rachel dorman 10:28am, 27 November 2008
Hey there, fellow Brightonians

I work for Archant Life, publisher of Sussex Life magazine, and I have a special request for anyone who would be willing to help us out...

The January '09 issue of Sussex Life is to include a supplement on Sussex Towns & Villages, and each town/village featured will be illustrated by one or two photographs of that area.

While we have an extensive catalogue of high quality photography which covers most of Sussex, there are a few places for which we are still looking for a strong lead image:

- Aldwick
- Copthorne/Crawley Down
- Ferring
- Jevington
- Newhaven
- Peacehaven
- Polegate
- Ringmer
- Rustington
- St Leonards
- Storrington

If you would be interested in contributing a photograph (or several) towards this very special supplement, please get in touch:

I must stress that we are not able to pay for images, but the photographer will be credited on the page on which the photo is used, as well as being listed as a contributor at the front of the supplement.

I'm thinking high streets, prominent buildings, markets, churches, bridges, statues/public art, places of historical or geographic significance... be creative, and submit as many images as you like.

Contributors whose images have been shortlisted for inclusion will be contacted prior to their image being used, so that we can obtain proper authorisation to publish your photograph(s). Please include your daytime phone number if possible, to make it easier for us to get in contact with you.

I haven't been advised of a submission deadline, but time is very short so if you're interested in getting involved, please don't delay in contacting me.

Best regards,

Rachel Dorman
-RobW- PRO 10 years ago
"I'm thinking high streets, prominent buildings, markets, churches, bridges, statues/public art, places of historical or geographic significance"

Good luck finding any of those in Peacehaven ;o)
Eric Hands PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Eric Hands (member) 10 years ago
I'm thinking " we can't pay for images because this magazine is produced and printed by volunteers who don't get paid either in any way and all profits from the expensive advertising go to charity ". Sure.
And come to think of it:
"While we have an extensive catalogue of high quality photography which covers most of Sussex"
I don't suppose you paid for any of those either ?
I'm sorry, I'm just fed up of people thinking that they can cadge stuff from Flickr members that they would have to pay for anywhere else.
.photomotive 10 years ago
This was shot in Newhaven, knock yourself out!

Nguyen Execution Adaptation

Also, I think that Dark Daze shot a rather busty model there, reckon he'd want paying however, come to think of it, so would I!
a roving eye PRO 10 years ago
Firstly I heartily applaud the cynical but totally wise comments of Eric Hands above. Why should a glossy mag like Sussex Life expect its library of pics be provided by the creative folk on Flickr free of charge?

It's only one step up the ladder from publications stealing the images from Flickr and using them without asking (which I've experienced).

However, from personal experience openings like this can potentially lead to further paid work either from the publication itself or indirectly from it. It's rare but it does occasionally happen.

What do others think - Sussex Life to be ignored and shamed at using such a method to build up their library or approach with optimism that it might prove beneficial in the long run?
Well if ALL businesses applied the same principles as this offer from Sussex Life we would never have to buy anything again!

Seems like their economic model is not based upon tradtional buying/selling but has moved past bartering (fair exchange) towards begging/appropriating. If someone walked into their office, smiled and took a picture from their walls without payment and then sold it to an advertiser I wonder what they might say and/or do?
Alex Bamford PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Alex Bamford (moderator) 10 years ago
I think the Flickr community needs to support the professional photographic community. Giving images away for free only undermines the profession that many of us aspire to. If they want free images they should go to a royalty free library and suffer the lack of quality and imagination that comes with it.
a roving eye PRO 10 years ago
the big bambooly - well put.

part of the problem is the quality of digital cameras is now so good that everyday 'stock' imagery is not something you can demand a reasonable fee for. most folk can capture something like Sussex villages with relative ease and little photographic experience.

the individual, creative imagery where perhaps you had to involve technical lighting issues or arrive there at an ungodly hour to capture breathtaking natural light or climb up something precarious to get that never seen before angle - that sort of stuff will be in demand and (hopefully) will never be passed on without fee.

