If we used photo.net, couldn't we have one "moderator" to receive all the entries and post them in a separate gallery for every month?
Dan On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Bruce Walker <bruce.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Christine Nielsen wrote: >> >> Another thought. If maintaining and uploading to the PUG is a drag, >> is there a reason why it wouldn't be housed on /something like/ >> flickr? Please don't shoot -- I've lurked long enough to know that >> not everyone is a flickr fan. I'm just saying that maybe the >> technology has evolved such since the birth of the PUG that there >> might be some other options...? >> >> :) >> -c > > I'm OK with Flickr for most purposes. But I don't think that anyone here > will be interested in using any site that requires you to sign-up to an > account in order to upload shots. That would rule out photo.net, flickr and > probably all the other social photo sites. > > The PUG site design is unique in allowing essentially anonymous but > moderated uploads. > > -bmw > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
