Here was my thinking on the "members only" rule.
1. The calendar bikes are a lot like DML bike of the month. They generate ideas and questions that can enrichen the content on the forums and mailing list on a regular basis. If the bike does not belong to a member then you get posts like "That's a cool bike!" or individual to individual e-mails, but it doesn't have as much potential to add to the DML 'community'.
2. I like to think that the calendar is a "by us - for us" kind of thing. By restricting the content to member bikes, the calendar is a better representation of what's going on with the members of the DML. I also think that it can be rewarding to our members to have a photo selected by their peers, or even to just receive positive comments from their submissions and a lot of that could be wasted if the bike doesn't belong to a DML'er.
That said, I can see where Dennis is coming from. He's a member whose work and craft are very high quality, they represent him as a member, and the photos could be a source of high quality content for the calendar.
I've thought of the last couple of calendars as being "DML calendars" not just Monster calendars, so to me using photos of non-member bikes dilutes that a bit. But like I said, it's "for us" as a community so if Dennis wants his one submission to be of someone else's bike, but representing him as a member and an artist, I just think that those facts should just be pointed out in the gallery and let the voting decide.
One more thing to add. I think if this happens, it would be better if the owner can at least be identified (I kinda don't dig it when I stumble across a picture of my bike on a complete stranger's webpage without my permission or any information about the bike), and Dennis should start thinking about how the bike will be represented in the little "factoid" (if I can steal a non-word from CNN) that has traditionally accompanied the selected photos.
My .02,
--Fillmore
1. The calendar bikes are a lot like DML bike of the month. They generate ideas and questions that can enrichen the content on the forums and mailing list on a regular basis. If the bike does not belong to a member then you get posts like "That's a cool bike!" or individual to individual e-mails, but it doesn't have as much potential to add to the DML 'community'.
2. I like to think that the calendar is a "by us - for us" kind of thing. By restricting the content to member bikes, the calendar is a better representation of what's going on with the members of the DML. I also think that it can be rewarding to our members to have a photo selected by their peers, or even to just receive positive comments from their submissions and a lot of that could be wasted if the bike doesn't belong to a DML'er.
That said, I can see where Dennis is coming from. He's a member whose work and craft are very high quality, they represent him as a member, and the photos could be a source of high quality content for the calendar.
I've thought of the last couple of calendars as being "DML calendars" not just Monster calendars, so to me using photos of non-member bikes dilutes that a bit. But like I said, it's "for us" as a community so if Dennis wants his one submission to be of someone else's bike, but representing him as a member and an artist, I just think that those facts should just be pointed out in the gallery and let the voting decide.
One more thing to add. I think if this happens, it would be better if the owner can at least be identified (I kinda don't dig it when I stumble across a picture of my bike on a complete stranger's webpage without my permission or any information about the bike), and Dennis should start thinking about how the bike will be represented in the little "factoid" (if I can steal a non-word from CNN) that has traditionally accompanied the selected photos.
My .02,
--Fillmore
