Re: Christopher Strevens' posts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Sorry I caused problems. I am not allowed photography where I am. I am allowed out for a shopping trip unescorted. And I capture images of London scapes.

The very serious and false charges are being dismissed.

I have had to reconvert to Christianity on pain of death.

In a few minutes I have to take "mass".

It is very difficult.

It is better to wash away sin than to burn it away.

We use trial by ordeal now. Very dangerous a procedure.

This is reality here.

Bigotry is practiced. And it very important.

My wife is catholic so I have to be.

A couple of razor slashed on my face caused me problems since maturity.

I have healthy children.

This problem could be up your street soon.

Christopher

London.

Taking up photojournalism was more difficult than I thought.

I am waiting for my green party press badge.

Christopher







Sent from my Windows Phone

From: Andrew Sharpe
Sent: ‎07/‎11/‎2015 21:51
To: PhotoForum educational network
Subject: Re: Christopher Strevens' posts

This is too bad. I have thought about leaving the list myself, but it is not because of him; it is because of two other fellows. I leave it to you to decide who those individuals are, but suffice it to say that for the last 6 months, I have had an email filter deleting any email from them. I have not been bothered by Chris' ramblings to have a filter for him, but I certainly could. Those other individual's postings are far more insulting and damaging to the camaraderie on the list than any of Chris' postings.

Andrew


On 11/7/15 8:43 AM, Andrew Davidhazy wrote:
> 9 subscribers departed from the list today as a result of Christopher Strevens’ posts.
>
> List participation is, in my opinion, affected by patently off-topic and disruptive messages.
> The list was established to serve as a communications venue for the friendly exchange of
> information. comments and hints, etc. related to photography and its practice.
>
> While it is recognized that it is easy enough to delete troublesome messages it would
> help the overall effectiveness of the list if one did not have to do that. Same for blocking
> messages from a particular individual. OTOH, he could be blocked from the list.
>
> We have discussed “censorship” in the past and the general consensus was that we should
> not engage in this practice. It is disappointing, however, when members decide they’d rather
> leave than have to deal with stuff such what Christopher Strevens has posted recently and
> also in the past.
>
> Andrew Davidhazy
> PF list coordinator
>

[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux