Brian's Stock Continues To Rise

[Lowbacca]

I'm so sorry, I seem to have stumbled into a meeting of Alcoholics Unanimous by mistake.

By mistake?

[guitarfool2002]

I started a new topic and thread here: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18396.0.html  to talk beer, wine, liquor, etc. There are so many good recommendations and varieties mentioned that I'd like to try, but they're scattered in various threads. I thought it would be good to have a place specifically for them, replacing any previous threads that have run their course. I started the discussion with a mention of a current seasonal variety. Any discussions are welcome and encouraged at the "Beer..." thread, please drop by and help yourself to the complimentary peanuts, pretzels, and pickled eggs. 

[Mooger Fooger]

As we are discussing the virtues of beer, I have to add my two cents worth. I love Jever Pils, which is a north german beer and very bitter. For refreshments on a hot summers day, nothing beats it. Then I like Baltika 9, a russian strong beer (10%) or Faxe (Danish with same %). I also like Hoegaarden white beer, Leffe Blond and Kwak, all from Belgium. When in Oz, then I head straight for Reschs or Tooheys.

[guitarfool2002]

Along with Billy's post addressing the issues in this thread that happened over the past few days, I'd like to address and clarify specifically the issue of the ban and what happened in the aftermath for which some posters had questions and concerns.

The decision to ban in this thread was done with the knowledge and agreement of all three active moderators of the board. Everyone knew and was informed what was happening, and the decision made to ban was done with a consensus of agreement. Any issues like this are decided that way, and discussed among the moderators so everyone is in agreement with the actions taken. Decisions like this are not taken lightly. The preferred way of handling these things is to give ample opportunity through warnings or suggestions for the involved parties to work things out, ranging from making peace, to an apology, to simply walking away and moving forward. When these are offered as options but repeatedly ignored, and if the situation shows little sign of getting better before it gets worse, then the stronger action is taken in the form of a ban, even if it's considered a time-out to cool down and diffuse a conflict or hostility. In more serious violations of policy or egregious violations of policies, the ban is more strongly and immediately applied, leading up to the lifetime ban. That is a last resort. It is done with the idea of moving the board forward.

In this particular thread's situation, a ban was put into place. All moderators were on board with that decision. The usual procedures were applied to enact that ban.

Within 24 hours, the board member who was given the ban was somehow able to log in and post to this thread. This should not have happened, and the reasons how and why this happened or even could happen in light of the process in place is being investigated. *None* of the moderators lifted or altered the ban, and the ban was still in place when the post appeared. There are several areas that are covered in the process, yet somehow there was a flaw or an open door that was either exploited or avoided in order for a member who had been banned to post under the same screen name and with the same account. This is being looked at, basically it cannot and should not have happened.

I know there was some confusion and some questions as to what happened after that post appeared. Let me state very clearly: The ban which was a consensus among the moderators was not lifted, or altered in any way by any of the moderators. The post was made in spite of that member account being banned.

That brings up my main point to tie into Billy's post. It comes down to showing respect, once again. When a ban or a warning is issued, please respect it. Without knowing the full reasons why this happened from a tech standpoint, what happened is that a member who was banned chose to return to the board less than 24 hours after the ban was issued and post. Whatever the rationale, it felt like a slap in the face...honestly, to the moderators and the decision made, to the membership of the board, to me personally as the moderator most engaged in the issue at that specific time, to the members who had been engaged in the thread specifically, and to the board as a whole.

That cannot be tolerated. When a decision is made like this, please respect the decision and respect the board and fellow board members and take some time to cool off, take a break from posting, step away for a bit, whatever the case. It was not appropriate nor was it welcome to have a ban ignored as it was here. In this specific situation, consider the content of what was posted in spite of the ban and weigh that into the thread as a whole.

The way in which a ban was sidestepped to allow a post to be made by a banned member is, again, being looked into so anything that needs to be addressed or fixed will be followed up.

Consider even if there were a way to short-circuit or sidestep the ban itself to allow a post, the *message* sent by the ban should still have been respected.

I feel this had to be addressed and clarified specifically in order to answer any lingering questions or doubts, and move this discussion and the board in general above and beyond this situation.

