Today in the news, it was announced that Twitter was going to employ Apple's director of equality (or some such title). Apparently somewhere in the region of 80% of Twitter staff are male and around 60% are white. That just sounds pretty normal to me to be honest. That's about the makeup of most tech businesses. Indeed, I worked for one shower here in Columbia SC where the boss said he wouldn't employ women at all because they would get in the way of his porn viewing. That's right - he liked to view porn while his staff worked. Needless to say, there were other problems with that business hence it was one of the few jobs I quit before getting another role.
The thing that amuses me most about the equal opportunities is that they"re so limited. Equal opportunities are restricted to black, white, male or female. They don't extend to any of the other varieties of humankind. It's OK to be prejudiced against religious beliefs, lifestyles, tattooes, looks, clothing, sexuality, sexual orientation and gender expression. It seems to me that equality is only as good as the law and the law is not very equal.
Thinking further on equlity, the problem goes right back to people's attitudes. Until we all have the attitude of equality within us, nobody will ever be equal. For example, take photography. Wedding photography used to be the preserve of men and male photographers. They were the only people that generally wanted to master the technical aspects of what was then quite a technical role. Women generally let the men do the technical stuff though my mother loved taking photos.. That was inequality in society. That inequality has reduced with women taking on more technical roles despite some falling back on the roal of helpless waifs.
Now, wedding photography and particularly boudoir photography is dominated by women. The thought is that since the camera can handle the technical aspects of photography without much intervention, the photographer can concentrate on the artistic aspects - that does rather appeal more to women than to men. Certainly I'm saying women prefer the artistic aspects to the techical and men the technical to the artistic - in general. This, however is the result more of upbringing than anything else.
The fact that women are increasingly dominating the photography market as suppliers also says more about the makeup of society where women generally have traditional roles based on genetics. Due to women largely being stay-at-home mothers or part-time workers in low-paid jobs while they look after children, women increasingly look toward photography as a casual earner.
(editor - at this point the "Blog It" app from the android app store deleted the next 5 paragraphs without user intervention)
The domination of women in photography is almost 100% when it comes to boudoir photography. There's no logical reason for that because both men and women are equally capable of acts of sexual violence on either men or women. Indeed, there have been cases in the media recently of female schoolteachers having babies fathered by their male students where the schoolteacher initiated the "romance". Facts don't seem to come into it very much. 95% of men would never commit an act of sexual violence toward a man or woman. It's not just that 95% are simply non violent and non dominating but the thought of losing ones business, ones reputation and spending several years as somebody elses sex slave in a prison probably has something to do with it. Here we have a major thing - fear is a major dictator of personal choices and reactions. Fear dominates people's lives more than they will admit.
Fear of the strange and unusual is one reason why or perhaps the dominant reason why the different flavors of humanity face prejudice. We have already established that black and white are equally capable. Differences are largely based on upbringing. For example, in an area where there are few jobs there is little inclination to study to get better jobs because the jobs don't exist.
Because transexuals, homosexuals, transvestites, transgender, bisexual, asexual etc are minorities, people who're broght up with religious and traditional family backgrounds generally have little to no experience of such people. The new and unusual comes with fear. To people without experience, fear breeds predjudice. There are states such as New York that are actively trying to wipe out prejudice.
Going back to Twitter and tech companies, until they have a requirement for true minorities to be employed or rather a legal requirement to employ such minorities, the workplace transsexual, trasvestite, homosexual, transgender, bisexual etc will always remain an unemployed minority.
Going even further, back to boudoir photography, how would a woman react to having a transvestite or transsexual photographing her or even a fully disclosed lesbian? I think it's safe to bet that most women are biassed or afraid enough that such a possibility would be met with outright refusal.
Going toward men's clubs - would a men's club accept a known homosexual or would they be afraid that they'd get attacked in the bathroom? Men and women kiss in public and that's seen as normal. Two women seen kissing in public is unusual. Two men kissing in public is seen as abhorent. How about a transvestite or transsexual and a partner of the same or different genders seen kissing in public? Yet - this is an act between two people and nothing that does anything more than visually impact the people that actively watch.
