I am not a social media type person...

Crossroads

Crossroads

Thump the Bottom
Griff, I apologize for posting on this thread. I know you want it to fall off, but I wanted to give this some thought, as well as my schedule has allowed only limited time on the forum.

For me it was not, nor has it ever been about strong opinions, but about how members respond to and respect others. And it matters not if the offender is helpful, a great player, or buys all the beer @ BGU. There is no excuse for disrespectful and demeaning comments. Those of you who know me know I do not have thin skin and have a high tolerance for humor.  however, when I become aware of disrespectful posts and attacks on other members, as well as reprehensible PMs that do not belong on this forum I will make a call for action.  To sit idly by when you are aware of such circumstances, would be akin to being part of the problem.

Unfortunately forum policy when an offensive post is made is to remove the post, so typically only the parties involved and those who happen to be online at the time are aware of what was typed. So only a limited few are aware of the severity or frequency of the issue.

This happened previously when an ex member, who was constantly causing trouble, made a veiled death threat to a moderator. This moderator is a great guy and a wealth of musical theory information, as well as a heck of a player. He used to offer terrific advice, but when I just looked at his last 100 posts 96 of them were to welcome new members. What a shame, and I hope at some point he returns to posting, but after seeing the attacks he was subjected to I certainly understand. Other members left as a result of this ex member, some returned, some haven't.

To think this situation will not happen again, is in my opinion overly optimistic. In fact I am surprised it has only happened twice in the five years (that I know of)  I have been here.. .And like any other problem it will continue to rear it's head, until it is dealt with.

I whole-heardtedly support Lloyd's suggestion of a structured escalation program for repeat offenders of civility and I also add that offensive posts should not be for moderators eyes only, but for all eyes unless an affected member requests it to be removed Imagine the consequences if we just hid from the public when Hitler invaded Poland, or when the Twin Towers were attacked. People in NY would be screaming for action, while residents of Iowa would be saying what's the big deal, you New Yorkers are always overreacting, because they had no idea of what took place. Granted these are extreme examples, but you get the idea.

It is not my intent to stir the pot, and again I apologize for bumping this post but I felt the need for my thoughts on the responses to this thread to be heard. If Griff or the moderators find this post to be inflammatory, then I offer myself for disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion.

I would much rather see that happen than the dreaded “Off Topic Comments have been moved to this thread”'

Now quit reading my dribble and get back to practicing.
 
MikeS

MikeS

Student Of The Blues
Staff member
Griff, I apologize for posting on this thread. I know you want it to fall off, but I wanted to give this some thought, as well as my schedule has allowed only limited time on the forum.

For me it was not, nor has it ever been about strong opinions, but about how members respond to and respect others. And it matters not if the offender is helpful, a great player, or buys all the beer @ BGU. There is no excuse for disrespectful and demeaning comments. Those of you who know me know I do not have thin skin and have a high tolerance for humor.  however, when I become aware of disrespectful posts and attacks on other members, as well as reprehensible PMs that do not belong on this forum I will make a call for action.  To sit idly by when you are aware of such circumstances, would be akin to being part of the problem.

Unfortunately forum policy when an offensive post is made is to remove the post, so typically only the parties involved and those who happen to be online at the time are aware of what was typed. So only a limited few are aware of the severity or frequency of the issue.

This happened previously when an ex member, who was constantly causing trouble, made a veiled death threat to a moderator. This moderator is a great guy and a wealth of musical theory information, as well as a heck of a player. He used to offer terrific advice, but when I just looked at his last 100 posts 96 of them were to welcome new members. What a shame, and I hope at some point he returns to posting, but after seeing the attacks he was subjected to I certainly understand. Other members left as a result of this ex member, some returned, some haven't.

To think this situation will not happen again, is in my opinion overly optimistic. In fact I am surprised it has only happened twice in the five years (that I know of)  I have been here.. .And like any other problem it will continue to rear it's head, until it is dealt with.

