Number of posts per day

Fair enough Alan. I'm possibly mistaking the pics you referred to, there are four landscape postings all marked digital, you must mean something else. I'm probably carrying baggage from previous threads on digital, but somebody remarked that 'paintings should be made with paint', or something like that. (I'm not reading through the thread again.) Heard it all before. I don't know why I bothered posting my bit... had second thoughts and I'd just come back to delete my comment and saw you'd commented. Be bad manners to delete it now.

Absolutely no need for a truce. Chatting electronically, as we are, is no substitute for a real chat over a cup of tea...where misunderstandings are resolved immediately. You can't cover all the bases when you make a comment in the forum, unless you write a short novel. A difference of opinion is what these forums are about. Now it seems there was no difference of opinion. Not that it would matter anyway (that bit was me qualifying what I said, we can't be doing that all the time. In fact the first line of this comment could be taken two ways, but you know what I mean.) This was why I was going to delete my posting...all I needed to say was it's a bit harsh not to comment simply because someone has posted 4 pictures...IF you would have quoted anyway ( a bit more qualifying). Ho hum. Yours unclearly, Lew.

Lew, you're not the target. Its people who post pics but never a forum comment. It's like eating all the jam but never the bread...it can be done but it's a bit rude. It does not apply to you. Ttfn D

Brian, I'm not offended by this discussion. I'm just offering the suggestion that not all 4 a day posters have selfish motives. You do say SOME posters, Brian...I can't argue with that. I joined about two years ago, read the info about posting pics, and started posting 4 a day...thinking that was how it's done. I wasn't the only person posting 4 a day at that time. It takes a while to find your way around the site, I'm not sure I began commenting on other peoples work straight away, not did I get involved in the forum straight away. But I did read the forum. Had I read this thread back then it would have put me off. Nothing offensive has been written in this thread, but it must off-putting to anyone reading it who has been posting 4 a day. If you disagree with that, that's fine. Different opinions. I'm not sure how you can make assessments about who's commenting etc, perhaps there's some method I'm not aware of. Some people don't seem to comment, and half the names used on the forum mean nothing to me anyway. My forum name is LEW...others use made up names. For all I know they may well be people posting 4 a day. When I'm making comments on other people's work, if I have time, I read what others have said. I frequently come across names I'm not familiar with. For me, POL has been great. So thanks for all that. I'm jumping off this bus now. Lew.

For me this discussion comes around to why I bothered to post in the first place. My route started with buying a copy of both the Artist and Leisure Painter in W. H Smith's, and deciding which one suited my interests most, and then taking out a subscription. From there I discovered the website and the gallery. It took me a while to appreciate the forum and even longer to feel confident enough to post. Rather like commenting on the gallery, it took a while to pluck up the courage, starting just by hitting the 'Like' button. I will also put my hand up and say I never said thank you to the people who commented on my Gallery postings - it didn't seem to be the norm, though I agree it is common courtesy, and I think more should be made of a dialogue on the Gallery comments. But the reason I started posting on the Gallery was to get some feedback, to find out what other's thought of my paintings. To that end I did limit myself to one a day, and I am glad I did. We all agree that four postings a day is within the rules, and whereas I have no criticism against individual artists who do post 4 a day, the downside that I see is that it does limit the chance of getting some honest feedback. I suspect most of the regular contributors are also subscribers to The Artist or Leisure Painter, and we subscribe because we want to improve our skill and the quality of our work. I see Gallery postings as an extension of that, and when new posting disappear so quickly it is difficult to follow what others think of the works you like and even more difficult to give ,or attract, honest feedback when the posting so quickly disappears from the readily accessible few pages - when I do a gallery search by category (e.g. acrylic) it is surprising how many paintings have passed by unnoticed. I am sure the site owners have a real interest in more subscriptions to their magazines, and if the main reason people subscribe is to improve their art, then they are missing a trick if they don't make the most of the Gallery, as a way of getting comment and feedback. Perhaps they should also take note that forum discussions about the gallery tend to run longer and attract more comments than forum discussion on art. Like Lew, I am going to hop off this particular bandwagon, and hopeful resist the temptation to hop back on. For various reasons, I have not had the enthusiasm to pick up a brush and slap paint on a surface since last July. What will inspire me most, the Gallery or the magazine? It's the Gallery, seeing a wide variety of amateur and profession works. If my 'Sta-Wet' palette stays dry then my subscription will dry up too, as will the custom I give to the companies who advertise in the magazine. But I am sure I shall still follow the community on the website.