Ok. Thx for the advise. I hope that I corrected my post to an acceptable standard.
Although I wouldn't post a Facebook-link where you need to have an account for, i will post the pictures / screenshots of the site tomorrow using an "adequate" picture-host. Not sure which one u actually prefer. I don't have my own server to post it on, sorry.
So, everyone can go to the site without being logged in. I myself have an FB account, but I hardly use it anytime.
Just for research-purposes from time to time. (and of course I don't post personal information there )
My english isn't the worst but I might not have understand everything to the fullest.
If I still have "mistakes" in my posting, please let me know. I don't hop so.
THE DERAILING ROOM
Re: Paris - "Charlie Hebdo shooting" 07/01/2015
I wish all our experienced long-term members would also follow these guidelines. It is very wearing and tiring to see so many links with no explanation of what they contain. I never click on a link missing that description because of the amount of time doing so wastes.hoi.polloi wrote:Provide captions. Explain explicitly what you are seeing and why it's strange to minimize the extra work people need to do to "get" your point.
-
- Member
- Posts: 5060
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Well, you just made a few more mistakes.
I am really very sorry but if this cannot improve, I will have to ask you to leave.Ok. Thx for the advise. I hope that I corrected my post to an acceptable standard.
Although I wouldn't post a Facebook-link where you need to have an account for, i will post the pictures / screenshots of the site tomorrow using an "adequate" picture-host. Not sure which one u actually prefer. I don't have my own server to post it on, sorry.
So, everyone can go to the site without being logged in. I myself have an FB account, but I hardly use it anytime.
Just for research-purposes from time to time. (and of course I don't post personal information there )
My english isn't the worst but I might not have understand everything to the fullest.
If I still have "mistakes" in my posting, please let me know. I don't hop so.
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
I think it's fair that we expect users to proofread their posts and fix formatting, punctuation, syntax and spelling errors.
But hoi, I think non-English speakers deserve a little bit of a break when it comes to grammar, no?
But hoi, I think non-English speakers deserve a little bit of a break when it comes to grammar, no?
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 5:31 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Ok. I understand that you want to hold up the readability and quality of the forum.
I was going to put up the screen-shots "tomorrow", like I said.
I usually proofread my postings. Even on Youtube comments I do, unless most other people.
If I had made an awful lot of blatant spelling mistakes, I would have understood the critique.
I am from Germany and therefor my English isn't perfect. Even English people are making blatant mistakes and use "their" instead of "there", "where" instead of "were" and so forth.
And I wanted to contribute to this forum, because I thought I would find awesome and open minded people.
Because I wrote "i" not in capital letters, "Thx" instead of Thanks and "u" instead of "you" (didn't know this is not allowed), forgot an "E" in hope, wrote "English" with non capital letter in the beginning this was criticized so harshly ? What's wrong about that "and" in the exclamation marks? Sorry about "advise", I usually know that this has a different meaning to "advice" but I did not recognize, that I made that mistake.
I find your answer and (possible) "consequences" to be rather harsh.
This doesn't encourage me to make further comments, because I would always have in mind not to make
any spelling mistake or be worried to break any of your other rules.
I am actually sorry, that it turned out like this. I never would have thought of something like this.
I understand your point of wanting clean, good readable postings with easily verifiable / comprehensible evidence.
I found several postings in the CH-thread of which I thought: "This is no good evidence or none at all and not even a "good speculation". But these posts do stay? Okay.
I guess this is just a little "odd" from my point of view. I never experienced this in any other forum.
And I am sure if I would take the time, I would find *many* errors of members that weren't corrected like this.
And this post had been moved to the Derailing Room. I wasn't even in the research-thread anymore.
You did not say something about the spelling and grammar of my "main" posting but of my answer in which I told you that I might not understand every advice to the fullest and my English is - due to the fact that I'm an "Ausländer" - far from "perfect".
I saw that Simon moved my topic back. But I guess I will try my "luck" elsewhere.
I wish you all the best, Simon and hoi.polloi. And all the other guys that I never got to know.
