Here is my take subject to correction and/or discussion.
My bone: What is a hot topic?
There should be, in my opinion,subject to correction, an area in NPN whereupon people can discuss something outside of photography--if that is possible. I say possible because no person is wise enough to comprehend the labyrinth of political intrigue that could encroach on that which we all enjoy so much. There, informed people need to share ideas.
Why?
Because those who limit their horizons and are afraid to discuss issues in photography, and everything that affects it [everything if one encompasses human psyche], are doing photography, their family, their culture and themselves a disservice.
Hot Topics can be voluntary. No one has to submit anything. Or the contra-positive is that, within moral limits, one should be able to submit political and religious issues.
If that violates the constitution of NPN perhaps the rules need to be revisited.
Why?
My take, and it is borrowed.
Individual liberty, under rule of law [foretold and agreed upon], is the engine of democracy [I prefer the word "Republic" as defined by America's Founders].
If individual liberty is extinguished, power is shifted to legislators; legislators, like everyone, have limited knowledge about the entire gamut of what people "want"; as that gamut of desires is put forth from the people and corporations the legislator has no choice but to call upon "experts"; experts will do everything to convince everyone their path is the best [and sometimes more lucrative for themselves!], at the expense of some of the true wants and desires of "the people"; the use of "experts" then becomes a course in political planning which invariably leads to loss of liberty and, as Hayek in The Road to Serfdom stated, to totalitarianism.
Won't happen here?
That's the siren call of allowing centralized control.
I contend that NPN, on Hot Topics, could be a forum for give and take attempting to keep individual liberty in the forefront by exposing "wants and desires" for happiness. There would be a lot of different thoughts. That is GOOD !!!
The entire spectrum needs to be constantly before "the people", not just a small segment. I mean over 600 "looks" on the last one about cameras and sequoias seems to be indicative of interest even if most did not participate directly by writing.
I realize not all planning leads to bad things; but I also realize the loss of liberty does.
Comments from the moderators and others appreciated and sought.
I am against it in a photography forum. AS was stated, there are thousands of places for religious and political discussions. Also, it would add to the storage and archival storage for this forum. I could only see religious or political discussions IF they were directly affecting some field of photography. Hope the original poster is not offended...but he did ask for comments!
To be perfectly blunt, I could care less about the moral and political views of NPN members. I already feel overly bombarded by opinions on those issues every time I tune into any of the various cable news networks or pick up a newspaper. I'd prefer to keep my interest in photography unencumbered by the wisdom that others apparently feel they have to share with the general public on political and moral issues.
Posted by Greg Lessard on June 2, 2011 at 12:46 PM
We have a fairly harmonious community here. A lot of that has to do with all of the great people in this community. Some of the harmony comes from avoiding potentially contentious subjects. I think its wise to generally stay away from politics and religion on this site. I also have noticed that politics and religion do come up from time to time and so long as the discussion remains civil and related to photography, Jim and the moderators generally allow the discussion. Let's keep the peace and save the politics and religion for other forums.
IMO, this is a photography forum. I come here for RESPITE from the rest of the world.
If I want to discuss politics, I'll go to a political site. If I want to discuss medical issues, I'll go to the two medical teaching sites I own and run.
Any political issues raised here should relate only to photography - as Jack's recent posting of the You Tube videos about police detaining that college student videotaping trains. People can then participate or not.
My 2 cents: Please no politics or religion! Excluding those from discussion is not a loss of liberty or free speech; in fact NPN supports both (liberty and free speech) in that members choose to exclude politics and/or religion as topics.
There are other sites that I subscribe to or visit that are pertinent either to a hobby/interest or profession; that allow politics and religion to be discussed and invariably at some point in time it gets personal, childish and vicious.
I used my democratic right to choose the NPN forum to discuss photographic ideas, photographic trends, partake in photographic opinions, learn about photography and, well.. be a better photographer. How will discussing Tim Hudak's idea of using chain gangs to clean up the streets, or Sara Palin's ridiculous bid for the presidency help me achieve that?? I f you can figure that out.. i'm in.
I am in complete agreement with all the comments so far. Please, keep this a "safe haven" for the enjoyment of photography and the wonderful community of people who participate at NPN.