Craig  

[Cam Mott]

I think Mikie hit the nail on the head a few pages back, regarding the "How do you know?" question. Let us not forget that it's not easy to tell emotion and inflection over a message board. The question asked by job may well have been a genuine, well meaning question of asking if or how Ray knew something as an actual fact, or just opinion. To others, it read as an aggressive attack. It seems to me that job's first big "mistake" was not knowing who Ray is, and having the guts to question him on something. To be honest, I didn't actually know who Ray was either until somebody informed me via pm that he is an "insider". I do know and understand the fact that certain members here should at times be shown a little more respect than others. After all, these people occasionally go out of their way to give us information we might normally not be able to have access to. But I also see an all to frequent "Us versus them" attitude. Let's not forget that we have all been a noob fan at one time or another, and we all can't know when a certain person has "ties" to parties involved that we don't, and that their word and knowledge on something is absolute fact, and is not to be questioned. Now having said all that, I do agree that job's posts about Ray's "minions", and saying things like "who needs them" was way out of line and inappropriate. But I do understand job's initial anger at the attitude given him way back at the beginning of this thread.

Agree on all counts. I've seen much worse here from the regulars that warranted a banning.  You explained it even better than I did, Octopus Prime. "Emotion" and "inflection" on a message board that can easily be misinterpreted. I understand Job's initial anger, and while he perhaps handled the responses inappropriately which resulted in a public hanging, I think this thing escalated quickly and should have been dropped two or three pages ago - apologies or no apologies. The damage to Job's rep on the board was already done, and it should have been left at his discretion to repair it (or not). Instead, there was a lot of unnecessary piling on, which I think was unwarranted.

I agree Mikie. Ray and AGD handled it, end of story.

[pixletwin]

I think Mikie hit the nail on the head a few pages back, regarding the "How do you know?" question. Let us not forget that it's not easy to tell emotion and inflection over a message board. The question asked by job may well have been a genuine, well meaning question of asking if or how Ray knew something as an actual fact, or just opinion. To others, it read as an aggressive attack. It seems to me that job's first big "mistake" was not knowing who Ray is, and having the guts to question him on something. To be honest, I didn't actually know who Ray was either until somebody informed me via pm that he is an "insider". I do know and understand the fact that certain members here should at times be shown a little more respect than others. After all, these people occasionally go out of their way to give us information we might normally not be able to have access to. But I also see an all to frequent "Us versus them" attitude. Let's not forget that we have all been a noob fan at one time or another, and we all can't know when a certain person has "ties" to parties involved that we don't, and that their word and knowledge on something is absolute fact, and is not to be questioned. Now having said all that, I do agree that job's posts about Ray's "minions", and saying things like "who needs them" was way out of line and inappropriate. But I do understand job's initial anger at the attitude given him way back at the beginning of this thread.

Agree on all counts. I've seen much worse here from the regulars that warranted a banning.  You explained it even better than I did, Octopus Prime. "Emotion" and "inflection" on a message board that can easily be misinterpreted. I understand Job's initial anger, and while he perhaps handled the responses inappropriately which resulted in a public hanging, I think this thing escalated quickly and should have been dropped two or three pages ago - apologies or no apologies. The damage to Job's rep on the board was already done, and it should have been left at his discretion to repair it (or not). Instead, there was a lot of unnecessary piling on, which I think was unwarranted.

Mikie nailed it again.

[Ed Roach]

Billy, so sorry for your loss, and glad to see you back!  Hope you are ok; that's always a rough time.

The other thing is I loved the body of your post.  Jon is always quick to point out that first and foremost, we are all fans of this brilliant music.  That is what brings us all together here

[bgas]

I think Mikie hit the nail on the head a few pages back, regarding the "How do you know?" question. Let us not forget that it's not easy to tell emotion and inflection over a message board. The question asked by job may well have been a genuine, well meaning question of asking if or how Ray knew something as an actual fact, or just opinion. To others, it read as an aggressive attack. It seems to me that job's first big "mistake" was not knowing who Ray is, and having the guts to question him on something. To be honest, I didn't actually know who Ray was either until somebody informed me via pm that he is an "insider". I do know and understand the fact that certain members here should at times be shown a little more respect than others. After all, these people occasionally go out of their way to give us information we might normally not be able to have access to. But I also see an all to frequent "Us versus them" attitude. Let's not forget that we have all been a noob fan at one time or another, and we all can't know when a certain person has "ties" to parties involved that we don't, and that their word and knowledge on something is absolute fact, and is not to be questioned. Now having said all that, I do agree that job's posts about Ray's "minions", and saying things like "who needs them" was way out of line and inappropriate. But I do understand job's initial anger at the attitude given him way back at the beginning of this thread.

