h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It's part of the Eds rules that we were told when the group was first set up, it was just tempoary over-looked, we all forget things sometimes.

When you reply to the invite, you can read Natalie's reply, email number 1379

Emmily

Not that I want to rock the boat or anything, but when was the 'no faces' rule removed? Or are the recent crop of faces on the FP not from the photographers?

It hasn't been removed, it's just a bit confusing, we're still confused by it.

The photos that have been supplied by the <./>photographers</.> this month can be seen here A21138329 - two faces have been used. One was disguised by slices of cucumber and some kind of face cream (is that a wig?), and the other is a Jack Russell Terrier .

At the end of the day, it's the Eds decision, and they use their discretion.

Emmily

I'm sure my Essex gals had enough slap on to disguise themselves.

I just thought I'd ask, but I realise the Eds are still making it up as they go along after all these years.

Tell me about it

We're told *no advertising* fair enough, it's a BBC website and Aunty doesn't like to advertise, then this appears - A18310538

We're told absolute *no no to children in photos* then this appears A20562158

Don't get me wrong, I appriciate that the Eds apply photos from the photographers group, and their time in doing that, I just wish it wasn't so confusing to know what's acceptable at times.

I had one photo that had 10 votes, sent to the Eds, then refused. A few others have been refused too. I'm not complaining here, just saying that these things happen, it's not personal.

Though I'll fess up about the 'Essex Girls' Entry. Although I didn't twist anyone's arm, I was very keen to have my photo applied on my Entry. The whole Essex Girl thing was one big joke, so I thought the Essex Girl joke book was ideal, and if you had any idea how much I pestered the other helpers in the charity shop for weeks to look out for Barbie shoes and , to scatter on the book, I gave up on the in the end and only had shoes to use.

Emmily

that's really unfair, I think

Which part of the post do you mean Tav?

Emmily

Well, I mean that they don't stick to their own rules. Or change them whenever they want.

Hmmm it does seem that way, but we're not privy to the finer details of the Eds rules and regs etc, to us, it's just confusion.

Emmily

oh
does anyone know?

This might give you an idea, if you can understand it all

BBC Editorial Guidelines

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/

and if you look in the Files section (of Photographers), under 'Admin stuff' 'Guidelines - What is Not Allowed' - that was from Jims when the Photographers Group first started.

Emmily

ok, thanks, maybe better not, I'd have to look up too many words in the dictionary

Oh yes, I've read them a while ago.

Traveller in Time using a confusion powered engine
"Not really, just the fact each and every case is taken individually,

Whatever rules are layd down, they are not set in stone. As well as sometimes apparently normal things will be concidered just reaking the rules.

In my experience it is part of the nature of the site, just spawn enough confusion to keep the minds working "

The internal photos that the Eds put on may be considered different because perhaps the kids are actors and so expect their photo to be put up online or on advertising?

As for loo rolls - F35977?thread=3850838

I do understand about the Essex Girls entry. I said to someone at the time that I'd be really annoyed if I submitted a picture for my own entry and someone else's won, but in that case I'd probably push for *both* pictures to be on it. There are plenty of entries that have more than one picture on it. Really I only submitted the pics for a giggle. I hope they did raise a laugh. One of the girls in the picture did have white stillettos, but I don't have a photo of her wearing them. She died a couple of years after those photos were taken in a road accident.