I have very much a feeling that while tech companies such as Twitter are now employing equal opportunities directors, their remit is just going to be the same boring old black & white, male & female. Thus far the number of publically known transsexuals is minimal - possibly only half a dozen of which Caitlyn Jenner is the most widely known at the moment. Interestingly, she has not had any form of sexual reassignment surgery so while she is seen as female, she still possesses male genitalia. Does this perhaps blur the line between transsexual and transvestite? I have yet to see any business that employs a transvestite other than show business. There are many successful transvestites in show business - Dame Edna Everidge/Barry Humphries is just one example. Generally such people are restricted to being side-show freaks. I have yet to be served in a store by a man with a beard wearing a dress and hoseiery. I have yet to be served in a store by a man dressed even remotely convincingly as a woman or even unconvincingly for that matter.
Returning again to photography and wedding photography, how many photographers are there that are transgender or transvestite? How many are homosexuals? It definitely seems to have become the preserve of heterosexual women just like boudoir photography.
Looking to the future, it took centuries for black and white to become equal. Various conservative groups such as the KKK have tried hard to set back equality for fear that it might change their lives in some negative way. Homosexuality became fought against but that was harder because nobody could prove it negatively affected anybody so it was left to some religious oddballs to find some dubious sounding reasons in the bible to challenge equality. It took several thousand years for women to achieve equality. The challenge there was the perceived role as child brearer and rearer that was seen as not allowing anything else.
After several thousand years of conflict, religious equality is here yet there are groups of zealots diametrically opposed to such equality. ISIS, for example and the Taliban. The Taliban uses photography and photographs yet despises photography and photographs, particularly of people. There's not so much equality but equality in many places yet some groups demand domination.
It looks like being several years yet before we do reach full equality. I have no problem with people's preferences. Where I and others have issues is when people try to sell their preferences to me and make it seem as though we are the odd ones for not trying their lifestle. For example, I would no longer be a homosexual than a Jehova's Witness or a criminal. I will stand up for their right to be Jehova's Witesses or homosexuals (though as the Good Lord says - criminals are Devil spawn). Once we do have equality, there will be acceptace of all lifestyles.
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Lithium battery replacements. How to tell good from bad
Over the years I've use a lot of lithium batteries. Quite honestly, I abhor them. I think the world would be a lot better place without lithium batteries and without nickel cadmium batteries too. Nickle Metal Hydride are the otherwise bright spark in an otherwise dismal battery world.
As far as laptop batteries, we don't have a choice any more - everybody has gone over entirely to lithium batteries. In my case, I have a 10 year old Mac laptop. It worked until the battery died. I did what everybody does and went on ebay to buy a cheap lithium battery. Instead of spending $80, I spent $20. Perhaps that shouldn't be spent but more wasted - it worked fine the first few times then started giving the same problems the old original did before it stopped totally. I have yet to save enough to replace that battery with the genuine article. I won't be buying another fake.
With camera batteries, I bought a fake from B&H to power my Canon XT and it worked and is still working, 10 years later. I bought a fake from B&H to power my 30D and it worked once then when I went to charge it again, a year later (I don't take my DSLRs out of storage very often), it was totally dead and wouldn't take a charge.
This pretty much echoes my entire experience of knock-off products. If it's a knock off and costs more than 1% of the price of the real thing, it's way too expensive. I've never had a genuine article fail on me - it's always the cheap knock off that fails. I don't expect a long life for my RCA tablet, for example but equally I expected more than 14 months from my Nexus 7. The reason I went for the cheaper knock-off this time is that since the real thing only lasts barely a year, if I go through two RCA tablets in a year I'm still financially way ahead!