Thanks for your opinion, Fisch, and I respect your point of view. Protecting liberty is vital to a healthy democracy. It's my opinion that having the liberty to OPT OUT of discussing every darn thing and being constantly exposed to contentious issues is also valuable for rest for the mind and soul. That is a big part of my enjoyment of NPN: the "rest for the soul" part, free for the most part from contention. Ahhhhhhh…
I emphatically agree - politics and religion belong elsewhere and not here. There's already too much of each that seems to slip into NPN between the cracks...
We should probably be more specific. Politics can apply to just about anything. This forum was specifically created for those political and other touchy discussions that are *directly relevant* to nature photography (e.g. conservation, land use, access, etc.) and those are still welcome as long as the discourse is respectful and not inflammatory. Topics get closed or deleted when they venture outside this narrow scope.
I agree that this is not the place to debate the merits of systems of government, centralized control etc. If there is no obvious link to nature photography, it doesn't belong on NPN.
I come to NPN for photography and not much else. I despise politics in all forms and rarely watch TV because of the plethera of BS. Religion is a personal thing and to each his own. Only topics related to photography should be discussed here. Period.
I have learned from, been annoyed by, become angry, been educated from, laughed at etc... some of the in depth and spirited although civil in most cases, political discussion here. I have my opinions like everyone else. I am probably not articulate enough to express my views on an equal level with many of you. I'm always impressed by the knowledge of many of our members that participate in some of these discussions. But I rarely talk about, or think about politics and stay calm. Honestly, it just pisses me off and causes me stress. I can remeber when I was younger, and ignorant to all the "stuff" and I was blissful in my ignorance. Seems like we should stay focused on what happiness, or fulfillment photography gives us.
I'm with Guy, if it relates to photography I say it's fair game, beyond that, it's probably not the place.
Larry, I understand your interest in discussing things going on in the world, religion or other topics with people who have become friends here on NPN. It's nice to have those discussions with friends. However, I have to agree with the others. I don't want to have to start worrying about offending someone or being offended. Right now I trust the value of the comments I receive on my work and am comfortable leaving comments for others. I don't want the nagging doubt of "is this about my work" or "should I comment" to start creeping in. I like this site being only about photography.
So far it seems 100% against my observation/suggestion.
Guy Tal's remark about "centralized control" with regards to photography.
To wit: On another NPN forum today there is an item where a person was challenged by "authorities" while photographing in a train station [posted yesterday by Jack Graham]. And I had posted several months ago about photographing federal buildings.
That, to me, is the hidden labyrinth of intrigue surrounding our changing society. In sum, NO HOBBY OR ENDEAVOR IS WITHOUT POLITICS. It may not be immediately evident but the travail of time and the march of power is inevitable.
I'm merely asserting that to hide one's head in the sand is very immature.
Only a truly informed and animated people can retain their liberty.
Being "happy" with photography and retreating is a luxury you cannot afford.
Read on: “Luxury, more savage than arms, has oppressed (Rome), and avenges a conquered world.” --- Juvenal, Satires, 6, li.292 as quoted in Discourses Concerning Government, pg. 165. The author, Algernon Sidney said this meant “... that luxury also through which they fell, was the product of their felicity; and that the nations that had been subdued by them had no other way of avenging their defeats, than by alluring their masters to their own vices. This was the root of their civil wars.” [felicity: the quality or state of being happy.]
The history of all great civilizations is against you when you retire from public dialogue because of wanting to be happy.
Appreciate the blunt comments. I'll go lick my wounds.
the fisch
Postscript: I see Mr. Graham has posted the aforementioned item above mine on this Hot Topics Forum. See if there is any connection--interesting to say the least.
Larry, if you're suggesting that NPN allow discussion of political/ethical issues that have a direct connection to nature photography, I think we're all in agreement that such discussion should be (and already is) allowed here on NPN. Perhaps I misread your original post as a proposal for NPN to accomodate the discussion of political and ethical issues without a direct connection to nature photography.
"Being "happy" with photography and retreating is a luxury you cannot afford."
Larry, personally I believe being happy and having a place(s) to retreat is not a luxury, but a necessity in life. At least in a life I would want to live.
There are times to be engaged in politics and other activities related to preserving the liberties we enjoy in this country, but there also are times to retreat and recharge.
I use photography to retreat and recharge myself, as the beauty of the birds I watch and capture in images remind me of why I am a conservation biologist, why I fight day in and day out to preserve the natural world.
Thus, I feel very strongly that I do not want politics or religion to enter NPN in any way other than how they currently weave themselves into the topics of nature photography we discuss on NPN every day.