I whole-heardtedly support Lloyd's suggestion of a structured escalation program for repeat offenders of civility and what exactly would that accomplish beyond allowing self appointed moderators to scour the Forum looking for "violations"? Believe me, it already happens. Remember civility is not black and white. WHere one sees a joke another gerts insulted. I wouldn't want the forum to be reduced to the "Least common denominator" type of comments.and I also add that offensive posts should not be for moderators eyes only, but for all eyes unless an affected member requests it to be removed. I'm afraid that I disagree.  Not deleting the post only causes arguments and provides no benefit except to the voyeur. If Griff or the moderators delete offensive posts we do so to keep the peace. If people chose to assume that because they do not see public condemnation of certain activity that nothing is happening, then that can't be helped.  Would you want the police called if someone called you a name at work? I'm guessing you would ignore it and just avoid the person.
Imagine the consequences if we just hid from the public when Hitler invaded Poland, or when the Twin Towers were attacked. People in NY would be screaming for action, while residents of Iowa would be saying what's the big deal, you New Yorkers are always overreacting, because they had no idea of what took place. Granted these are extreme examples, but you get the idea. They ARE extreme examples and as such have no bearing on the discussion. 

It is not my intent to stir the pot, and again I apologize for bumping this post but I felt the need for my thoughts on the responses to this thread to be heard. If Griff or the moderators find this post to be inflammatory, then I offer myself for disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion.

I would much rather see that happen than the dreaded “Off Topic Comments have been moved to this thread”'

Now quit reading my dribble and get back to practicing. I can't. It's too early and I don't want to wake Marsha!!!
Click to expand...
 
Crossroads

Crossroads

Thump the Bottom
Mike I appreciate your responses and really do, as most forum members I imagine, appreciate the job that you and the other mods do. I know it is thankless work, and I appreciate all of your efforts.

I whole-heardtedly support Lloyd's suggestion of a structured escalation program for repeat offenders of civility and what exactly would that accomplish beyond allowing self appointed moderators to scour the Forum looking for "violations"? Believe me, it already happens. Remember civility is not black and white. WHere one sees a joke another gerts insulted. I wouldn't want the forum to be reduced to the "Least common denominator" type of comments.

One of society's staples has been built on a retributive  justice system. Moderators currently review posts and remove them when they feel a member is out of line. There are some statements that are clearly over the line, and if the statement warrants being removed without a member requesting it, then there must be something wrong with it, otherwise it would not be removed. All I am asking here is better definition of policy, as well as a retributive system where repeat offenders are removed for a week, a month, a year or banished altogether based on the frequency and severity of their offenses. Along with the member being suspended/removed, future offensive posts will go along with them, thus making moderation easier, and the forum a better place to visit. I don't see where this could do anything other than improve things,

and I also add that offensive posts should not be for moderators eyes only, but for all eyes unless an affected member requests it to be removed. I'm afraid that I disagree.  Not deleting the post only causes arguments and provides no benefit except to the voyeur. If Griff or the moderators delete offensive posts we do so to keep the peace. If people chose to assume that because they do not see public condemnation of certain activity that nothing is happening, then that can't be helped.  Would you want the police called if someone called you a name at work? I'm guessing you would ignore it and just avoid the person.

So again here you are making determination as to whether posts are offensive, so that is a moot point. You are already doing it. This has nothing to do with voyeurism and everything to do with censorship and the understanding of people we are dealing with. Had I made repeated offensive posts would other members have invited me to their house for dinner, or over for a jam, or split a room with me at a jam or BGU? I know if I had invited someone to dinner and they repeated offensive comments that had been removed from the forum, I would be annoyed because the whole situation would have been avoided if I had a 360 degree view of this person, not just a goody two shoes version of this person, painted by the moderators.


Imagine the consequences if we just hid from the public when Hitler invaded Poland, or when the Twin Towers were attacked. People in NY would be screaming for action, while residents of Iowa would be saying what's the big deal, you New Yorkers are always overreacting, because they had no idea of what took place. Granted these are extreme examples, but you get the idea. They ARE extreme examples and as such have no bearing on the discussion. 

If they had no bearing they would not be examples, extreme or otherwise. In order for them to be extreme examples by default, they must have relevance, so I think you missed the boat on that one.  I provided a less extreme example in my  previous paragraph regarding inviting a member to dinner, to more clearly illustrate my point.

It is not my intent to stir the pot, and again I apologize for bumping this post but I felt the need for my thoughts on the responses to this thread to be heard. If Griff or the moderators find this post to be inflammatory, then I offer myself for disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion.

I would much rather see that happen than the dreaded “Off Topic Comments have been moved to this thread”'

Now quit reading my dribble and get back to practicing. I can't. It's too early and I don't want to wake Marsha!!!


Excuses, Excuses! With all those fancy guitars I think you could invest in a set of headphones or IEMs.
 
