Mike's band

[guitarfool2002]

Related to the specifics of these discussions, there were statements posted and assumptions made in the past week which are not factual to how the situations played out between the board members and the moderators involved in the discussions and the actions taken.

When any issues like these are given to the moderators, everything in question including our discussions are archived and saved in case they need to be referenced in the future, or beyond that simply to have everything in question "on the record".

In this situation, we have every discussion archived and available for reference.

Unfortunately all of this went public, and there are people being called liars, people's honesty being called into question, and worse. This is what happened, and this is what can be backed up by the discussions and reports archived and saved.

All of the moderators were forwarded and discussed the messages in question as part of the reporting process.

The first reported message was February of this year. The second was reported in April.

The moderators received these reported messages, as per board rules, and discussed what can be done to resolve the issues. There were issues beyond the messages themselves at play, considering all factors.

Advice was sent to both parties on how to move forward. When parts of that advice were not followed and it went into public posts on the board, both parties received a 7-day timeout ban.


So where does that leave everything as of today, and as of this discussion.

There are people being called liars. There are assumptions and charges being put on board members and moderators that all of the facts of this on record and archived would prove are wrong, and not just wrong but offensive bordering on disgusting on a personal level.

If anyone wants to challenge the facts, let's use the facts that are on the record rather than assumptions and false claims. If it reaches such a point, let's ask for permission of all involved to put some of the facts on the table so everyone being led to believe there was misconduct or accusations of lying can see what the facts really are. Everything in question is archived as per the usual way the moderators have to deal with these issues. This is not an isolated incident, this is not a random process that popped up out of nowhere. Everything was followed as per board rules regarding the handling and reporting of this, and the reported messages were in fact seen and discussed by the moderators.

I cannot believe it has come to this, to be honest. If there are claims that people are lying, or acting against board rules or even basic trust, consider everything in question is archived and available.

Because the claims being made and shared around would fall under the category of a lie (or at best, a case of misinformation) more easily when the actual facts of what happened are reviewed.

I cannot watch as something other than the truth is used to attack other people on this board, no matter who is involved. And the facts do exist.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Huston, we have a problem. GF states "no moderator can access private messages from anyone at any time. Period. There is simply no way to do this in any form, and the messages are and remain private to the sender and the receiver." Yet the rule he quotes clearly states " Private messages will not be read by a moderator unless warranted by the behavior of a board member.  Anyone who becomes a cause for concern due to rude or abusive behavior may have their accounts temporarily frozen and their private and public messages examined to see what final actions should be taken." (emphasis mine). Thus according to the rule as quoted by GF,  PMs can be read by mods if the situation warrants. I'd appreciate clarification on this point. I think we all would.

[guitarfool2002]

Read this again, Andrew. Crystal clear. No problems. A board member reported a PM to the mods. Any unwanted or improper private messages should be immediately reported to one of the moderators. That is what was done with two private messages that all three moderators had forwarded to them, and which all three moderators discussed.

All of the discussions between the three mods as well as the two messages which were reported according to board rules are archived and can be presented if necessary.

Keep in mind, these are messages that you said never were sent and did not exist. Three mods saw them and discussed them, according to the board rules.

Reconsider calling out people and calling them liars in light of the facts. Not to mention suggesting improper conduct from any of the mods. It's all archived and ready to post if necessary.

There are issues raised in this discussion which need to be addressed. First, the specific board rules covering private messages listed in the "Welcome" thread:

Thanks for visiting the Smiley Smile message board. Here are a few guidelines to help everything run smoothly:

5) If you feel the need to discuss a PM you received with a third party, then don't expect your PMs to be very private, either. If you don't want someone sending you a PM, or someone doing anything in particular, tell them. Don't wait for or expect someone to speak up for you. If the party in question doesn't listen, go to a moderator about it.   Private messages will not be read by a moderator unless warranted by the behavior of a board member.  Anyone who becomes a cause for concern due to rude or abusive behavior may have their accounts temporarily frozen and their private and public messages examined to see what final actions should be taken.  Said action may be anything from a warning to a temporary or permanent ban.  The moderators will discuss and announce the action that is taken.  Any unwanted or improper private messages should be immediately reported to one of the moderators.