If people feel a need to discuss these issues at more depth, then I believe there are other sites to visit other than NPN, or maybe someone will start a new site devoted to politics and religion in nature photography.
Phil,
At least you are a critical reader, meaning you read and understand.
My post today explains what history reveals to be truth; nothing, including photography, stands in isolation.
One cannot talk about how political/ethical issues have a direct connection photography's hobby concern without talking about the expanded version.
The total picture is where the problem lies.
No planner, those now in control, can foresee all of humanity's wants and desires; they only see that which is within their expertise and if photography is not their bag, considerations for photography never get on the table.
Photographer's simply have to think outside their box to be really good citizens and to protect and maintain the freedoms necessary for continuation of their efforts. There is more to life than photography; as Juvenal said, happiness is a product of luxury which lulls the populace to sleep--paraphrased from my previous post.
Overstated? Not according to history.
In Hot Topics one does not have to participate in certain threads--it is free choice.
Limited discourse is basically violation of free speech and lulls photographers and everyone else with hobbies and jobs and homes and familes.... to sleep. Consider, we owe our children, our posterity, the freedoms we have and recharging one's batteries in nature is OK if one addresses the attacks, or even potential attacks, on those freedoms. A little sleep, a little slumber and the chickens are snatched by the fox.
I'm going to stop and let this run its course. You are all the "masters of your fate and the captain of your souls"...
Larry, you seem to think we all need to be educated. Why don't you start your own website and whomever wants to be enlightened will sign up? You come off as very condescending to me.
Guess this has really become a "Hot" topic. I think we all agree...politics about photography...ok....politics not about photography...not ok. I wish you well and hope to see some wonderful photography by you and all the others!
I figure I spend enough time listening to the issues and discussing them with others outside this forum. Most of that time I am in some state of stress, discust, or bewilderment. I'd just like to limit it to that, and not corrupt the "happy' place I've found here. I'm sure we all have different views, ideology, personalities and so on. But the beauty of it is that we leave that on the doorstep.
I made the mistake of bringing up politics among a group of friends I came to know through NPN. While it was kept civil, there were some distinct differences between us. It could have gone sour pretty quick, and luckily it didn't tarnish the friendships I had made through our common bond "photography" and the love of nature.
I wasn't trying to suggest that I try to live my life in complete ignorant bliss. But the ten or so percent of it that I do find relaxing and happy, I'd like to keep that way. I'll be pissed off and caught up in all the BS the other eighty percent!!!!
It also seems to me that most political issues that start here as a direct relationship to photoigraphers, usually find a way to broaden out during the duration of the discussion. So if we start a political discussion about ethics, or conservation, global climate change etc... from a viewpoint as to how it effects photographers and it goes from there to an expanded discussion, okay. The moderators, or Jim would then step in when it was determined the discussion had strayed too far.
One last point for Larry, and anyone else it might influence.
Larry, you seem very well informed and educated. You state your points in an articulate and fact filled way. personally, I can't compete with you in a debate on that level. The fact is that we probably agree on many points and issues. But I notice you are vigourous in your responses to political related topics. I think that's fine too. I think being educated and informed is the best means of resisting the things that seem unfair, unlawful, or unconstitutional, etc... But if you are not actually applying it to the cause, it just becomes debate, and retoric. I'm not suggesting that I think you are not doing anything yourself. I don't know you, and would not assume that. But speaking for mtyself, I am not actively doing anything to influence change in the things I find flawed about our system of government, and our society. The one thing I was doing and probably still do, is bring my anger and frustration about these issues home with me. I just give my wife and others a big dose of my bad attittude concerning something I heard about that day, or discussed with someone else. It's stressful on me, and my family when I get in that state of mind. I have been trying to discover ways to increase the percentage of my time that is positive and enjoyable. That doesn't mean I want to stick my head in the sand and ignore the risks of complaisancey. I just want to find ways to sustain photography and nature, and the healing effect it has on me to continue to do that. I figure if I start debating politics here, I'll just be impossible to live with all together!!! So, I took a little long to make my point. I hope no one was offneded by anything I said, in any way.
