I have been following this discussion about Facebook and agree more with those that choose not to support/use Facebook, more for reasons of personal security. I'm also not a regular contributor to the list and didn't feel my 2 cents would benefit the discussion. You asked how these photos can be tracked and that is nearly impossible. One suggestion would be to use software to apply a "watermark" to all photos. It would take a little more volunteer effort, but printing "http://www.pacificbulbsociety.org/pbswiki/" in a corner of an image that does not obscure the subject would at least provide a link to the source. Someone could easily Photoshop this out of the image, but I think most wouldn't bother. I often do searches for species of alpines or other perennials and have discovered links to sites I didn't know existed using this kind of information. Adobe Lightroom could handle this easily as could Photoshop. There are also cheaper choices but they may compromise the quality of some images. One free site is picmarkr.com. Kirby DeMott -----Original Message----- From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Nhu Nguyen Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:51 AM To: Pacific Bulb Society Subject: Re: [pbs] Plagiarized Images Thanks, Matt for the very nice post. It got my brain fired up in all manners of interesting ways. As a person who is not deeply involved in social media, I am hoping you can clarify a few questions. When we post a photo, say to the wiki and someone takes it an use it on their website without back-linking, then someone else takes that photo and use it on their blog. How will the readers of the website or the blog know where the photo came from originally? How can we even track these photos if we want to know where it is being used? How can this disconnect be used to spread words of the PBS? I imagine that the benefits you talked about has to do with social media like re-tweeting a Tweeter entry, or tumbling of a Tumbler entry where everything can be traced back to the original source? Nhu On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Matt Mattus <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > I think that one discussion here, should be more about - how can we > engage MORE people to become engaged rather than discourage them. > > And then, a second discussion should be - how to tier out engagement - > as only a few of these curious gawkers really want to engage as deeply > as the > 50 or so members who chat here. > > The critical fact is that even if a young person searches and > discovers a rare bulb, this baseline interest is what may spark a > deeper engagement in the future - it's entry level engagement. Today, > a Google search may be the only place where a young person may see > what we have. Their laptop is their library. The Internet is how they > are discovering possible future interests. > If they repost to a blog or their Pinterest page "cool check out this > Tulip", then they may become a future member once they learn more.