5.5)  Do not post contents of private messages on the board without permission from the sender. 'Private' means exactly that.

Those are and have been the standing rules covering private messages.

Despite some comments and assumptions made in this thread, no moderator can access private messages from anyone at any time. Period. There is simply no way to do this in any form, and the messages are and remain private to the sender and the receiver.

What the quote above outlines is the process that happens if and when a board member receives a private message that they consider inappropriate, offensive, or unwelcome in any way.

If such a message is received, private messages can be reported to the moderators just as a public board post can be reported. The moderators at that point will review and discuss the situation at hand. The private message in question, when warranted and as outlined above, can be requested to be forwarded to the moderators so the situation can be discussed, along with potential actions to be taken. But there is no way, in fact no mechanism in the board's design at all, to allow the moderators to go into anyone's account on their own and read any private messages. If there is a reported post or a dispute, the message is forwarded to the moderators by the recipients who are reporting it. That's it.

The rules are very clearly spelled out, as are the follow-up procedures and potential actions. Whatever else is being suggested by those trying to imply misconduct or abuse of this policy regarding PM's and the reporting process is simply wrong as it applies to the situations mentioned in this thread.

Bottom line: If any board member receives such a PM, the best advice taken from the rules above is and shall remain as such - "Any unwanted or improper private messages should be immediately reported to one of the moderators." Then, the process in place will start among the moderators. No moderator can or will access or read private messages unless such a message is reported by a board member.

Those are the rules. I will follow up with the facts of how all of that relates to the situations being discussed here.

[Andrew G. Doe]

That wasn't my question. You say the mods cannot read the PMs. The rule you quoted clearly states that in certain circumstances, they can. All I asked was for clarification. If the rule is wrong, or outmoded, it needs rewriting.

The PMs I said don't exist are the "tons and tons of PMs" SB alleges I sent "to maintain (my) control and push (my) agenda", not the two reported you cite that date from February & April. Two. Hardly the deluge claimed. Control ? If I had any such influence, this thread wouldn't exist, for reasons I need not explain. Agenda ? Everyone's got one. Mine's accuracy in reporting the history of this band we love as no other, with a side of trying to restore this place to its former glory. That's all. Maybe it's not worth trying any more. Maybe we all need a time-out.

[Wirestone]

Calling for a better board, as Andrew is doing, should be encouraged.

I'm sorry if Billy and GF feel slighted, but raking AGD over the coals is exactly the wrong thing to do right now.

[guitarfool2002]

Is calling people liars and accusing the mods here of improper conduct based on something other than the truth part of that strive for accuracy?

You claim the messages didn't exist or were not sent. All three mods have them and discussed them in detail, again according to board rules.

You claim the mods did or didn't do certain things suggesting misconduct or worse. All the discussions and the messages in question are available and archived.

You're suggesting some infractions by the mods of the board rules regarding the PM reporting process. The discussions we had will show that those rules were followed as written.

You claim people here are liars and worse when the things you claim are being lied about actually happened and do exist.

Who is lying?

[guitarfool2002]

Calling for a better board, as Andrew is doing, should be encouraged.

I'm sorry if Billy and GF feel slighted, but raking AGD over the coals is exactly the wrong thing to do right now.

But it's OK to rake me and others over the coals based on lies? Let me know.

[guitarfool2002]

Part of making the board a better place involves being truthful, especially in member-to-member interactions. Everyone who wants a better board, consider we can at any time go over exactly what happened in the issues being discussed here. And the truth is not what was presented and repeated by others who were not even involved.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Is calling people liars and accusing the mods here of improper conduct based on something other than the truth part of that strive for accuracy?

You claim the messages didn't exist or were not sent. All three mods have them and discussed them in detail, again according to board rules.

You claim the mods did or didn't do certain things suggesting misconduct or worse. All the discussions and the messages in question are available and archived.

You're suggesting some infractions by the mods of the board rules regarding the PM reporting process. The discussions we had will show that those rules were followed as written.

You claim people here are liars and worse when the things you claim are being lied about actually happened and do exist.

Who is lying?

Again, the messages I say I didn't send were not the ones you mentioned but the "tons and tons" claimed by Smile Brian. This is the second time I've clarified this. I cannot phrase this more simply, or clearly.

