Paris removes Pont des Arts love locks
Jun 3rd, 2015, 06:59 AM
#82
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't care who takes what photos because I do not have to look at them unless I want to.
You can look at plenty of mine (some of me) here:
http://altecockertravels.weebly.com/
There are a lot of them so to see them you will have to commit a lot of time, so please don't go to my website until you have at least an hour. There are none from Paris, but I am going there in August (first time in 14 years as I've been busy visiting other places). I'll be visiting a friend in Paris before doing a home exchange on the Costa Brava.
If you hit me with the selfie stick or get in my way, I will get annoyed, but not otherwise.
You can look at plenty of mine (some of me) here:
http://altecockertravels.weebly.com/
There are a lot of them so to see them you will have to commit a lot of time, so please don't go to my website until you have at least an hour. There are none from Paris, but I am going there in August (first time in 14 years as I've been busy visiting other places). I'll be visiting a friend in Paris before doing a home exchange on the Costa Brava.
If you hit me with the selfie stick or get in my way, I will get annoyed, but not otherwise.
Jun 3rd, 2015, 07:05 AM
#83
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 17,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are obviously two issues here: rude people who inconvenience others and deface beautiful areas and therefore must be stopped; and arrogant, mindless, etc. people whom one is free to judge but who are doing no harm.
I stand by my belief that both categories pf person have always existed, and probably in about the same proportion to the general population.
I stand by my belief that both categories pf person have always existed, and probably in about the same proportion to the general population.
Jun 3rd, 2015, 08:16 AM
#84
"...both categories pf person have always existed, and probably in about the same proportion to the general population."
A very good point. And goes along with my belief that politics is a good way to keep an eye on crooks that we may otherwise not know are among us. And then the selfie-takers, less dangerous for the most part, but it's always good to know where they are.
A very good point. And goes along with my belief that politics is a good way to keep an eye on crooks that we may otherwise not know are among us. And then the selfie-takers, less dangerous for the most part, but it's always good to know where they are.
Jun 3rd, 2015, 09:10 AM
#85
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NewbE, you have made an excellent point that lack of judgment is not necessarily evil incarnate. And that can go both ways!
I have questioned my skirting the "judge not lest you be judged" rule lately.
I was stunned to be stopped by two young adults in the middle of a prayer chapel inside Toledo Cathedral to take their picture.
I'm not Catholic, but I'm certainly "old school"--this just isn't a selfie moment in my book. I told them I just could not do it. I would be more than happy to take their pictures outside; I just could not do it inside.
Later on, I questioned my judgment in my tone of voice. These two kids were
--not shouting on their cell phones in the middle of the church
--not using flash
--not blocking traffic.
Were they wrong?
No.
Maybe they were a tad lacking on a concept of appropriates IN MY VIEWPOINT, but overall, they were not disrespectful of the site.
I was the mean grumpy granny. No, I was not harsh to them; I still could have extended a bit more kindness.
Mea culpa--I'm trying my best to be remorseful, but I still do not know if I'd be willing to take the picture.
I have questioned my skirting the "judge not lest you be judged" rule lately.
I was stunned to be stopped by two young adults in the middle of a prayer chapel inside Toledo Cathedral to take their picture.
I'm not Catholic, but I'm certainly "old school"--this just isn't a selfie moment in my book. I told them I just could not do it. I would be more than happy to take their pictures outside; I just could not do it inside.
Later on, I questioned my judgment in my tone of voice. These two kids were
--not shouting on their cell phones in the middle of the church
--not using flash
--not blocking traffic.
Were they wrong?
No.
Maybe they were a tad lacking on a concept of appropriates IN MY VIEWPOINT, but overall, they were not disrespectful of the site.
I was the mean grumpy granny. No, I was not harsh to them; I still could have extended a bit more kindness.
Mea culpa--I'm trying my best to be remorseful, but I still do not know if I'd be willing to take the picture.
Jun 3rd, 2015, 10:05 AM
#86
When you say "prayer chapel" do you mean a chapel specifically set aside for private prayer? If so, if it has a sign saying that, it is definitely inappropriate to take photos there. Just as it would be inappropriate to take photos during a service.
Jun 3rd, 2015, 10:17 AM
#87
It is important to know that in France, all religious buldings built before 1905 are property of the state, and the state allows photos to be taken in them. Churches, temples, mosques, etc. built after 1905 belong to the congregations that built them, and they can make the rules about photos or not. That's why you can take pictures in Notre Dame but not in the Sacré Coeur.
Jun 3rd, 2015, 10:41 AM
#88
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 17,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW, I always feel funny touring a church when there are people there trying to pray, or during a service.
AlessandraZoe, I'm not sure you have anything to be remorseful about! I am often seized by an urge to scold people for acting like jerks in public--tapping on the glass at the zoo and encouraging their kids to do the same, or walking without looking where they're going, or talking too loudly, I could go on and on--and fully expect that one day my inhibitions, few as they are, will fall away completely and I will be That Old Lady.