Tablets and batteries are not the same thing, however. The technology of lithium batteries is just plain scary. Lithium combines with water to produce hydrogen. Normally, water is used to extinguish fires. With a lithium battery fire, water doesn't extinguish it, it feeds the fire. And people keep their phones in their pants pocket and their shirt pocket where it's constantly bathed in a very humid atmosphere. It's equally scary to see people drinking while holding cups near their computers. They're a spill and a spark away from a conflagration that canot be extinguished with normal fire-fighting equipment.
So, do you really, truly trust budget and knock-off batteries where god alone knows what corners have been cut. Could the battery have been made by a devious al-Quaida or ISIS operative? My best advice is to toss your fake batteries in your next-door neighbors trash (don't want to set your own trash on fire).
As far as laptop batteries, we don't have a choice any more - everybody has gone over entirely to lithium batteries. In my case, I have a 10 year old Mac laptop. It worked until the battery died. I did what everybody does and went on ebay to buy a cheap lithium battery. Instead of spending $80, I spent $20. Perhaps that shouldn't be spent but more wasted - it worked fine the first few times then started giving the same problems the old original did before it stopped totally. I have yet to save enough to replace that battery with the genuine article. I won't be buying another fake.
With camera batteries, I bought a fake from B&H to power my Canon XT and it worked and is still working, 10 years later. I bought a fake from B&H to power my 30D and it worked once then when I went to charge it again, a year later (I don't take my DSLRs out of storage very often), it was totally dead and wouldn't take a charge.
This pretty much echoes my entire experience of knock-off products. If it's a knock off and costs more than 1% of the price of the real thing, it's way too expensive. I've never had a genuine article fail on me - it's always the cheap knock off that fails. I don't expect a long life for my RCA tablet, for example but equally I expected more than 14 months from my Nexus 7. The reason I went for the cheaper knock-off this time is that since the real thing only lasts barely a year, if I go through two RCA tablets in a year I'm still financially way ahead!
Tablets and batteries are not the same thing, however. The technology of lithium batteries is just plain scary. Lithium combines with water to produce hydrogen. Normally, water is used to extinguish fires. With a lithium battery fire, water doesn't extinguish it, it feeds the fire. And people keep their phones in their pants pocket and their shirt pocket where it's constantly bathed in a very humid atmosphere. It's equally scary to see people drinking while holding cups near their computers. They're a spill and a spark away from a conflagration that canot be extinguished with normal fire-fighting equipment.
So, do you really, truly trust budget and knock-off batteries where god alone knows what corners have been cut. Could the battery have been made by a devious al-Quaida or ISIS operative? My best advice is to toss your fake batteries in your next-door neighbors trash (don't want to set your own trash on fire).
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
How to become the best photographer in ten easy steps
It is every photographers dream to be the best, to be universally admired and to earn money from photography. How is this achieved? How can you, the humble amateur achieve such heights of excellence and greatness? Simple - follow the following ten steps...
1. Tear up and forget any notion that you will ever feel better than anybody else for there will always be somebody whose photographs you will see as better and which other people will like more.
2. Realise that unless you have low standards you will always feel that your photographs could be better, could be improved etc.
3. Realise that wherever you look somebody will have something nasty to say about you or your photographs.
4. Acknowledge all of the above and that other people"s opinions are just pure baloney.
5. Just head out and take photographs.
6. Experiment, take risks, try things. If the photo sucks, you can keep it, delete it or whatever.
7. Remember that the photos you take are special because they are a reflection of you, of your personality, of your style.
8. Remember you don't have to copy anybody else's style, subjects or ideas.
9. Remember you have you own unique vision, style and interpretation.
10. Accept you are the best photographer already in your world.
1. Tear up and forget any notion that you will ever feel better than anybody else for there will always be somebody whose photographs you will see as better and which other people will like more.
2. Realise that unless you have low standards you will always feel that your photographs could be better, could be improved etc.
3. Realise that wherever you look somebody will have something nasty to say about you or your photographs.
4. Acknowledge all of the above and that other people"s opinions are just pure baloney.
5. Just head out and take photographs.
6. Experiment, take risks, try things. If the photo sucks, you can keep it, delete it or whatever.
7. Remember that the photos you take are special because they are a reflection of you, of your personality, of your style.