Please don't take it personal, so don't I.
P.S. Feel free to highlight my errors / mistakes, although I really tried quite hard not to make any.
I was going to put up the screen-shots "tomorrow", like I said.
I usually proofread my postings. Even on Youtube comments I do, unless most other people.
If I had made an awful lot of blatant spelling mistakes, I would have understood the critique.
I am from Germany and therefor my English isn't perfect. Even English people are making blatant mistakes and use "their" instead of "there", "where" instead of "were" and so forth.
And I wanted to contribute to this forum, because I thought I would find awesome and open minded people.
Because I wrote "i" not in capital letters, "Thx" instead of Thanks and "u" instead of "you" (didn't know this is not allowed), forgot an "E" in hope, wrote "English" with non capital letter in the beginning this was criticized so harshly ? What's wrong about that "and" in the exclamation marks? Sorry about "advise", I usually know that this has a different meaning to "advice" but I did not recognize, that I made that mistake.
I find your answer and (possible) "consequences" to be rather harsh.
This doesn't encourage me to make further comments, because I would always have in mind not to make
any spelling mistake or be worried to break any of your other rules.
I am actually sorry, that it turned out like this. I never would have thought of something like this.
I understand your point of wanting clean, good readable postings with easily verifiable / comprehensible evidence.
I found several postings in the CH-thread of which I thought: "This is no good evidence or none at all and not even a "good speculation". But these posts do stay? Okay.
I guess this is just a little "odd" from my point of view. I never experienced this in any other forum.
And I am sure if I would take the time, I would find *many* errors of members that weren't corrected like this.
And this post had been moved to the Derailing Room. I wasn't even in the research-thread anymore.
You did not say something about the spelling and grammar of my "main" posting but of my answer in which I told you that I might not understand every advice to the fullest and my English is - due to the fact that I'm an "Ausländer" - far from "perfect".
I saw that Simon moved my topic back. But I guess I will try my "luck" elsewhere.
I wish you all the best, Simon and hoi.polloi. And all the other guys that I never got to know.
Please don't take it personal, so don't I.
P.S. Feel free to highlight my errors / mistakes, although I really tried quite hard not to make any.
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 5:31 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
I'm curious about some of the errors you pointed out. I am writing every point in a new row by purpose for clearness.
"Ok." - Why no dot/point here? In every other language I know you can do that.
"tomorrow" was set in quotation marks by purpose. It's written correctly, no?
"unless" was the wrong term, you are right. What I meant was "unlike".
"Therefor" didn't show me any "errors" (no red underline), so I thought it was right. I didn't know two similar written words do exist.
What's wrong about "Even English people are making blatant mistakes"? Would I have to say? "Even English people *make* blatant mistakes"?
"What's wrong about that "and" in the exclamation marks? " - What's wrong about the "that" here? "exclamation marks" was surely the wrong term. I wanted to write "brackets" (I had the wrong term in my head). But your "quotation marks" weren't correct either.
"I never would have thought of something like this." - What's wrong here?
""This is no good evidence or none at all " - What's wrong here?
I never experienced this in any other forum. - Do I have to say "on" any other forum? What's wrong about "I never experienced..."? Did I have to put an "have" after "I"?
"And I am sure if..." - what's wrong with starting a sentence with "And"?
"like this" - I didn't mean to say "like these". I cannot explain what I meant in English without using German terms.
"And this post had been moved..." - Again. Why can't I use "And" in the beginning of a sentence?
What should "[run on]" mean / suggest? I don't get it, sorry.
"I saw that Simon moved my topic back. But I guess I will try my "luck" elsewhere." - I see no problem in making these two separate sentences. I can't start a sentence with "But" or "And" in the English language?
"I wish you all the best, Simon and hoi.polloi. And all the other guys that I never got to know." - This could have been a single sentence, I have to admit.
"Please don't take it personal[ly], so don't I." - What's wrong?
acuriousmind aka the "spelling terrorist".
"Ok." - Why no dot/point here? In every other language I know you can do that.