i'm sure a lot of photographic enthusiasts will be happy to provide their images free of charge just for the kudos of having their name published in a mag.
Eric Hands PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Eric Hands (member) 10 years ago
But even royalty free libraries aren't free......you have to pay something to use the images. I'm not against free use of images ( I've just 'donated' a front cover to a nature / ecology newsletter ) as such, but I do think that this particular instance is deplorable. Not only that, but I suspect that any images donated will, indeed, go into their 'extensive library' and, as such, could be used again and again with only their word that permission for further use will be individually requested / negotiated.
This isn't begging, it's soliciting.
Paul Russell99 PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Paul Russell99 (member) 10 years ago
From the Archant Life link

"Its head office is in Norwich and has an annual turnover of £194 million"

Top tip: get a decent budget for photos -- scrounging for them just makes your company look tawdry.
.photomotive Posted 10 years ago. Edited by .photomotive (member) 10 years ago
I'd like to think that most people here are clued up enough to know that their images may well be used for purposes other than those initially stated. Take it upon yourselves if you do choose to submit an image to really check that the image and it's rights are not then handed over as part of the deal.

Sussex Life is a publication that I never thought I'd see asking for images in such an overt fashion, I thought they were a bit better than that. They could at least find the images they want themselves and then ask the photographers individually. Guess that's too much hard work though.

Having images published is great whether it's free or not (although probably only great the first time if it's free). Where's the kudos in replying to a begging letter though? Surely it'd be better if you were asked directly.

PS - I've just realised that I know someone who works for Archant, I may drop him an email to see what their procedures for photos are and the archiving thereof.
Paul Russell99 PRO 10 years ago
Actually, I may have a picture of the sewage works in Rustington, if that's any help...
yezzer 10 years ago
Personally, I've got no objections to people using my images for free, as long as they get my explicit permission first and i'm credited. I don't aspire to be a professional photographer, I do it because I enjoy it.
If I get my name in a magazine, then I'm happy :)

Disclaimer: Rachel is my partner
fred pipes 10 years ago
'we are not able to pay for images' - yeh, why pay when there are people queuing up to work for free! Providing free pix to commercial organisations, who presumably pay their staff, printers etc, are kicking pro photographers in the guts. I hate this 'intern' culture which exploits people trying to get into the 'creative' industries, with the promise of a paid job further down the line. Don't believe it. If you work for free now, you'll always work for free, or they'll just cast you aside and get another willing intern! Kudos doesn't pay the bills! Do these wannabes all have a private income (or student grant?)? Can you tell I'm angry?
fred pipes 10 years ago
if you do decide to contribute, for the kudos, make sure you are granting them a non-exclusive license, say for the UK only, and for a specific timeframe. If they ask you to assign (assign = give away) the copyright, then the image will no longer be yours - you'll never earn anything from it, ever, and they will be able to sell it on or license it to third parties without your permission and without you getting a bean!
Leonski 10 years ago
Looking at Rachels photostream, she's a dab hand with the camera and lives in the area.

Get out there girl and get some kudos, I'm sure Yezzer would help.
AndyWilson PRO 10 years ago
As I whore my programming skills for a living I've got to admit the indignitation of photographers when free images are mentioned amuses me - in a world where everyone seems to believe they have a right to not pay for software (not to mention music and films)
DarkDaze Photography 10 years ago
hmmm i agree with big bambooly 100%, but andywilson nails the quandry of modern life- i used to spend £100's per year on filthy porno films, but now I just watch them for free online.

*i am joking i didnt pay £100's.................


I used to steal them from shops........... *

its true tho that its wrong and cheapskate of the mags, but people fall over themselves to get a backpage picture in the Guardian Weekend, and thats just filling a page for free isnt it- no-one would condemn Weekend for that..... If you can get an image published surely thats better than it just languishing on a hard drive somewhere. But 100% watch the licensing issue.
Eric Hands PRO 10 years ago
One difference with, say, the Guardian backpage scenario is that usually there is the carrot of a prize for a potential winner. I'm aware of all the usual arguments re. market forces and appreciate that images are worth 'less' than they used to be ( now we're all photographers ! )....but the question remains - have any of the photos in these glossy mags been paid for ( directly or indirectly, i.e. either by the publishers or by the original commissioners prior to being given away as PR shots ) ?
I suspect the answer has to be 'yes'. Then, irrespective of a potential contributors amateur or professional status, then they should also be paid - not taken advantage of.
DarkDaze Photography 10 years ago
yep, but the Guardian just give away a poxy camera (as far as i remember) that they must get paid by canon or whoever to promote, now if they paid the winner a cash prize that was a third of what a full page advert in the magazine would cost an advertiser, then they would be doing the right thing.