8. Remember you don't have to copy anybody else's style, subjects or ideas.
9. Remember you have you own unique vision, style and interpretation.
10. Accept you are the best photographer already in your world.
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Review of a cheapass tablet
My Nexus 7 did the dirty on me the other day. It started constantly freezing so I did a factory reset and found the restore partition had been deleted by whoever refurbished it for walmart. I'd bought it in October of last year and it's now December of this year. Just out of warranty lol. Anyway, it died.
In the meantime I ordered the 16GB RCA 7" tablet with a keyboard. The tablet outperforms my Nexus on just about every level save three. Some of the apps I used to use won't work on my RCA but that's fine. The only two I can think of or have discovered so far that don't work are the "what to wear" app (which was good for a laugh) and Blogeroid but I've replaced those two with better apps. I've also not bothered installing the games I had because I'd stopped playing them anyway.
The screen is the biggest difference. It's lower resolution, has a narrower viewing angle and isn't quite as vibrant. Ideally I`d like to replace the Nexus but for $55 you really can't complain. Especially since it comes with a keyboad.
The keyboard is a hard clamshell thing that works really well. Unlike my previous keyboards, this works really well. The sole issue is that it maintains the tablet-keyboard at about 50 degrees. It"s not the ideal angle to view the screen.
Battery life is excellent however the charging port is another one of those lousy micro USB things. The older style pin connectors were far superior in longevity.
Wednesday, December 16, 2015
Death of a Nexus 7
A few days ago, the Nexus 7 I bought secondhand from Walmart as a refurbished tablet began to act up. For no explicable reason the screen would shut off and refuse to come back on. That necessitated powering it off then on again.
Today the situation became intolerable with the tablet just freezing after it had been powered up. Reading around, there was a recovery mode/factory reset function available. Recovery mode brought up a list of failure messages where the tablet was apparently looking for files on a partition that didn't exist. My best guess is that in the refurbishment process, somebody had reflashed the unit but had flashed it as a single partition. This is not really surprising as there are a lot of semi-skilled illiterates with A+ "qualifications" that really couldn't tell the difference between a computer and a bowl of beef stroganoff!
The upshot of today's shenanigans was that the tablet after being given a factory reset now just comes up with the word "google" on the screen and that's it. It progresses no further. Clearly this is the end of the road for this tablet - or is it? This could well feature in my next video on the rifle range - just like my old Virgin phone did!
Clearly $100 for a tablet that lasted barely 14 months is not good value. I had forgotten my golden rule which is that like shoes, you never buy used electronics. I have ordered a new tablet - a cheaper brand. This time it's an RCA tablet for $45 from Walmart. That shluld be here on Monday. Unlike my previous RCA tablet which was incredibly limited by having a miserly 8gb of memory, this one has 16.
Overall, I find tablets to be a very useful addition to my technology arsenal. Given that they're so disposeable, it's really good news that everything is automatically backed up to the cloud - despite the uncomfortably close relationship between sinister government bodies and Google. I'm hoping that my interest in photography, travel and busses does not land me on the government naughty list!
My other adventures with technology today have been equally frustrating. First, on my way home, my GPS refused to kick in until I'd been driving for 20 minutes. Then, when it did, it told me I was driving across the Pacific at 423mph whereas at the time I was stationary at a stop light in the backwoods of South Carolina. I wasn't sure whether the TomTom was playing banjo music or somebody lurking in a tumbledown cabin beside the road! The next frustration was an old frustration - I tried updating my blog on my macbook but the screen kept shutting down. That's probably a battery issue. Getting tired of flicking the brighter and dimmer buttons just to get brief flashes of light on the screen, I turned to my phone. Remembering I'd purchased a bluetooth keyboard for it, I started using the keyboard. After half an hour of getting multiple keystrokes appearing when the keys had been pressed just once, I remembered why I didn't use that keyboard. I did what I should have done months ago and tossed the blasted thing in the trash can.