Agree on all counts. I've seen much worse here from the regulars that warranted a banning.  You explained it even better than I did, Octopus Prime. "Emotion" and "inflection" on a message board that can easily be misinterpreted. I understand Job's initial anger, and while he perhaps handled the responses inappropriately which resulted in a public hanging, I think this thing escalated quickly and should have been dropped two or three pages ago - apologies or no apologies. The damage to Job's rep on the board was already done, and it should have been left at his discretion to repair it (or not). Instead, there was a lot of unnecessary piling on, which I think was unwarranted.

I agree Mikie. Ray and AGD handled it, end of story.

Mikie nailed it again.

Then Maybe the three of you, Mikie, Cam and Pixle should start your own board and post there, since you evidently don't think the mods are doing thir "job"; especially  Cam and Pixle as Craig has already given a detailed explanation and you stillsee the need to be post your horses asses opinions

[pixletwin]

bigass, don't take it personally mmmkay?

[Cam Mott]

I think Mikie hit the nail on the head a few pages back, regarding the "How do you know?" question. Let us not forget that it's not easy to tell emotion and inflection over a message board. The question asked by job may well have been a genuine, well meaning question of asking if or how Ray knew something as an actual fact, or just opinion. To others, it read as an aggressive attack. It seems to me that job's first big "mistake" was not knowing who Ray is, and having the guts to question him on something. To be honest, I didn't actually know who Ray was either until somebody informed me via pm that he is an "insider". I do know and understand the fact that certain members here should at times be shown a little more respect than others. After all, these people occasionally go out of their way to give us information we might normally not be able to have access to. But I also see an all to frequent "Us versus them" attitude. Let's not forget that we have all been a noob fan at one time or another, and we all can't know when a certain person has "ties" to parties involved that we don't, and that their word and knowledge on something is absolute fact, and is not to be questioned. Now having said all that, I do agree that job's posts about Ray's "minions", and saying things like "who needs them" was way out of line and inappropriate. But I do understand job's initial anger at the attitude given him way back at the beginning of this thread.

Agree on all counts. I've seen much worse here from the regulars that warranted a banning.  You explained it even better than I did, Octopus Prime. "Emotion" and "inflection" on a message board that can easily be misinterpreted. I understand Job's initial anger, and while he perhaps handled the responses inappropriately which resulted in a public hanging, I think this thing escalated quickly and should have been dropped two or three pages ago - apologies or no apologies. The damage to Job's rep on the board was already done, and it should have been left at his discretion to repair it (or not). Instead, there was a lot of unnecessary piling on, which I think was unwarranted.

I agree Mikie. Ray and AGD handled it, end of story.

Mikie nailed it again.

Then Maybe the three of you, Mikie, Cam and Pixle should start your own board and post there, since you evidently don't think the mods are doing thir "job"; especially  Cam and Pixle as Craig has already given a detailed explanation and you stillsee the need to be post your horses asses opinions

"Horse's asses"? Won't that opinion get you banned? Hurry, apologize!  

I read the explanations and the entire thread. The Mods have their opinion and I have mine, I think that is still allowed? They are the mods and get to make the call, I'm happy with that.

I hope Brian's stock continues to rise.

[pixletwin]

Also since bigass is apparently keeping score, I would like to know what I ever posted to deserve being trolled so specifically?

[bgas]

bigass, don't take it personally mmmkay?

Don't go getting your tit in a wringer Pox El Tween, it's not personal to me, only you

[pixletwin]

bigass, don't take it personally mmmkay?

Don't go getting your tit in a wringer Pox El Tween, it's not personal to me, only you

Oh. Do you normally not feel personally threatened enough by people's opinions that you call them horse's asses? Or only when you are anonymously posting on a message board?

[ontor pertawst]

Gentlemen, gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!

[rab2591]

Gentlemen, gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!

[Cam Mott]

Gentlemen, gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!

Good one.

I'm not fighting with bgas. We go way back message-board-wise.

I've never called him a name but he's earned his right to have his opinion of me. I just don't want him to get banned for naming his opinion of me.