In a sense i completely agree with you eric, tho maybe as devils advocate its worth saying that there is nothing to stop someone really enterprising going to most of those locations and shooting perfect magazine material. If you nailed all the places on the list you would surely be in a strong position to ask for a fee- or possibly get a commission in the future.
Alex Bamford PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Alex Bamford (moderator) 10 years ago
I'm planning the fastest route on Google maps now.
striped tomatoes [deleted] 10 years ago
Jason Lupi PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Jason Lupi (admin) 10 years ago
I was featured as an artist of the month for Sussex Life, 2 yrs ago and they used images of my paintings (obviously).
I didnt get paid for the use of those images, albeit paintings, I just got the publicity, which was fantastic.
If i was making money from my images- check here; then I would demand payment, but Im not.
Tons of music is free, videos are free, and a lot of other stuff is free..............so if your image is in a mag, and they credit you - then great.
rob orchard PRO 10 years ago
OK, time for my 2p.

Firstly, I agree with most of what's been said above. It is a bit of a cheeky request.

BUT, let's have a bit of context here, shall we. Hasn't EVERYONE here got photos on Flickr that anyone can look at for free whenever they like? How different is that to people looking at photos for free in Sussex Life?

At least the request was made in a civil manner, unlike so many times when photos get stolen for blogs without asking, or being uncredited. If you don't want to offer any photos, then so what. It's not like it was our first born being asked for!
Paul Russell99 PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Paul Russell99 (member) 10 years ago
Jason -- I think there is a difference between what's on offer here and being featured as an artist of the month. The latter is great. It's like if the Argus ran a feature about you as a photographer or a painter -- you wouldn't dream of asking for a fee to use your artwork in the feature. It's great publicity.

At the other extreme, to give away photos to a profit-making company just for a tiny credit that a few people will notice is not worth it, in my opinion.

Of course, it's up to the individual, but if you say "yes" to these requests for free images, you are helping, in a very small way, to devalue the worth of all photos, and slowly make it acceptable that publishers will set the budget for photos to zero, while paying thousands of pounds for printing, etc. etc.

Just say "no" kids!
Jon Southcoasting PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Jon Southcoasting (moderator) 10 years ago
I see some in the group are still under the illusion that artists, photograhers, musicians actually make money. Some do, but per head I bet the average earnings are pretty low.

I agree with you. Art is free these days. If you can make money at it, good luck - but you can't stand in the way of progress. If you're an artist, do it for love, not money (like wot I do - ha ha).

What I'd like to see is guest editorials, so they choose some interesting photos instead of the glossy and boring crap they usually feature. In fact, Rachel, if you're still there after all the abuse, I'd happily offer my editorial skills for free if I have carte blanche to select the photos :-)
Paul Russell99 PRO 10 years ago
@ Southcoasting

"I see some in the group are still under the illusion that artists, photograhers, musicians actually make money. Some do, but per head I bet the average earnings are pretty low."

Hmm, I know of some pro photographers (no, not me) who just can't get by now because (1) digital, (2) Flickr and (3) people giving away their photos have just about killed their business. The first two are great, but I don't agree with the third. Many companies just see Flickr as a huge photo library where they don't have to pay.
rachel dorman 10 years ago
Uh-oh. Can open, worms everywhere.

I'll try to clear up some of the issues which are troubling a few of you...

I did say something to this effect in my original post but I can see that it wasn't completely clear for everybody so I'll re-phrase - if you have submitted an image, we still want to get in direct contact with you before the image is used, as we need to be confident that you've explicitly agreed to let us use your photograph and that you understand exactly how it going to be used. The images we already have in place for this supplement will have been specifically archived for this type of job - we know exactly where the images came from and there is no doubt that we own the copyright. The policy has always been "if we don't know where an image originated, we don't use it"; we're not in the practice of stealing images or breaching copyright rules, by accident or otherwise. Now, this isn't my project, I only got involved as a favour to a colleague, so I'm not in a position to discuss terms of use in much detail. All I'll say is that if you're not happy about giving away a photograph for free then definitely don't submit anything; if you're worried about how your image will be used then please contact me and I'll have the editor call/email you back so that you can come to arrangement that both parties are 100% happy with (and if this means retracting a submission then that's fine, we completely respect your wishes)... but I have specifically asked him to contact the people whose images are shortlisted anyway, to make sure everything's fully agreed in advance.