Also, why are you studiously ignoring my request for clarification concerning the contradiction between what you say, and what the rule you quoted states about the mods being able to read PMs in certain circumstances ? How hard is it to say "the rule is outmoded" ?

Since we're talking lies... OSD stated in a post he swiftly deleted (but with TRBB happily screenshotted - see post #116) that I and others are being covertly paid by Mike. That's a lie.

Smile Brian, in post #117, accused me of altering the image of the screenshot. That's a lie. In post #143, he accused me of sending the tons and tons of emails to maintain my (non-existant) control of this forum. That's a lie, if only because he can't know how many I sent or what they contained. It's actually a lie because I didn't send tons of emails. I don't have the time or, truly, the inclination.

All I, and several others, have suggested in this thread is that the mods have, of late, been notably inactive and seemingly allowed the current nonsense to escalate to the current level.

But, as I stated this morning, this is all truly pitiful nonsense in the light of what others in the world, and in particular a good friend, are going through right now. Outside of this forum, and I suspect within it to a degree, NO-ONE CARES. To paraphrase the old Super Bowl joke, 300,000,000 music fans couldn't give a sh*t. Outside of this forum, we - you, I, everyone posting - don't matter. This is not real life. Not even close. People matter, not egos, not who's got the biggest collection or the best contacts. I've met some wonderful people through The Beach Boys, made lasting friendships, heard the best pop music the world can afford. That's enough for me. The rest is all frippery.

[guitarfool2002]

That wasn't my question. You say the mods cannot read the PMs. The rule you quoted clearly states that in certain circumstances, they can. All I asked was for clarification. If the rule is wrong, or outmoded, it needs rewriting.

The PMs I said don't exist are the "tons and tons of PMs" SB alleges I sent "to maintain (my) control and push (my) agenda", not the two reported you cite that date from February & April. Two. Hardly the deluge claimed. Control ? If I had any such influence, this thread wouldn't exist, for reasons I need not explain. Agenda ? Everyone's got one. Mine's accuracy in reporting the history of this band we love as no other, with a side of trying to restore this place to its former glory. That's all. Maybe it's not worth trying any more. Maybe we all need a time-out.

The mods cannot directly access any member's private messages. If a member receives a private message that falls under the category of the board rules, whether it's inappropriate, offensive, unwelcome, etc - the rules of the board encourage that member to contact a mod and report the message. After that, the member, in reporting the message, can forward the message(s) to the mods to be reviewed and discussed. That is and has been the process outlined in the welcome page of the forum.

To clarify again: There is nothing in the board's design that allows the moderators to directly access incoming or outgoing private messages of any board member from their accounts. If there is a reported message, the only way the mods will see it is if and when it can be forwarded to the mods. That's according to board rules.

All of those rules are and were strictly followed.

[SMiLE Brian]

Andrew, they are not emails they are PMs. Many know firsthand of threatening PMs for going against your AGD-enda.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Long day at work, I used the wrong terminology. Elsewhere I've correctly said "PMs". Fact remains, I didn't send "tons and tons". Of anything. And now, I have a life to live, mundane as it might be.

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

Speaking of PM's...

[The Shift]

Andrew's correct here - there is a direct conflict in what Charles' original rule sets out and what Craig and Billy have subsequently explained. Charles said, under the quoted rule 5:

Anyone who becomes a cause for concern due to rude or abusive behavior may have their accounts temporarily frozen and their private and public messages examined to see what final actions should be taken.

Can I suggest that this rule be rewritten to clarify the fact that only those PMs forwarded by complainants can, and will, be examined by the mods. This, to avoid any future misunderstandings.

As for "tons and tons" of PMs, I'm asking myself exactly how many PMs add up to even one ton, and why hasn't the Internet collapsed under all that weight!

[Wirestone]

No one -- until GF brought it up -- was talking about private messages sent many months ago. And for the record, I've said some mean things to and about AGD and never received an iota of condemnation from him privately.

But then, I also don't go out of my way to troll others on the board, either.

The fact remains, this place could be better than it is, and AGD isn't a moderator. Billy and GF are. Saying so and advocating for an improvement in the situation should be complimented and not torn down. It's amusing when it's autotune, not so much when it's an actual person.