So, technology - bah! None of it seems to be working today. That pretty much tells me not to blow any more money on newer cameras!
The upshot of today's shenanigans was that the tablet after being given a factory reset now just comes up with the word "google" on the screen and that's it. It progresses no further. Clearly this is the end of the road for this tablet - or is it? This could well feature in my next video on the rifle range - just like my old Virgin phone did!
Clearly $100 for a tablet that lasted barely 14 months is not good value. I had forgotten my golden rule which is that like shoes, you never buy used electronics. I have ordered a new tablet - a cheaper brand. This time it's an RCA tablet for $45 from Walmart. That shluld be here on Monday. Unlike my previous RCA tablet which was incredibly limited by having a miserly 8gb of memory, this one has 16.
Overall, I find tablets to be a very useful addition to my technology arsenal. Given that they're so disposeable, it's really good news that everything is automatically backed up to the cloud - despite the uncomfortably close relationship between sinister government bodies and Google. I'm hoping that my interest in photography, travel and busses does not land me on the government naughty list!
My other adventures with technology today have been equally frustrating. First, on my way home, my GPS refused to kick in until I'd been driving for 20 minutes. Then, when it did, it told me I was driving across the Pacific at 423mph whereas at the time I was stationary at a stop light in the backwoods of South Carolina. I wasn't sure whether the TomTom was playing banjo music or somebody lurking in a tumbledown cabin beside the road! The next frustration was an old frustration - I tried updating my blog on my macbook but the screen kept shutting down. That's probably a battery issue. Getting tired of flicking the brighter and dimmer buttons just to get brief flashes of light on the screen, I turned to my phone. Remembering I'd purchased a bluetooth keyboard for it, I started using the keyboard. After half an hour of getting multiple keystrokes appearing when the keys had been pressed just once, I remembered why I didn't use that keyboard. I did what I should have done months ago and tossed the blasted thing in the trash can.
So, technology - bah! None of it seems to be working today. That pretty much tells me not to blow any more money on newer cameras!
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
An entertaining tale
I'm still very interested in taking photographs of the night sky. Looking around though, my options are somewhat limited financially - as are everybody else's options given that there's still a horrible recession going on.
The options I looked at were:
1. Getting a Nikon 1 J1 to take the photos. I almost had one too. There was one on eBay but it went for $83 which was above my maximum bid of $75. I already thought $75 was too high and had secretly hoped not to win the auction.
2. Getting a Rokinon 16mm f2 lens as primes are generally better than zooms. The photo above was taken with a Tamron 17-35 F2.8 zoom. It's good aside from the soft corners.
3. Getting a Zenitar 16mm. This was a fast f2.8 lens but apparently is very soft at apertures wider than f8. It's not surprising because Russian quality control is non existent.
4. Getting a micro four thirds camera with the kit zoom. Apparently the kit zoom is excellent and though it's not f2.8 the available ISO would permit the photo. This would cost about the same as the Rokinon lens.
5. Getting a new Canon camera that would have higher ISO, allowing the same level of image to be taken with my current F4 lens.
I used to have a Tamron 17-35 F2.8 but sold it due to it being too soft at F2.8. Certainly the photo looks impressive but the corners kill it for me.
The only gripe I have about my current camera gear is that I can't do night sky photos - which I'd love to do. I like the focal lengths I have. I am very used to the cameras and since one was a gift from my mother on an important occasion in my life, I'm attached to it. I'm not that keen on the bulk of the camera setup but there's little I can do about that. Canon like making big bulky Fischer-Price style cameras.
