home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
- I'm about to blurt my opinion about the quality of recent articles posted
- to the LW mailing list and newsgroup, so if you're not interested in
- reading my opinions, proceed to the next message.
-
- I value the existence of the LW mailing list and newsgroup very highly.
- We have had many highly productive discussions concerning all aspects of
- Lightwave, Modeler, and many other tools used in conjunction with Lightwave
- and Modeler to produce 3d animation. Recently, articles are appearing
- consistently that I consider to be reckless and irresponsible. I'm not
- referring to the barrage of company bashing that's been going around. I
- think these attacks are tasteless, but they're very obvious and easily
- dismissable by all but the most sensitive reader as net-garbage. I'm
- referring to articles, usually posted in response to serious questions
- regarding the use or function of some piece of software or hardware that
- is somehow related to Lightwave, that contain incorrect or unverifiable
- information. I'm not referring to responses to questions that clearly
- necessitate opinionating, like "What's the best way to make a tree?". I'm
- referring to responses to questions like "What does depth of field mean?"
- or "How do I calculate aspect ratios?" or "What makes NT page so much?" or
- "Did Amblin Imaging do the effects for XXXX?". I consistently see
- responses to questions like these that are either incorrect or
- unsubstantiated. These kinds of questions have real answers that are not
- opinions. They have answers that are verifiable, and sources that are
- citable. I don't think that the people who ask these kinds of questions
- should have to try and figure out who sounds like they know what they're
- talking about. I think it's getting so bad that people who are capable of
- posting helpful responses don't bother because they end up being argued
- with about points that are not disputable outside the bounds of either a
- theoretical physics or philosophy group. If we all discuss what we know
- and explain what we think we know, I believe we'd all get more out of the
- list.
-
- I would like to see a new atmosphere of responsible posting on the
- Lightwave newsgroup and mailing list. I would like to see more people
- cite their sources when they volunteer information about topics that they
- are not familiar with first hand, like "This imaging company did that". I
- would like to see more people justify their technical explanations with
- sources for givens and formulae, like "According to the ASC Guide for
- Video..." I realize that more detailed articles take more time to write,
- but some of the busiest people in the Lightwave user community are on
- this list and they are taking the time to formulate thorough responses and
- disseminate valuable, verifiable information with sources cited. I think
- it's worth a little extra effort to ensure that the Lightwave newsgroup
- and mailing list are high confidence sources of information for all of us.
-
- OK, everyone, have at it - argue with me. If you want to yell at my face,
- I'll be at NAB Sunday, Monday and Tuesday. I'm staying at the Hilton.
-
- Dave Gilinsky (DG75)
- Pixel Dust, Inc.
- dave@gaspra.pd.com
- _______________________________________________________________________________
-
-
-
-
-
-