Crossroads

Crossroads

Thump the Bottom
Ah, but Godwin's law was intended to

Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. "Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics, its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler or to Nazis to think a bit harder about the Holocaust", Godwin has written

Therefore as Mike would say, this does not apply. I did not and would not compare anyone to Hitler, the man was a monster.

Instead I used his invasion of Poland (a military action), as well as the attack on the towers as EXTREME EXAMPLES of what happens when information is censored. I could have just as easily used Mussolini, Genghis Khan, or Alexander the Great.

But since you brought him up Jalapeno,  if Hitler was on this forum, you may be led to believe he was not such a bad guy, just a guy with a lot of "Off topic posts have been moved to this thread", where his posts had been.

And that shows the danger of censorship. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]
 
J

Jalapeno

Student Of The Blues
Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool [glow=yellow,2,300]to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. [/glow]
Click to expand...

I've seen more drama queens in this forum than I have in forums with mostly females posting. I chuckle so much when I read things here sometimes ;)
 
Crossroads

Crossroads

Thump the Bottom
No drama here bud. Just stating fact.

And frankly I can see where your post could be interpreted as insulting to many. Have I done anything to insult you?

This is how these petty internet arguments get started.

Fortunately for both of us, I will not reduce myself to your level.
 
MikeS

MikeS

Student Of The Blues
Staff member
Ah, but Godwin's law was intended to

Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. "Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics, its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler or to Nazis to think a bit harder about the Holocaust", Godwin has written

Therefore as Mike would say, this does not apply. I did not and would not compare anyone to Hitler, the man was a monster.

Instead I used his invasion of Poland (a military action), as well as the attack on the towers as EXTREME EXAMPLES of what happens when information is censored. I could have just as easily used Mussolini, Genghis Khan, or Alexander the Great.

But since you brought him up Jalapeno, [glow=yellow,2,300] if Hitler was on this forum, you may be led to believe he was not such a bad guy, just a guy with a lot of "Off topic posts have been moved to this thread", where his posts had been.[/glow]
So you conclude from a lot of "Off Topic Posts" that he's a good guy??

And that shows the danger of censorship. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]
Click to expand...
 
MikeS

MikeS

Student Of The Blues
Staff member

Hmmmm Come to think of it, we HAVE been referred to as Jack Booted Thugs.   But it's been a while.

I wear it as a badge of honor.  ;D

 
Crossroads

Crossroads

Thump the Bottom
Ah, but Godwin's law was intended to

Godwin's law does not claim to articulate a fallacy; it is instead framed as a memetic tool to reduce the incidence of inappropriate hyperbolic comparisons. "Although deliberately framed as if it were a law of nature or of mathematics, its purpose has always been rhetorical and pedagogical: I wanted folks who glibly compared someone else to Hitler or to Nazis to think a bit harder about the Holocaust", Godwin has written

Therefore as Mike would say, this does not apply. I did not and would not compare anyone to Hitler, the man was a monster.

Instead I used his invasion of Poland (a military action), as well as the attack on the towers as EXTREME EXAMPLES of what happens when information is censored. I could have just as easily used Mussolini, Genghis Khan, or Alexander the Great.

But since you brought him up Jalapeno, [glow=yellow,2,300] if Hitler was on this forum, you may be led to believe he was not such a bad guy, just a guy with a lot of "Off topic posts have been moved to this thread", where his posts had been.[/glow]
So you conclude from a lot of "Off Topic Posts" that he's a good guy??

And that shows the danger of censorship. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Click to expand...
Click to expand...

No just that I would not have a true understanding of what kind of guy he was. Oh why why, did I ever use the H word? Now in addition to num-nuts, I got you piling on.

Enough I'm going swimming.
 
J

Jalapeno

Student Of The Blues
I gots Sunday morning numb-brain due to Saturday night whiskey which does prevent numb nuts.
Click to expand...

In the USA the status of nuts are protected by HIPAA and its not legal to discuss them  ;D
 
blackcoffeeblues

blackcoffeeblues

Student Of The Blues
     Digging up bones
I'm digging up bones
     Assuming things
that's better left alone
     Tonight I'm just sitting here, reading a thread that should be gone....but I guess it's all about
Digging up bones.....(SLIGHT VARIATION OF AN OLD COUNTRY SONG BY RANDY TRAVIS) ;) ;) ;)
    
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top