"tomorrow" was set in quotation marks by purpose. It's written correctly, no?
"unless" was the wrong term, you are right. What I meant was "unlike".
"Therefor" didn't show me any "errors" (no red underline), so I thought it was right. I didn't know two similar written words do exist.
What's wrong about "Even English people are making blatant mistakes"? Would I have to say? "Even English people *make* blatant mistakes"?
"What's wrong about that "and" in the exclamation marks? " - What's wrong about the "that" here? "exclamation marks" was surely the wrong term. I wanted to write "brackets" (I had the wrong term in my head). But your "quotation marks" weren't correct either.
"I never would have thought of something like this." - What's wrong here?
""This is no good evidence or none at all " - What's wrong here?
I never experienced this in any other forum. - Do I have to say "on" any other forum? What's wrong about "I never experienced..."? Did I have to put an "have" after "I"?
"And I am sure if..." - what's wrong with starting a sentence with "And"?
"like this" - I didn't mean to say "like these". I cannot explain what I meant in English without using German terms.
"And this post had been moved..." - Again. Why can't I use "And" in the beginning of a sentence?
What should "[run on]" mean / suggest? I don't get it, sorry.
"I saw that Simon moved my topic back. But I guess I will try my "luck" elsewhere." - I see no problem in making these two separate sentences. I can't start a sentence with "But" or "And" in the English language?
"I wish you all the best, Simon and hoi.polloi. And all the other guys that I never got to know." - This could have been a single sentence, I have to admit.
"Please don't take it personal[ly], so don't I." - What's wrong?
acuriousmind aka the "spelling terrorist".
-
- Member
- Posts: 5060
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
No offense meant, none at all, and I am so glad to hear that you don't take it personally.
But I really cannot make heads or tails of your last post. It's probably better that you don't post here. Thanks for your thoughts and your passion. Perhaps you can start an Ausländer version of our forum! That would be great! Then, I could be the one that you might want to give spelling/grammar tips to.
But I really cannot make heads or tails of your last post. It's probably better that you don't post here. Thanks for your thoughts and your passion. Perhaps you can start an Ausländer version of our forum! That would be great! Then, I could be the one that you might want to give spelling/grammar tips to.
-
- Member
- Posts: 5060
- Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Sure, but there are many borderline things that are on the slippery slope. "u" for the word "you" isn't a purely grammatical error, is it? Of course, none of us writes in perfect grammar on this forum. Nobody. And that's fine and beautiful. But when our posts start to look like "Instant Messages" we are in trouble. I would implore us to be aware of the fact that looking and sounding like the power of Facebook posts is not always a good thing, just because it's a form of mass media these days.anonjedi2 wrote:I think it's fair that we expect users to proofread their posts and fix formatting, punctuation, syntax and spelling errors.
But hoi, I think non-English speakers deserve a little bit of a break when it comes to grammar, no?
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 5:31 pm
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
I was just wondering about several of the "mistakes" that were none at all in my opinion.
The post where I was corrected seems to be deleted. At least I cannot see it anymore.
I admit there were some mistakes. I saw that afterwards. If you don't want to see a "you" as "u", "thanks" as "thx", I totally understand that and it's fine with me.
But some errors, I have to say, weren't errors in my opinion. At least they weren't explained. But if the one who corrected me - as I said you could do - seems to have deleted the post.
Therefore I understand that you don't understand what I posted in the last answer before this one. I mean if you haven't seen the posting he made before of course.
Just my (last) 2 cent.
All the best to you guys!
The post where I was corrected seems to be deleted. At least I cannot see it anymore.
I admit there were some mistakes. I saw that afterwards. If you don't want to see a "you" as "u", "thanks" as "thx", I totally understand that and it's fine with me.
But some errors, I have to say, weren't errors in my opinion. At least they weren't explained. But if the one who corrected me - as I said you could do - seems to have deleted the post.
Therefore I understand that you don't understand what I posted in the last answer before this one. I mean if you haven't seen the posting he made before of course.
Just my (last) 2 cent.