I especially like Chris Chamberlin's remarks. Chris, there is strength in numbers. We have as a nation become too politically correct; we've been disarmed. A house divided cannot stand so my idea is that there is strength in numbers. I'm just trying to re-visit what at some level appears to have been lost--commonality of basic ideas. We've been lulled to sleep by the burgeoning bureaucracy and are content to let it nibble away. When the foundation fails, something will fall and it will make a big noise or snivil away without a whimper. That something is America.
There will never be agreement on all aspects of life. That's why individualism is so important and why central control, which stifles your varied efforts, is an enemy. That's why the siren call of having the central government protect all lands we think are precious for photography and pristine beauty will lead eventually to totalitarianism. Then only the elite will be able to visit. [Gorbachov had credit cards galore while the citizens lived like monks]
Along that line I found the website below.
Just put cameras in place of the article discussed. Remember we have already been told in error that we can't photograph trains without proper authority; we thought we could not photograph federal buildings but that was proved wrong. Power is there and it is encroaching on a silent group of photographers.
I closing one more time, no one has to visit this thread.
If it upsets you, don't.
If you like it or have something to say, why can't it be available for photographers to cuss and discuss. Common interest in one area is a means of discussion for things not in common. Better done between citizens than have it forced by "planners".
While I'll agree that no activity exists without influence from the world we live in, those who have already responded have covered it quite well. Some of the more important points made;
1. NPN is a place to escape the day-to-day disucssion of politics, religion, etc. that so permeates the media today.
2. In view of how polarized political discussion can be, I find great comfort that people from opposite sides of the political spectrum, people from different cultures and of different religions can come together and find joy in each others company discussing something we all enjoy and can relate to. Personally, it brings me great joy and great hope that we as a race of beings on this planet can find a way to peacefully co-exist and work towards a better future (whatever that might be).
3. NPN will always be a place to discuss the art and technique of nature photography without the distraction of all the stress/controversy that you can easily find everywhere else.
Most importantly, I will always respect the right of NPN members to come here to discuss nature photography without being subjected to political/religious discussion and debate. Guy stated it above - this forum is specifically for "hot topics" that pertain directly to nature photography. It's a tough line to define, but I think we've done OK with that so far.
Discussion
27 repliesTo me, at least, that means something.
What does it mean to you?
Here is my take subject to correction and/or discussion.
My bone: What is a hot topic?
There should be, in my opinion,subject to correction, an area in NPN whereupon people can discuss something outside of photography--if that is possible. I say possible because no person is wise enough to comprehend the labyrinth of political intrigue that could encroach on that which we all enjoy so much. There, informed people need to share ideas.
Why?
Because those who limit their horizons and are afraid to discuss issues in photography, and everything that affects it [everything if one encompasses human psyche], are doing photography, their family, their culture and themselves a disservice.
Hot Topics can be voluntary. No one has to submit anything. Or the contra-positive is that, within moral limits, one should be able to submit political and religious issues.
If that violates the constitution of NPN perhaps the rules need to be revisited.
Why?
My take, and it is borrowed.
Individual liberty, under rule of law [foretold and agreed upon], is the engine of democracy [I prefer the word "Republic" as defined by America's Founders].
If individual liberty is extinguished, power is shifted to legislators; legislators, like everyone, have limited knowledge about the entire gamut of what people "want"; as that gamut of desires is put forth from the people and corporations the legislator has no choice but to call upon "experts"; experts will do everything to convince everyone their path is the best [and sometimes more lucrative for themselves!], at the expense of some of the true wants and desires of "the people"; the use of "experts" then becomes a course in political planning which invariably leads to loss of liberty and, as Hayek in The Road to Serfdom stated, to totalitarianism.
Won't happen here?
That's the siren call of allowing centralized control.
I contend that NPN, on Hot Topics, could be a forum for give and take attempting to keep individual liberty in the forefront by exposing "wants and desires" for happiness. There would be a lot of different thoughts. That is GOOD !!!
The entire spectrum needs to be constantly before "the people", not just a small segment. I mean over 600 "looks" on the last one about cameras and sequoias seems to be indicative of interest even if most did not participate directly by writing.
I realize not all planning leads to bad things; but I also realize the loss of liberty does.
Comments from the moderators and others appreciated and sought.
Kindest regards to all
the fisch
If I want to discuss politics, I'll go to a political site. If I want to discuss medical issues, I'll go to the two medical teaching sites I own and run.
Any political issues raised here should relate only to photography - as Jack's recent posting of the You Tube videos about police detaining that college student videotaping trains. People can then participate or not.
My 5 cents ...
