after less satisfying experience with a couple of other nominally similar sites.

Most pages at SmugMug seem to be "open" (like ours) and can be browsed by anyone without a password, although access can be limited. You need a password, of course, to edit/add/remove photos.

On open pages, visitors can download your pictures, and/or can "order prints," so what we have up is "very public" and some might want to consider whether they want anyone who wanders by to have their mug (or whatever else shows) before posting at a similar site.

We have had recent threads devoted to identifying member MySpace and YouTube pages, but so far as I recall there have been only scattered entries in random threads showing photo page links. Perhaps a dedicated thread would at least shake out some who have personal photo pages who would be willing to link them, and bring the ones who've posted links all to one place? - or maybe there already is one?

John

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 08 May 07 - 12:56 AM

You're NOT SERIOUS??!!

Now I've got to get the rope off the light fitting and start making lunch!

CHeers


Bugsy

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: catspaw49
Date: 08 May 07 - 12:08 AM

Sorcha, I don't know where to start so I won't. Can I assume your posts are also jokes as mine are or are you serious.......as I am not.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Rowan
Date: 07 May 07 - 09:42 PM

Thanks PoppaGator. I thought I'd got it right. They haven't got us completely numbered yet, but they're trying. Very trying!

Now that we've sorted out that there's only one level of access to piccies on our Mudcat personal pages I'm wondering about the feasability of part of the suggestion I made earlier.

The webpage site with the piccies I described above (http://www.sherwood.photosite.com) doesn't appear to need a password to view it, which is why I thought it relevant when others were discussing such problems with other sites. I suspect the software it uses is part of the business run by the student I mentioned. I expect one would probably need a password to add piccies to it.

So, how feasable would it be to set up such a site so that Mudcatters, who already had membership privileges and thus password access, could put piccies on it but the only access to the piccies would be via the password-protected portals of Mudcat?

If this were feasable I suspect there'd be some need for the "owner" of any album (their own group of personal piccies) to have a separate password to control who could edit the piccies, if not the album. And another for the volunteer sysop delegated to manage it for Mudcat.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Peace
Date: 07 May 07 - 09:20 PM

Reminds me of a story.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Sorcha
Date: 07 May 07 - 09:02 PM

Well, ya, he is kind of a bully, and seems to pretty much get away with it, unlike others. Hang in bugs.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 07 May 07 - 08:31 PM

PoppaGator - Thanks for explaining that.

In Australia we have the TFN (Tax file number) which has to be quoted all over the place. We also now have compulsory photo ID on our drivers licenses. Same stink, different colour.


Cheers


Bugsy

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 07 May 07 - 08:21 PM

Rowan,

So you're an Aussie ~ that explains everything! ;^) Must be nice not to be "numbered" by Big Brother (or, as in our case, by Big Uncle Sam).

There's no "deeper" access to the current set of photos, which isn't growing any larger at the moment. As a member, you have all the access anyone can get. I believe you've gotten confused by the discussion of possible alternatives ~ off-site access to other online photo "albums" of the types that have been developed fairly recently ~ which may or may not be proposed as a substitute for the original Mudcat archives that are becoming harder to administer.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 07 May 07 - 08:06 PM

I meant "thanks for THAT"

CHeers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 07 May 07 - 08:05 PM

Thanks for tat Sorcha. 'Spaw's always picking on me. He's such a bully.

Cheers


Bugsy :>(

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Sorcha
Date: 07 May 07 - 07:48 PM

And, Spaw, just go piss upwind, OK? Can't see that Bugsy has done anything wrong. Take your clone priviliges and edit him out if you like, but stop griping about nothing.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Sorcha
Date: 07 May 07 - 07:42 PM

If there is a 'deeper' level, I've yet to find it.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 07 May 07 - 07:40 PM

'Spaw! It's an Age thing. It's drugs. It's the medication. It's the hormone treatment. It's sleep deprivation. It's malnutritian. It's the drink. Ah Shit! I've run out of excuses and I'm still lost.

Go pick on someone your own size!

CHeers

Bugsy :>)

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Rowan
Date: 07 May 07 - 06:36 PM

Thanks for that info, PoppaGator. I hope you didn't get too exercised by my comment; it was meant as a gentle dig about the fact that not all the Mudcatters are US citizens or even American. Because I'm not American and I am old enough to have associated intimately with holocaust survivors I associate the initials SS with an organisation far more sinister than your Social Security.