[Mikie]

Then Maybe the three of you, Mikie, Cam and Pixle should start your own board and post there, since you evidently don't think the mods are doing thir "job"; especially  Cam and Pixle as Craig has already given a detailed explanation and you still see the need to be post your horses asses opinions

Really? Where in this thread have I said (or even suggested) one time that the Mods weren't doing their job?  I think you'd better take the time and go back and read a few pages on this thread, Bgas.  Be sure and read them closely, K?

[Mikie]

Also since bigass is apparently keeping score, I would like to know what I ever posted to deserve being trolled so specifically?

Pix, you said it best. "Bigass." No need to go any further. 

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Stop it guys...please. Take it to PMs or somewhere else off this board.

Thanks.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Billy, so sorry for your loss, and glad to see you back!  Hope you are ok; that's always a rough time.

The other thing is I loved the body of your post.  Jon is always quick to point out that first and foremost, we are all fans of this brilliant music.  That is what brings us all together here

Thanks Ed....appreciate you

[GhostyTMRS]

I think the sketchy version of it all is this. Throughout much of the '90s, the boards were very pro-Brian. In the early oughts, there was a pronounced shift to looking at the band as a whole, and recognizing everyone's contributions. The early astonishment of seeing BW out and about and recording was also replaced with familiarity, and we all know what that breeds. The simplest way to recognize this shift is to compare the boxed sets -- Good Vibes is all about BW as auteur, while Made in California makes an honest (though sometimes misplaced) effort to showcase everyone's work.

As the 2000s passed, some people migrated to Brian's camp -- not because they thought he was god, but because they preferred his work, made connections with the band, preferred his shows -- and some folks moved toward what Mike was doing (which improved dramatically over the same timespan). You also had a subset of folks who found the older recordings the only real points of interest.

All the sides came together for the C50 and Smile box, because everyone united for that. And there was harmony and peace and love. And then it broke apart, and what might have been only preferences before hardened into factions. What had been once restive fiefdoms, and then a unified country, descended into all-out civil war (Ray's mention of Gettysburg was most apt).

Given the amount of flak Mike received for the end of the tour, there was a natural, vociferous defense of his stance. And in the last few months, as Brian has seen his profile raise again with the new album, etc., a lot of his fans are speaking more loudly and demanding that the kind of statements that were once accepted or ignored (wifeandmanagers, the usual insinuations that BW is someone else's puppet) be backed up.

Mike was maligned, probably unfairly, for decades. His defenders are correct on that score, and have the right to say so. And Brian has been subject, for nearly 20 years, to baseless speculation about the choices he's made in his personal life and career. His defenders (of whom I'm obviously one) have the right to point that out. I wish I could see it getting better, but the last couple of years have been rough.

This is the best response to what I've seen happening on this board. I'm very skeptical of the idea that any criticism of Brian's work must be coming from a "pro-Mike" faction. Imagine if Brian released GIOMH today and it was met with criticism (as it was in 2004). Would that negativity now be characterized as coming from a "pro-Mike" stance as an underhanded way of shutting down ANY criticism? That's where it seems this is all heading. What the hell does it even mean to be "pro-Mike"? How about pro-Beach Boys for a change? Wanting all the guys to do well either individually or collectively in their golden years because they've earned our affection based on all the great records of the past?

[GhostyTMRS]

And as another poster mentioned, I really don't believe Brian's stock is rising. Like McCartney or Bob Dylan, he passed into living legend status some time ago. There's nowhere else for his stock to go. Sure, there are always going to be people who don't know his name, don't know the music, etc. And a faction of baby boomers who've been so brainwashed against the Beach Boys that there's no hope for them at this stage of their lives, but anyone with any musical sense or clout reveres Brian and that's all that matters.

[NickandthePassions]

This is my all-time favorite forum. Just in this one thread, members have discussed Brian Wilson (my all-time favorite composer), some of my favorite alcoholic beverages, and made numerous references to my all-time favorite movie, Dr. Stranglelove.

[rogerlancelot]

Let's make everybody happy and re-title this thread "Bruce's Shorts Continue To Rise".

 

[Mooger Fooger]

I have a better idea, let us post about how we absolutely HATE everyone on here. Not normal hate, mind you, I mean the complete and utter hate. At the same time we should explain how the joyus music of BBs and co drives us to such extremes. You know great music leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Then we can discuss Bruce's shorts. It all ties in superbly.