All the best to you guys!
Re: THE DERAILING ROOM
Simon, I got your message but it won't allow me to reply. Just wanted to let you know it was received and sorry for being cheeky.
-
- Member
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:33 am
Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts
Noted and scrubbed, Maat
Last edited by Starbucked on Tue Jan 27, 2015 9:31 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts
Starbucked,Starbucked wrote:Judith of Nasa - http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/ride_ ... ages/5.jpg
That first photo is of Sally Ride (which you've also reversed), NOT Judith Resnik:
from: http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/ride_ ... lash=false
The caption reads, “Ride leaves the simulator in Houston after a training session”
-
- Member
- Posts: 2579
- Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:38 am
- Location: Italy
- Contact:
Re: The Ukrainian theater
Hm. I doubt you are proving anything with that picture. Also there are several videos showing the meeting. Of course the videos can be faked too, but there is no "pasting" or "dummies" there --and maybe it is not worth the trouble since we only see three people in a room. Don't take it personally but of all the info in my post, you took the less significant. Maybe less rush...?brianv wrote:
Madame Tussaud's Putin. The dummy on the right was pasted in from another image, while the dummy on the left is just a dummy, period.
Image created with the Linux GD library. All other EXIF stripped.
-
- Member
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:15 pm
Re: The Ukrainian theater
Brian, this 'event' reminds me of The Hacker Factor exposure last year (see below). It showed how the Kremlin manipulated images.brianv wrote:
Madame Tussaud's Putin. The dummy on the right was pasted in from another image, while the dummy on the left is just a dummy, period.
Image created with the Linux GD library. All other EXIF stripped.
Brian, going back to the image you posted, if you enhance the below imge by x6, white outlines are also visible surrounding the three characters in the image.Feeling Hungary
A few days ago, I saw an interesting political picture at FotoForensics. It shows Putin (right) and Viktor Orban (Prime Minister of Hungary, left) with Hungarian President Janos Ader in the middle signing papers. The picture caught my attention because of the frame over the mantel. It looks like it should be a mirror, but it isn't reflecting anything.
The picture was uploaded to the Hungary news site "index.hu" on 11-Feb-2014. However, I couldn't find the article that went with it. (I blame my inability to read Hungarian.) What I did find was far more interesting. I sent the picture to TinEye and immediately found the source picture... sort of:
This picture shows Putin and Orban in the exact same pose. It is the same camera angle, their clothing has not moved, their fingers have not moved... This is the same picture, but the man in the middle has been replaced by flowers on the table. The flowers picture was released on 31-January-2013. Back in January 2013, Orban met with Putin to discuss a variety of topics, including energy. A year later, on 15-Jan-2014, they met again and signed an agreement to expand a nuclear power plant.
There are more problems with this picture than just the digital addition of the man in the middle. For example, PCA measures JPEG actifacts. Look for the amount of detail (or lack of detail) within each JPEG grid. Visible JPEG grids indicate a low quality picture. Large blocks within each grid is a medium quality, and fine pixelated detail is high quality. (Ignore the coloring, look at the detail. The coloring is just to help highlight details, like dropping dye onto a microscope slide.) In this case, the quality seen on the man in the middle is different from the rest of the room -- so he was added. The lower corners of the picture frame/mirror are also different, so they were modified.
At this point, we can be certain that the 2014 picture is a digital composition. However, the biggest clue appears when we apply a basic color histogram to the picture:
The histogram shows a distinct white outline between Putin, Orban, and the background. The entire picture looks like a digital composition.
As The Hacker Factor points out:
'Media outlets use pictures to help convey a story. But if the picture that supports the story is fictional, then what does it say about the actual event?'
http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index. ... s/P13.html
http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/23569
Re: The Ukranian theater
You are on to something, kickstones and brianv, as is nonhocapito. Is the fact that the guy is kneeling a significant message to the audience for which it is intended? I would think so.
And what do you think about the Snowden lookalike in the picture without the kneeling guy?
And what do you think about the Snowden lookalike in the picture without the kneeling guy?