In Oz we don't yet have a universal identifying number and quite a few of us regard this as a freedom we have that is denied to Americans. Tax File Numbers (TFB) and Medicare numbers come close but you're not automatically assigned these. The Canberra pollies are trying to introduce a universal identifyer but its enabling legislation hasn't yet been passed.

Back on thread, I inferred from your earlier post and Joe's supporting comment that there are two layers of access to photos on the personal pages at Mudcat; one that members can access once they've logged in (and which also gives access to PMs etc) and another, deeper, level which requires another password that is only privately passed between members.

Have I understood correctly? If I have, it seems reasonable to me that one way of achieving this would be by having the photos on the deeper level hosted on one's own computer and, if that was what was happening, would make sense of Bugsy's question and concern.

Perhaps someone could enlighten those of us who're not yet up to sysop competencies.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 07 May 07 - 12:40 PM

I don't believe that a person can be "too young" to have a Social Security number. Rowan, I bet you have a SSN but possibly you don't know it (assuming you're a US citizen.) You may have slipped through the system if you were born at home with no involvement of a hospital or an MD; otherwise you'd have been registered.

Those of us who are relatively old didn't get numbers assigned to us until we went to work at our first jobs, but for the last several decades, kids born in the US get SSNs assigned to them at birth. My kids, now ages 29, 27, and 24, all have had SSNs since they were infants. To list them as dependant children on my tax return, I always had to fill in a blank for each kid's SSN.

I think the assignment of numbers was restricted to welfare recipients at first, but by 1977 they were "numbering" all births, or at least all births in hospitals. We were not receiving any kind of public assistance when any of our kids were born. (Never did, until briefly in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.)

Maybe a person could exist in the US without a SSN if:
1) over 30 (or more) ~ that is, born before they system began registering infants;
2) they've never had a "straight" job with payroll deductions;
3) never left the country (requiring a passport), or come here from another country (requiring a "green card").

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: catspaw49
Date: 07 May 07 - 05:33 AM

After a serious perusal of this thread, it is my considered belief that while the Mudcat photos maybe temporarily defunct, it is equally true that you, Bugs, are just plain funct. Matter of fact, you're funct up and just about as funct up as a person can get and still remember how to breathe.

Try to get a grip.

Best as Always,

Spaw

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 07 May 07 - 01:39 AM

Are you talking about getting access to MY hard drive via the Mudcat photo's section?

Now I'm COMPLETELY lost!

Cheers


Bugsy

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Rowan
Date: 06 May 07 - 07:07 PM

Thank goodness I'm too young to have an SS number, or one of those that they tattooed on your forearm.

But I take your point Gargs.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 04 May 07 - 11:13 PM

Bugsey - you are attempting a "good thing" PLEASE follow through.

However, most people place their money in a bank, some people lock their doors....some do not....depending on location....most do not want their SS numbers published

VERY Nefarious folk prowl the web - world wide....there are some photos (one or two out of 240) that could prove compromising....MAKE ALBUMS and then .... make available ONLY the data you WANT public .... protect the rest of your "vault" of photos.

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 04 May 07 - 04:51 AM

????????????? I'm lost..............and YOU wanted me to VOLUNTEER to run a PHOTO WEBPAGE!?!

See my point Joe?

Cheers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 May 07 - 03:59 AM

He's right, though - if you don't want the whole world to see it, make sure it's protected by a password.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 04 May 07 - 03:31 AM

Gargoyle! You is a baad baad Bowa!

Now git you back under dem stairs!


Cheers


Bugsy

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 03 May 07 - 08:39 PM

Lots and googles of stuff available.

Sorry Bugsy - Cat must have gone done and deleted my advice.

On PC's right click - for example KatLafing - and you can run an entire web posting of their personal storage spaces (save web-page) to record entire files. VERY few FOLKS seem to be placing passwords or limiting the areas of their "personal" photographs......sometimes, I feel like a child looking through my mother's underwear drawer.

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 03 May 07 - 03:17 PM

Like those pix, huh Joe? The rest of y'all might enjoy a look-see as well.

If and when I ever submit a profile, I'll attach my cartoon drawing of PoppaGator to place on the profile page, and in the text will include a note referring readers to the photo section for real photos of the real me.

If and when I might add more photos, there's one I have that I would post if I could, and another one I'm hoping to acquire.