I should make it clear that I didn't expect any professional photographers to be willing to give away their work for free. I'm a creative professional myself and understand exactly where you're coming from so please don't misinterpret my post. It's true that we could fill these gaps just by nipping out with the company camera, risking the current unpredictable weather and taking some snaps ourselves - however a few people have mentioned the word 'kudos', and this is really all this is - a chance for people who do a bit of photography for fun to see their stuff in print and show their mates, which obviously benefits the magazine too. If you feel that only getting a contributor's credit is an unfair deal for you, then this isn't for you.

On the other hand, professionals (at all levels) who are interested in being commissioned for more significant work for any of the Archant titles, working to proper briefs and charging appropriate rates, etc, are encouraged to get in touch with the editor of the respective title to express their interest (details online, or give me a shout). I have no knowledge of what work is coming up and requires a commission, but I can say with certainty that our editors would welcome being approached by you so they can call on you when jobs come up.

Big big thanks to all the people who did submit pictures today, sorry that I can't personally reply to your emails but everything is being forwarded to the guy in charge for consideration.

PS. Guardian Weekend don't (currently) offer a prize to their photography competition winners, other than publication of the photo...
Eric Hands PRO 10 years ago
Who has said anything about 'stealing' copyright ? As a potential contributor it would be me taking on trust any assurance that there would be no further use without permission. Are you paid in any way for helping to solicit 'free' photographs ? As for the Guardian, their circulation is truly national, not regional, and I can well understand why someone would like to see their work there, even if no money changes hands. But I assume ( because I have seen many similar titles ) that Sussex Life is one of those super glossy coffee-table free magazines ( I notice that one of the great features for December is: 'Boxing Day walks with:
Jodie Kidd, Kate Mosse, Ptolemy Dean, Holly Willoughby and Charlotte Hawkins' ) that is merely a vehicle for expensive advertising income rather than any meaningful journalism. And I don't think that it would break the bank to offer potential photographic contributors a few crumbs from the table.
a roving eye PRO 10 years ago
well that was a healthy democratic thread with a civilsed ending - i've seen similar threads on other photo sites quickly get out of hand with insults being thrown all over the place
flaky toe [deleted] 10 years ago
fuck me I have stumbled into the past.

I swear to all non-existant or existing God's if I have to flickr (teehee) through another sodding get paid don't get paid thread I will set myself on fire.

And you can hold me to that.
Or a candle..
Or some other flame making device.
Eric Hands PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Eric Hands (member) 10 years ago
A typical reaction. I expect you'll be looking for a free plumber then the next time your bathroom is awash with crap...after all, the internet is awash (!) with 'how to plumb' articles, so no need to call a professional any more.....
Jason Lupi PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Jason Lupi (admin) 10 years ago
the Avangelist - LOL - will do!........x

Paul Russell99 - I partly agree with you.
E Welthorpe 10 years ago
Can open, worms everywhere.

Excellent Chandler quote.

benhollingsworth 10 years ago
I think we should all (that's ALL) look deeply at the Creative Commons license that many of us use within Flickr and beyond. If you have your license set to 'non-commercial' then fine, don't submit without due consideration to what you MAY receive in terms of exposure (sic) or 'Kudos'.

From a commercial perspective, I agree that Sussex Life is earning money, and that Rachel's clarification of various points does not attempt to explain why a profit-making publication cannot simply pay for photographs it includes, but neither does it tell us how much they would charge for a photographer to include works in a commissioned article.

As an extension to the bartering system (artist exposure in return for free images) I think it is a perfectly justified to ask, and it was requested in a respectful manner with no hidden agenda.

If only I took the kind of pictures that anyone would want to view, I would have no compunction in submitting.

Now, how about some free advertising space for my web design/sandwich delivery/escort agency Rachel ;-)
fred pipes 10 years ago
It's an interesting debate. Once photographers and illustrators would pay £800-£1000 a page to be in a source book like Contact, to get seen by art directors and ultimately get them work. Then came along 'portfolio' type coffee-table books where pros would be asked to submit photos and illustrations - they wouldn't get paid, but they'd be in a prestigeous publication, distributed worldwide, that would get them exposure, and ultimately paid work. The photographer saves a grand and the publisher gets a cheap book - a win win situation. Then along came Flickr...