Whichever way I go, it looks like it'll take a while what with car tax and insurance both due in January. I'd been looking for a secondhand Rokinon but they seem unavailable.
posted from Bloggeroid
Friday, December 11, 2015
Domain names and photo hosting
Today, just for laughs, I looked at the dpreview "discussion" webpages. There's not so much discussion going on as puerile ranting, chest beating and nugatory, gratuitous posting. Mostly the issues raised on dpreview are along the lines of "waah. I just read this (from an unconfirmed or incomplete source) and think its the end of the world" or "how/what/where do I do/buy/get this" where the answer is usually easily available via online searches or better by putting down the damn tablet and heading to the library. Remember libraries? They have books and books have information in them. Better than that even, books don't need batteries so you can keep reading without having to plug them in. Of course, I'm talking about dpreview posters that usually will be found hunched over an elderly computer, surrounded by a sea of burger wrappers, empty coke cans in a foul smelling unventilated room with curtains closed so long that they're sticking to the wall.
Anyway, I digress. One of the posters asked an interesting question, namely what to do for photo hosting and domain names. For some bizarre reason they considered a domain name as a $35 purchase. Really - $35! Are they off their rockers? I've seen domains going for $3.99 and even free. Only a real schmuck would pay more than the minimum for the kind of skanky con trick that domain names represent.
"Hold up", I hear you say. "What do you mean by calling domain names thusly?" Well, in today's world, domain names are irrelevant. Do a web search in a few days for "$%4545454%$" and you'll get right back to this blog entry. Now, imagine - assuming you are not a dpreview "contributor" ergo compus mentus - you can come up with a memorable catch phrase for your photo pages. Something as memorable as "Arbeit Macht Frei" or "Wein, Weib und Gessang" would work. Poof! Your need for a domain name has vanished as too has any associated cost.
What about photo hosting? Who in their right mind actually pays to host photos? Actually the cretin that made the posting on dpreview seemed to believe that right-click protection would stop people downloading their photos and wanted it included. It's really rather sad that anybody should be stupid enough to believe anything online cannot be easily copied or easily have copy protection removed. Ebooks are a classic example - they're just zipped html folders. But back to the point - why pay to host photos? Free sites such as Picasa, Flickr, Instagram etc exist. The important thing to realise is that as soon as an image is available online, somebody will copy it and use it. I've seen it done. I've seen really grotty sub VGA images downloaded, printed and used as table decorations at functions.
So, domain names and paid hosting? Don't make me laugh! I've not paid for domain names nor for hosting for years. I don't have to worry about bills nor renewals. Of course an interesting sub issue is that having a paid domain and website does not mean anybody is ever going to visit it! I had a photo website for several years and no matter what I did would attract more than a pitiful number of visitors. I gave up on trying to sell snow to the Eskimos and stopped throwing money away on domain names and websites. Like as not nobody will visit your website so don't throw money at it.
Anyway, I digress. One of the posters asked an interesting question, namely what to do for photo hosting and domain names. For some bizarre reason they considered a domain name as a $35 purchase. Really - $35! Are they off their rockers? I've seen domains going for $3.99 and even free. Only a real schmuck would pay more than the minimum for the kind of skanky con trick that domain names represent.
"Hold up", I hear you say. "What do you mean by calling domain names thusly?" Well, in today's world, domain names are irrelevant. Do a web search in a few days for "$%4545454%$" and you'll get right back to this blog entry. Now, imagine - assuming you are not a dpreview "contributor" ergo compus mentus - you can come up with a memorable catch phrase for your photo pages. Something as memorable as "Arbeit Macht Frei" or "Wein, Weib und Gessang" would work. Poof! Your need for a domain name has vanished as too has any associated cost.
What about photo hosting? Who in their right mind actually pays to host photos? Actually the cretin that made the posting on dpreview seemed to believe that right-click protection would stop people downloading their photos and wanted it included. It's really rather sad that anybody should be stupid enough to believe anything online cannot be easily copied or easily have copy protection removed. Ebooks are a classic example - they're just zipped html folders. But back to the point - why pay to host photos? Free sites such as Picasa, Flickr, Instagram etc exist. The important thing to realise is that as soon as an image is available online, somebody will copy it and use it. I've seen it done. I've seen really grotty sub VGA images downloaded, printed and used as table decorations at functions.