The picture currently on my home PC that I would submit is a group shot of my first appearance with KC King and the N.O. Quarter Shanty Krewe, at the now-defunct O'Flaherty's Pub.

The other picture of myself that I have seen, been promised a copy, but never gotten is a b&w shot of myself fronting a rock band of twenty-somethings at a young friend's wedding in '04. I'm still under treatment for cancer, still with a feeding tube installed in my belly (although the tube is concealed benaeth my coat and tie), at my absolute skinniest (about 160 lb, down from 245 just a few months earlier), and wailing. (I'm reminded to pester the mother of the groom, once again, to locate and send me a jpeg.)

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: open mike
Date: 03 May 07 - 02:40 PM

I, too am glad to see that the massages are back in proper order-
can i sign up for one?

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: bbc
Date: 03 May 07 - 06:39 AM

I hope that, whatever happens, the current photos will remain available. Some, particularly in the events section, are pretty special--1st Mudgather at annap's, Rick Fielding's concerts, 1st Get-Away that we attended, for example.

best,

bbc

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 May 07 - 09:01 PM

Well, I married a chiropractor who started out as a massage therapist, so I thought I had a lifetime of free massages ahead of me. I got plenty before the wedding, but now I'm in line behind her clients, her mom, her son, and the dogs....
The damn dogs get a massage every night.
And if I'd get more chiropractic treatment, maybe my typing wouldn't be going all to hell.
-Joe-


Oh, and I guess I have to say that we can't accept photos or profiles just now, but I'm really glad I looked at PoppaGator's photos.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Jeri
Date: 02 May 07 - 06:54 PM

Newpapers require permission. It's common decency to ask about individual photos. Group photos, not so much. If the photo section goes off-site and/or is open to everyone, I want my 'Jeri' photos off of it.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Rowan
Date: 02 May 07 - 06:46 PM

I also noticed Joe had his massages in order and thought it was because some kind mudelf was looking after him for all the work he does; he was certainly quick off the mark and effective with a little problem I sent him.

Some people have different requirements and thus definitions regarding privacy but it seems to me (with my very limited knowledge of server technology) that it might be possible to set up the Mudcat personal page so that it contained a link to a server where the photos could go and have the server set up so that the Mudcat personal page link was the only one (apart from sysops) that could access the piccies.

When I retire (in about ten years or so) I might have accumulated the expertise to go with the spare time required to volunteer, but the twisted copper pairs and summer lightning strikes might make any offers from me problematic if involving hardware.

At the Res School I taught at just after Easter, one of the students revealed that she ran a software business that she intended using to finance her studies. She took lots of piccies, some of which were required by other students in her group, so she displayed them on a web page which seems to deal with access to photos rather well. The website is at
http://www.sherwood.photosite.com
if anyone wants to check it out. Sorry about my inability to do hotlinks. And yes, I do appear but I think even my mother wouldn't be able to pick me out.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 02 May 07 - 05:13 PM

I wouldn't think of submitting another member-photo of myself after The Crash (even though I have at least one worth considering), but would it be OK to submit the Profile I've never written, but still may or may not create?

Bless you all for maintaining this site despite all the headaches, the occasional stupidity you're forced to monitor, etc.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 May 07 - 04:23 PM

I think it's pushing privacy too far to think we have to ask permission to post somebody's photo in an unsecured location. Personal details like phone numbers and e-mail addresses are another matter, but I don't think I'd see a need to ask permission to post a picture tied to a name.
Our Photos page is closed to non-members because it's part of the section that contains e-mail addresses and profiles and personal information.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: MMario
Date: 02 May 07 - 03:29 PM

*grin* the motto of the service is rarely the same as the motto of those serving in it!

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 02 May 07 - 03:23 PM

Thanks Bugsy:
I used to be in the RAF Joe. Our Motto - NEVER VOLUNTEER!"
I always wondered what "Per Ardua ad Astra" meant. Someone tried to convince me it was "Through adversity to the stars"

I'm glad you've set me right on that one!

CHEERS
Nigel

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Grab
Date: 02 May 07 - 08:37 AM

Nice to see your massages are in the proper order, Joe. Are you on the DC madam's list too? ;-)

Graham.

PS. Congrats for sorting out all the probs since the crash.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 02 May 07 - 08:08 AM

Hadn't member photos been a members-only area? If so, and if it's moving offsite with open access, that would make it necessary to ask every photo subject if that's OK.