I can understand why people might work for free for low-budget local publications like Source - they get into gigs gratis and save a few bob, for a start. But not for glossy commercial mags like Sussex Life, who are just taking the p*ss.
monkeymillions 10 years ago
Can't we all just get along?
.photomotive Posted 10 years ago. Edited by .photomotive (member) 10 years ago
Eric Hands said: "But I assume ( because I have seen many similar titles ) that Sussex Life is one of those super glossy coffee-table free magazines"

It's not free, they currently charge £3.20 per issue.

As for the question as to why they can't pay for images I would suspect it's something to do with the 'credit crunch' and the fact that Archant are struggling just as much as everyone else is and are desperately trying to cut down on costs.
Andy XR 10 years ago
Group hug?
Alex Bamford PRO 10 years ago
Why don't we all get together for a drink sometime, play a bit of music, chill out, take a few snaps, swap lenses.

Anyone free on the 11th?
-RobW- PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by -RobW- (member) 10 years ago
"Archant are struggling just as much as everyone else is and are desperately trying to cut down on costs"

Yes, exactly, let's look at this from a commercial perspective. As it seems that for this feature they are happy with shots that may not be a high pro quality, their options are: 1) ask people to see if they can get them for free. 2) pay a lot of money for them without seeing if they can get them for free first.

Looks like a no brainer, if you ask me.

Oh, and I agree with AndyWilson. Trying to get people to pay a fair price for programming is like trying to get Dom Perignon out of a stone. "£2000? Yeah, well, you just wrote a load of weird words. I could have done that."
Dolores Luxedo 10 years ago
Maybe I'm completely missing the point here... but aren't Sussex Life asking if anyone wants to submit their images for the magazine? In return for a credit in the magazine?

Glossy and commercial it may be, they requested if anyone wanted to submit their pictures. If you don't want to submit any because they're not paying, or because you're concerned they're going to steal your images, then don't send them the pictures!

If, on the other hand, you don't mind them using your pictures, or you don't have any grand aspirations of one day perhaps being paid to be a photographer, then why not? A lot more people will see the picture in a Sussex magazine than on your Flickr stream (probably)...

Much as the issue of people stealing images off Flickr and using them without permission is a valid one, this isn't what's going on here. It's a polite request for pictures that's been treated as some kind of highway robbery!
Paul Russell99 PRO Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Paul Russell99 (member) 10 years ago
Of course, it's a perfectly reasonable request from the company -- given the choice between having to pay a few hundred quid for photos and getting them for free, the latter obviously is better for the company. I have worked for magazines where the budget for photos was almost nothing.

But, in an ideal world, if everyone says "no" to these requests maybe next time Archant or whoever will think "bugger, we better set a small budget for photos this time". It's not as if printing the magazine is done for free.

If you say "yes" to these requests, you are, in a tiny way, helping to spread the idea that photos are effectively worth nothing in monetary terms, and devaluing the work of all photographers, whether amateur or professional.

And I am unanimous in that!
Alex Bamford PRO 10 years ago
I'm unanimous with you
flaky toe [deleted] 10 years ago
Witches of Eastwick
flaky toe [deleted] 10 years ago
And on a final note:

There is a difference between being asked to contribute to something or to licence materials to something.


1. To give or supply in common with others; give to a common fund or for a common purpose.
2. To submit for publication: contributed two stories to the summer issue.

If you CONTRIBUTE to something you are willing to GIVE.

If you are approached to 'supply' somebody with your product - then you are entitled to begin bartering your worth.

Not enough people read things before hopping up and down on the "I am an artist" bouncy castle with their "give a starving artist food" line.

I sent a picture in to Hearts gallery once. It was one of my finest master pieces, it could probably still hold its own today.

It had a green hill with a red steam engine coming over the top of the hill, the bright blue sky was awash with thick steam from the smoke stack which I had made with cotton wool. It spent several weeks on our fridge next to my Bumble Bee sticker for good behaviour in Swimming (I didn't like being made to take cold showers before getting in the pool... it was a sore point for a while). My Mummy decided to send it in to see whether Tony and Morph liked it too.

And they sure did! One day I got home from school and there it was as clear as day on my television with Tony walking underneath it saying how much he liked the puffy steam.

