Larry,
Yes, I know. :-)

And I must admit that as far as the quality offense is concerned I have
ignored it on purpose, knowing full well that my photos were low quality,
but if I waited until I had high quality photos I could not post orchid
photos at all, since I am almost a hopelessly bad photographer who only on
rare occasions gets a good photo by accident. However, I wanted to share my
excitement and since I knew that my hand won't get chopped off for posting a
bad quality photo on abpo, I did it anyway. Now if I had posted the same
photos on rgo, I would have gotten my hand chopped of by Mick, and I would
have gotten over it, but I probably would have posted bad quality photos
here again.

As for photo size not being a mandate in the abpo charter, maybe it should
be.

I actually think that a much more serious offense is whenever we reply to
pictures on abpo with meaningful and worthwhile textual content that could
be of benefit to others. And I don't know whether that is an offense against
the charter, but if it is not it really should be. Since abpo is not
archived and many people have access only to rgo, these messages that really
should be in rgo have a limited audience if they are not forwarded to rgo. I
wish we were as good or better about policing the
no-informative-text-only-posts-in-abpo rule as we are about policing the
no-pictures-in-rgo rule. But to my knowledge noone has been flamed yet for
posting really worthwhile text content to abpo, or have they?

Joanna

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 18:47:18 GMT, "J Fortuna"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

I have at times posted pictures of bad quality

That offence it truly unforgivable and despicable. :-)

and forgetting to size them down,

There is no mandate in the alt.binaries.pictures.orchids charter
concerning photograph size.