~Susan

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 02 May 07 - 08:01 AM

I used to be in the RAF Joe. Our Motto - NEVER VOLUNTEER!"


Cheers


Bugsy

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 May 07 - 03:29 AM

You mean I scared you off by asking you to volunteer, Bugsy?
[grin]
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Sandra in Sydney
Date: 02 May 07 - 03:27 AM

Chris posted one of the 2007 Ozcatter pics I sent to Jeff.

I also have a small collection of Mudcat visitors awaiting sending to Mudcat (or wherever)

Bugsy, if you want any pics, pls PM your email address & I'll send them.

Bob - when you want to update your Mudcatter pic, I have several suitable ones!! Bob-the-Press-Photographer & Bob-cleaning-up-the-Bush-Music-Club-Hut come to mind, but there are others.

sandra

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 02 May 07 - 02:42 AM

Thanks for explaining things to us Joe.

I'll now pull my head in and hope someone with some more expertize than me can host a photo's page.

cheers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 May 07 - 02:10 AM

Well, the ideal so somebody with a server that will allow open access to photos, so Mudcatters can follow a link posted at Mudcat and go directly to the photos without entering passwords and such - and we need an individual with access to that site, who can receive the photos and post them.

There are lots of free photo pages on the Web and various Mudcatters have used many of them, but almost all require a password and lots of fooling around, just to look at picture. I have to admit I'm usually too lazy to go through the hassle of looking.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 02 May 07 - 01:27 AM

You are right about that, Joe, it has run incredibly reliably for quite a while now.

What are the requirements for the photo storage? What kind of volume are you looking at? You have in mind someone with a server who can host the photos, and not just storage space here and there, right?

SRS

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 May 07 - 01:13 AM

Things have been a little tough for us technologically since the Big Crash of the Summer of 2005. We finally have most of the things fixed that went kablooey in the crash, and most of the remaining problems are things you wouldn't notice. The photos and most other database entries were showing double, and that's fixed now. The massages are back in proper order, even though the number of messages in a thread doesn't always display correctly on the Forum Menu. The Links page seems to be working OK, although I still have a huge backlog of links to process.

Max and Jeff have their plates full with other stuff right now, so they haven't had time to do much more than to keep the basic stuff running - and I think the basic stuff has been running more reliably than it ever did in the past. I don't know if they'll get time to do more with photos. I'm hoping they'll fix Mudcat MIDIs first, since that's more directly related to our primary music function. In the meantime, I'm storing MIDI files at Jon Freeman's site. It would be wonderful if somebody would like to volunteer to run a similar offsite storage facility for Mudcat photos. I can set up a Photos PermaThread to use for linking to that site. Any volunteers?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Celtaddict
Date: 02 May 07 - 12:08 AM

I submitted pics from Mystic Sea Music Festivals for some years, but after the last, there was a combination of reasons the person who had been posting them on the 'Cat was unable to continue that task. I think it has become so easy to post them in other places online and include links that doing so is almost certainly the best way to share photos of events and such.
I do think it would be nice if someone with the technical ability could update bio photos.

Subject: RE: Is the photo section now defunct?
From: Bob Bolton
Date: 01 May 07 - 11:58 PM

G'day Bugsy (and 'Hi' Gargs),

I seem to remember that Chris Maltby had posted a link (post #200 in the Ozcatters to meet at the to National thread - back on Sunday 29 April) an annotated photo of a group of Mudcatters, taken before Hrothgar's Hymn Session. That wasn't posted in Mudcat photos, but linked to his Bigpond Users' facility.

I'm not sure where the "in-house" Mudcatter photos and biogs stand ... I've been feeling that the existing 1989 photo of myself might be starting to look like a failed "Dorian Grey" attempt! (But I can't complain ... I mostly spend too much time on the wrong side of the lens.)

Regards,.

Bob

Subject: Is the mudcat photo section now defunct?
From: Bugsy
Date: 01 May 07 - 08:40 PM

I was just checking up to see if any of the Ozcatters Photo's had made it into the "Events" page of the photo section and noticed that nothing has been added since 2005. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not moaning or anything. Don't jump down my throat,(I think you guys are doing a fantastic job with MUDCAT) but I just wondered - Is the photo section now defunct?

cheers


Bugsy