Strangely I don't recall sending the BBC an invoice the next day for using it on their widely viewed programme. After all, the camera crew, sound, lighting, editorial, directorial, presenters, animators, vision mixers, grips, foleys, runners, clappers, Tony and quite possibly Morph, even the lady making cups of tea had all gotten paid. So surely I should have? Right?

I best send them a final notice today before I forget.
♥ shhexy corin ♥ PRO 10 years ago
There's a similar debate going on in Central where people are complaining that CNN shouldn't ask people to send in their pics of the events in Mumbai without offering payment. Which is even crazier.
Eric Hands PRO 10 years ago
If you say "yes" to these requests, you are, in a tiny way, helping to spread the idea that photos are effectively worth nothing in monetary terms, and devaluing the work of all photographers, whether amateur or professional.
Couldn't have put it better myself.
AndyWilson PRO 10 years ago
Does the same argument apply to comedians doing open mic spots, or bands playing in the corner of a pub for free to get exposure?
Alex Bamford PRO 10 years ago
No. You wouldn't expect to pay £3.20 to get in and see an open mic slot or a band that's not being paid. Sussex life are charging £3.20 for people to see your work. However nicely Rachel put her request, the magazine publisher she works for is taking the piss. I can quite understand why, advertising revenue is down, magazine sales are probably down too. But they're not asking you to work for peanuts, they're asking you to work for nothing. There wasn't even a mention of a few voucher copies to give to your loved ones.

I'm getting bored by this whole thread now. Can we move on now please?
benhollingsworth Posted 10 years ago. Edited by benhollingsworth (admin) 10 years ago
Personally, I think the community and the requester have had a good airing, and have conducted them (our) selves with decorum, and in exactly the spirit that will now doubt be in abundance on the 11th.

In my *other* capacity, I'm willing to close the topic if the consensus is to do so.

My vote is for 'nice discussion, lets leave it there.'

(I'm off to renew my Pro subscription, proud to be a part.)
Litost. PRO 10 years ago
Nice to see a group of fellow photographers willing to resist the urge to prostitute themselves to the first mag that offers to give them a credit/entry into a competition to win a great prize which they reserve the right to substitute for a kfc bargain bucket or a backstage pass for boyzone.

I sadly doubt this is a war we can actually win but i look forward to at least joining in the general sarcasm towards people who think their work has no value or towards the people that persuaded them that was the case :).
Dolores Luxedo Posted 10 years ago. Edited by Dolores Luxedo (member) 10 years ago
I'm not sure what the jive is for bands / open mic, and I'm not really a photographer, but definately when I do a poetry gig, the standard is that the poets don't get paid, and the general public pays to get in... I've been paid a couple of times, but I wouldn't get many gigs if I demanded cash... and if I'm lucky I'll sell a couple of books or blag some free drinks. It's not that I think 'my work has no value', it's more that it's absurd to think it's a pastime I can pay my rent with, definately at the moment. I'm not saying it's not good to aspire to getting paid to do things, but in many fields (and I think photography as well as poetry counts in this category) a lot of the opportunties aren't going to pay. fine.

I'd imagine if you're a big time poet, you probably wouldn't do an unpaid gig unless it was for a good cause, so I guess the same analogy goes to professional photographers as well... but if you are a professional photographer, you aren't going to be sending your pictures into sussex life for free!

also, flickr isn't a community of professional photographers. it's a website where more or less anyone, from amateur to professional, shares pictures - and not so unreasonable someone might want to submit them to a magazine...
Jon Southcoasting PRO 10 years ago
I agree with Dolores and umpteen others expressing this point, but I think the stream should be closed and we can pick this up on the 11th at the Gladstone. No fisticuffs mind you!
aneye4apicture 10 years ago
I've just sat down and read the whole thread in one go and still trying to take it all in! Lot's of well-put ideas but no simple answer I think. I'm not going to add any fuel to the fire, rather, plug the Gladstone Flickr meet /Xmas Bash on the 11th. Some healthy debate over a pint and mellow out to a few tunes are in order. And if anyone gets too worked up, a chance to let off some steam on the dancefloor :-)
AndyWilson PRO 10 years ago
Where can I get a boxing glove with a horseshoe in it?
Pete Barr-Watson 10 years ago
ok, as per Ben's suggestion, I'm closing the thread.

If anyone does have a point to make still and it's burning you up inside that you didn't get the opportunity then message me and I'll sort that out.

Thanks all...
Groups Beta