Your example is about what YOU are comfortable doing, and I think you were fully within the bounds of civilized behavior to decline to take the photo
AlessandraZoe, I'm not sure you have anything to be remorseful about! I am often seized by an urge to scold people for acting like jerks in public--tapping on the glass at the zoo and encouraging their kids to do the same, or walking without looking where they're going, or talking too loudly, I could go on and on--and fully expect that one day my inhibitions, few as they are, will fall away completely and I will be That Old Lady.
Your example is about what YOU are comfortable doing, and I think you were fully within the bounds of civilized behavior to decline to take the photo
Jun 4th, 2015, 11:59 AM
#89
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the rapid advances in gadgetry these days, I am willing to bet that selfie sticks, selfies and all the rest of this narcissistic crap will be "so-five-minutes-ago" by the end of this year.
It won't be long now before all you'll have to do is just wink - and that little nano-camera implanted in your retina will beam your photos right inside the heads of all your nearest and dearest.
What comes after that is anyone's guess, but I hope I'm not around to see it.
It won't be long now before all you'll have to do is just wink - and that little nano-camera implanted in your retina will beam your photos right inside the heads of all your nearest and dearest.
What comes after that is anyone's guess, but I hope I'm not around to see it.
Jun 4th, 2015, 05:16 PM
#90
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AlessandraZoe, it is one thing to take a picture in a church but not a picture of yourself in said church. Sort of tacky imo. I don't use flash and try to be discreet. I always light a candle and donate some change.
I did tweet to Chase credit card service and told them their ad encouraging people to put love locks on bridges was not such a good thing. They said they would notify marketing. Oh well, tried at least.
I did tweet to Chase credit card service and told them their ad encouraging people to put love locks on bridges was not such a good thing. They said they would notify marketing. Oh well, tried at least.
Jun 5th, 2015, 05:36 AM
#91
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good job to contact Chase, flpab. I might do the same.
Belinda, my remorse comes in with my tone of voice after my first refusal to take the photo. My first refusal was not grumpy granny one bit; instead it was a heartfelt "I can't do that."
And by rights, I DO have a right of refusal. What followed, though, was grumpy granny. Even in my offering to take their picture elsewhere, my tone of voice was just not good.
I was not abusive. I just was not nice.
Yes, I still feel their request was inappropriate. But in the context of the place and time, there were tour groups coming through with ZERO respect for their surroundings. These two kids were not horrible, and if my tone of voice after that first blurt did not help them understand why I could not do that, then I failed to help THEM.
Someone once wrote that it's not the acts of great courage that count but the little kindnesses ( I thought it was Wallace Stegner but I can't find it). No matter what, you get my drift.
I remember once as a waitress 40 years ago getting an order totally wrong for UNbuttered toast. I was a kid. The guy at the counter, who probably had a heart condition, started to react when he got his order. And he looked at me and totally wiped out his ire.
OMG, he even tipped me.
Looking back, I would willing serve that guy unbuttered toast every day of his life because he was so patient in an impatient world.
AZ
Belinda, my remorse comes in with my tone of voice after my first refusal to take the photo. My first refusal was not grumpy granny one bit; instead it was a heartfelt "I can't do that."
And by rights, I DO have a right of refusal. What followed, though, was grumpy granny. Even in my offering to take their picture elsewhere, my tone of voice was just not good.
I was not abusive. I just was not nice.
Yes, I still feel their request was inappropriate. But in the context of the place and time, there were tour groups coming through with ZERO respect for their surroundings. These two kids were not horrible, and if my tone of voice after that first blurt did not help them understand why I could not do that, then I failed to help THEM.
Someone once wrote that it's not the acts of great courage that count but the little kindnesses ( I thought it was Wallace Stegner but I can't find it). No matter what, you get my drift.
I remember once as a waitress 40 years ago getting an order totally wrong for UNbuttered toast. I was a kid. The guy at the counter, who probably had a heart condition, started to react when he got his order. And he looked at me and totally wiped out his ire.
OMG, he even tipped me.
Looking back, I would willing serve that guy unbuttered toast every day of his life because he was so patient in an impatient world.
AZ
Jun 17th, 2015, 01:23 PM
#93
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Never say never", and all that, but I'll venture to say I'd never buy a selfie stick. However, I'm curious about how they work. How do you "press the shutter", so to speak?
I'm really not sure why everyone is so bothered by the selfie sticks. They're not damaging anything. Isn't being boring one of our unalienable rights?
Here's what is perhaps the world's first selfie stick:
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-30550998
I'm really not sure why everyone is so bothered by the selfie sticks. They're not damaging anything. Isn't being boring one of our unalienable rights?
Here's what is perhaps the world's first selfie stick:
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-30550998
Jun 17th, 2015, 02:03 PM
#94
I was wondering the same thing. I saw some at my grocery store recently and there's a wire & connector at the attaching end which, presumably, is trigged at the bottom where they're held.
Has anyone else noticed, in the pictures I've seen of them lately, they seem to be getting longer. I suspect there could be damage with inept self-picture-takers swinging them around with that weighted end.
Has anyone else noticed, in the pictures I've seen of them lately, they seem to be getting longer. I suspect there could be damage with inept self-picture-takers swinging them around with that weighted end.