Sandy
There are other sites that I subscribe to or visit that are pertinent either to a hobby/interest or profession; that allow politics and religion to be discussed and invariably at some point in time it gets personal, childish and vicious.
So Thank You for no politics or religion!
Sharon
Garry
Thanks for your opinion, Fisch, and I respect your point of view. Protecting liberty is vital to a healthy democracy. It's my opinion that having the liberty to OPT OUT of discussing every darn thing and being constantly exposed to contentious issues is also valuable for rest for the mind and soul. That is a big part of my enjoyment of NPN: the "rest for the soul" part, free for the most part from contention. Ahhhhhhh…
Just my $.02 worth.
Don
I agree that this is not the place to debate the merits of systems of government, centralized control etc. If there is no obvious link to nature photography, it doesn't belong on NPN.
Guy
I'm with Guy, if it relates to photography I say it's fair game, beyond that, it's probably not the place.
Chris
Guy Tal's remark about "centralized control" with regards to photography.
To wit: On another NPN forum today there is an item where a person was challenged by "authorities" while photographing in a train station [posted yesterday by Jack Graham]. And I had posted several months ago about photographing federal buildings.
That, to me, is the hidden labyrinth of intrigue surrounding our changing society. In sum, NO HOBBY OR ENDEAVOR IS WITHOUT POLITICS. It may not be immediately evident but the travail of time and the march of power is inevitable.
I'm merely asserting that to hide one's head in the sand is very immature.
Only a truly informed and animated people can retain their liberty.
Being "happy" with photography and retreating is a luxury you cannot afford.
Read on: “Luxury, more savage than arms, has oppressed (Rome), and avenges a conquered world.” --- Juvenal, Satires, 6, li.292 as quoted in Discourses Concerning Government, pg. 165. The author, Algernon Sidney said this meant “... that luxury also through which they fell, was the product of their felicity; and that the nations that had been subdued by them had no other way of avenging their defeats, than by alluring their masters to their own vices. This was the root of their civil wars.” [felicity: the quality or state of being happy.]
The history of all great civilizations is against you when you retire from public dialogue because of wanting to be happy.
Appreciate the blunt comments. I'll go lick my wounds.
the fisch
Postscript: I see Mr. Graham has posted the aforementioned item above mine on this Hot Topics Forum. See if there is any connection--interesting to say the least.
Larry, personally I believe being happy and having a place(s) to retreat is not a luxury, but a necessity in life. At least in a life I would want to live.
There are times to be engaged in politics and other activities related to preserving the liberties we enjoy in this country, but there also are times to retreat and recharge.
I use photography to retreat and recharge myself, as the beauty of the birds I watch and capture in images remind me of why I am a conservation biologist, why I fight day in and day out to preserve the natural world.
Thus, I feel very strongly that I do not want politics or religion to enter NPN in any way other than how they currently weave themselves into the topics of nature photography we discuss on NPN every day.
If people feel a need to discuss these issues at more depth, then I believe there are other sites to visit other than NPN, or maybe someone will start a new site devoted to politics and religion in nature photography.
Just my thoughts on the matter.
At least you are a critical reader, meaning you read and understand.
My post today explains what history reveals to be truth; nothing, including photography, stands in isolation.
One cannot talk about how political/ethical issues have a direct connection photography's hobby concern without talking about the expanded version.
The total picture is where the problem lies.
No planner, those now in control, can foresee all of humanity's wants and desires; they only see that which is within their expertise and if photography is not their bag, considerations for photography never get on the table.
Photographer's simply have to think outside their box to be really good citizens and to protect and maintain the freedoms necessary for continuation of their efforts. There is more to life than photography; as Juvenal said, happiness is a product of luxury which lulls the populace to sleep--paraphrased from my previous post.
Overstated? Not according to history.
In Hot Topics one does not have to participate in certain threads--it is free choice.
Limited discourse is basically violation of free speech and lulls photographers and everyone else with hobbies and jobs and homes and familes.... to sleep. Consider, we owe our children, our posterity, the freedoms we have and recharging one's batteries in nature is OK if one addresses the attacks, or even potential attacks, on those freedoms. A little sleep, a little slumber and the chickens are snatched by the fox.
I'm going to stop and let this run its course. You are all the "masters of your fate and the captain of your souls"...