So, domain names and paid hosting? Don't make me laugh! I've not paid for domain names nor for hosting for years. I don't have to worry about bills nor renewals. Of course an interesting sub issue is that having a paid domain and website does not mean anybody is ever going to visit it! I had a photo website for several years and no matter what I did would attract more than a pitiful number of visitors. I gave up on trying to sell snow to the Eskimos and stopped throwing money away on domain names and websites. Like as not nobody will visit your website so don't throw money at it.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
Craigslist fun...
With all the bogus garbage on Craigslist, I thought I'd join in. The local Craigslist has a sea of adverts by photographers and for photographers ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous.
These are the adverts for photographers...
Not too many in that page. There were more further down and many more in other areas. There was no shortage of photographers advertising though...
In my opinion, its all baloney. I doubt that anybody ever gets hired from responding to a Craigslist advert and I doubt that anybody ever hires anybody that responds to a Craigslist advert.
With that in mind, I put up a spoof advert....
Within hours one person wrote back saying "This is a joke right? You have got to be kidding..." But nobody else ever responded. Clearly I need to work on it to make it sound more plausible.
Indeed, the trigger for that spoof was remembering when I advertised photography online. The contact form on my website was filled with unsolicited resumes. Then some joker entered into a long and clearly bogus correspondence about needing a photographer to photograph his dead uncle in a casket in a funeral home.
If more replies come, they'll be posted. Somehow, I doubt anybody takes Craigslist seriously.
Meanwhile, there was an advert for a "sister wife" on Craigslist. Clearly a bogus advert so, using the dating side as a control sample, I posted my own bogus advert...
Nobody in their right mind would respond to an advert like that, or would they? I waited on tenterhooks expecting a sea of outraged responses. There was only one response aside from several bots trying to get me to reveal my real email address.
The outraged response really wasn't that outraged to be honest. They said " What kind of Mormon does gross stuff like that! Are you and you're wives even attractive enough to make a woman get her tubed tied! Sounds like you want a slave not a companion"
Again, I'll post further responses but since the list of adverts grows at a phenomenal rate - all with very weird stuff, there probably won't be more responses. I think the advert will quickly be subsumed by the mass of other advertisers.
So... Craigslist adverts - genuine or not? Probably none are!
These are the adverts for photographers...
Not too many in that page. There were more further down and many more in other areas. There was no shortage of photographers advertising though...
In my opinion, its all baloney. I doubt that anybody ever gets hired from responding to a Craigslist advert and I doubt that anybody ever hires anybody that responds to a Craigslist advert.
With that in mind, I put up a spoof advert....
Within hours one person wrote back saying "This is a joke right? You have got to be kidding..." But nobody else ever responded. Clearly I need to work on it to make it sound more plausible.
Indeed, the trigger for that spoof was remembering when I advertised photography online. The contact form on my website was filled with unsolicited resumes. Then some joker entered into a long and clearly bogus correspondence about needing a photographer to photograph his dead uncle in a casket in a funeral home.
If more replies come, they'll be posted. Somehow, I doubt anybody takes Craigslist seriously.
Meanwhile, there was an advert for a "sister wife" on Craigslist. Clearly a bogus advert so, using the dating side as a control sample, I posted my own bogus advert...
Nobody in their right mind would respond to an advert like that, or would they? I waited on tenterhooks expecting a sea of outraged responses. There was only one response aside from several bots trying to get me to reveal my real email address.
The outraged response really wasn't that outraged to be honest. They said " What kind of Mormon does gross stuff like that! Are you and you're wives even attractive enough to make a woman get her tubed tied! Sounds like you want a slave not a companion"
Again, I'll post further responses but since the list of adverts grows at a phenomenal rate - all with very weird stuff, there probably won't be more responses. I think the advert will quickly be subsumed by the mass of other advertisers.
So... Craigslist adverts - genuine or not? Probably none are!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)