Kindest regards,
the fisch
Guess this has really become a "Hot" topic. I think we all agree...politics about photography...ok....politics not about photography...not ok. I wish you well and hope to see some wonderful photography by you and all the others!
I made the mistake of bringing up politics among a group of friends I came to know through NPN. While it was kept civil, there were some distinct differences between us. It could have gone sour pretty quick, and luckily it didn't tarnish the friendships I had made through our common bond "photography" and the love of nature.
I wasn't trying to suggest that I try to live my life in complete ignorant bliss. But the ten or so percent of it that I do find relaxing and happy, I'd like to keep that way. I'll be pissed off and caught up in all the BS the other eighty percent!!!!
It also seems to me that most political issues that start here as a direct relationship to photoigraphers, usually find a way to broaden out during the duration of the discussion. So if we start a political discussion about ethics, or conservation, global climate change etc... from a viewpoint as to how it effects photographers and it goes from there to an expanded discussion, okay. The moderators, or Jim would then step in when it was determined the discussion had strayed too far.
One last point for Larry, and anyone else it might influence.
Larry, you seem very well informed and educated. You state your points in an articulate and fact filled way. personally, I can't compete with you in a debate on that level. The fact is that we probably agree on many points and issues. But I notice you are vigourous in your responses to political related topics. I think that's fine too. I think being educated and informed is the best means of resisting the things that seem unfair, unlawful, or unconstitutional, etc... But if you are not actually applying it to the cause, it just becomes debate, and retoric. I'm not suggesting that I think you are not doing anything yourself. I don't know you, and would not assume that. But speaking for mtyself, I am not actively doing anything to influence change in the things I find flawed about our system of government, and our society. The one thing I was doing and probably still do, is bring my anger and frustration about these issues home with me. I just give my wife and others a big dose of my bad attittude concerning something I heard about that day, or discussed with someone else. It's stressful on me, and my family when I get in that state of mind. I have been trying to discover ways to increase the percentage of my time that is positive and enjoyable. That doesn't mean I want to stick my head in the sand and ignore the risks of complaisancey. I just want to find ways to sustain photography and nature, and the healing effect it has on me to continue to do that. I figure if I start debating politics here, I'll just be impossible to live with all together!!!
Chris
I especially like Chris Chamberlin's remarks. Chris, there is strength in numbers. We have as a nation become too politically correct; we've been disarmed. A house divided cannot stand so my idea is that there is strength in numbers. I'm just trying to re-visit what at some level appears to have been lost--commonality of basic ideas. We've been lulled to sleep by the burgeoning bureaucracy and are content to let it nibble away. When the foundation fails, something will fall and it will make a big noise or snivil away without a whimper. That something is America.
There will never be agreement on all aspects of life. That's why individualism is so important and why central control, which stifles your varied efforts, is an enemy. That's why the siren call of having the central government protect all lands we think are precious for photography and pristine beauty will lead eventually to totalitarianism. Then only the elite will be able to visit. [Gorbachov had credit cards galore while the citizens lived like monks]
Along that line I found the website below.
Just put cameras in place of the article discussed. Remember we have already been told in error that we can't photograph trains without proper authority; we thought we could not photograph federal buildings but that was proved wrong. Power is there and it is encroaching on a silent group of photographers.
I closing one more time, no one has to visit this thread.
If it upsets you, don't.
If you like it or have something to say, why can't it be available for photographers to cuss and discuss. Common interest in one area is a means of discussion for things not in common. Better done between citizens than have it forced by "planners".
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/28/feds-sting-amish-farmer-selling-raw-milk-locally/
Heck, I grew up on this stuff !!!....
the fisch
1. NPN is a place to escape the day-to-day disucssion of politics, religion, etc. that so permeates the media today.
2. In view of how polarized political discussion can be, I find great comfort that people from opposite sides of the political spectrum, people from different cultures and of different religions can come together and find joy in each others company discussing something we all enjoy and can relate to. Personally, it brings me great joy and great hope that we as a race of beings on this planet can find a way to peacefully co-exist and work towards a better future (whatever that might be).
3. NPN will always be a place to discuss the art and technique of nature photography without the distraction of all the stress/controversy that you can easily find everywhere else.
Most importantly, I will always respect the right of NPN members to come here to discuss nature photography without being subjected to political/religious discussion and debate. Guy stated it above - this forum is specifically for "hot topics" that pertain directly to nature photography. It's a tough line to define, but I think we've done OK with that so far.