[Peter Reum]

This thread has some disturbing posts that detract from a civilized exchange of ideas. Terming the musicians who play in Mike's band as Mike's whores is disrespectful in and of itself. The men who play for either Brian or Mike's bands are people who love BEACH BOYS music. The ongoing gotcha attitudes of board members who like one band or the other, in essence  "counting coup" on people who have differing ideas for the sake of f*cking up a thread is simply bad manners. If this behavioral pattern of posting is continued,it is disrespectful of all Beach Boys. Say whatever you like,but say it in a manner that is respectful of everyone's feelings. When I managed a home with mentally ill teenagers, our central rule was The Thumper Theorem...

it applies here just as well

[Cyncie]

This thread has some disturbing posts that detract from a civilized exchange of ideas. Terming the musicians who play in Mike's band as Mike's whores is disrespectful in and of itself. The men who play for either Brian or Mike's bands are people who love BEACH BOYS music. The ongoing gotcha attitudes of board members who like one band or the other, in essence  "counting coup" on people who have differing ideas for the sake of f*cking up a thread is simply bad manners. If this behavioral pattern of posting is continued,it is disrespectful of all Beach Boys. Say whatever you like,but say it in a manner that is respectful of everyone's feelings. When I managed a home with mentally ill teenagers, our central rule was The Thumper Theorem...

it applies here just as well

What Peter says. One of the things that keeps me from posting more here is the level of snark even an opinion can elicit from those who "know better." It just seems we all need to show a little more respect… to the band and to each other.

LOL@Thumper Therorem…..

[Debbie KL]

Could I point out (my first post on this thread, so no need to search) that it's a family weekend in the US from today through Sunday (Thanksgiving today), and that 2 of the 3 mods are from the US?  Maybe this could be given a rest until the mods can actually have a life and be with their families?  Not everyone has 24/7 to devote to SS (thank heavens), and the mods are volunteers who have to review all this and respond to all of you, on top of other threads, including the equally insane world of the Sandbox.  And NONE OF US knows what goes on behind the scenes that they also have to address. 

Maybe our "thanksgiving" should be to appreciate these volunteers enough to let them (and those involved in whatever the apparent argument is) time to respond?  Nothing in the drama of this board is a matter of life or death.  And we might want to remind ourselves that we don't know what goes on behind the scenes, period.  Unless and until we know the whole story, we're not equipped to comment, really.

[Emdeeh]

Agreed, Debbie. Thanks to the mods and to the experts here.

[GhostyTMRS]

No one -- until GF brought it up -- was talking about private messages sent many months ago. And for the record, I've said some mean things to and about AGD and never received an iota of condemnation from him privately.

But then, I also don't go out of my way to troll others on the board, either.

The fact remains, this place could be better than it is, and AGD isn't a moderator. Billy and GF are. Saying so and advocating for an improvement in the situation should be complimented and not torn down. It's amusing when it's autotune, not so much when it's an actual person.

When I first joined the board, I was pretty enthusiastic and posting left and right about a variety of topics. Unfortunately, the overall tone of the board has become more toxic as the years go on, mainly because of trolling and/or people derailing the discussions in threads to bring up their own personal obsessions over and over and over again. I sometimes wonder "Do any of these repeat offenders even OWN any Beach Boys albums?? Do they have zero interest in Brian's music and just come here to disrupt every thread in some kind of religious fervor?".  It got to the point where the toxicity of the board started to negatively impact my enjoyment of the music (silly, I know). As a result, I stayed away for a while and only then could listen to the Beach Boys with peace of mind. It's a sad state of affairs when someone asks me where they can learn about Brian's music and The Beach Boys and I have to either a) tell them about this place but warn them that they'll have to wade through page after page of imaginary personal vendettas and insults to find something useful or (more often) b) point them somewhere else like the excellent Beachboys.com. While I know that ALL message boards have their share of trolls and malcontents, I would've thought fans of Brian's music would have a little more class and wouldn't be so hateful and disrespectful to the band and each other. 

While it would be impossible for the moderators to police every single thread 24/7, I have seen other boards where mods check in and type something like "stay on topic please" (I'm thinking of the New York Radio Message Board for example). Perhaps that could be a start in the right direction.

Anyway, my two cents. Desper articulated it much better than I could.

[adamghost]

I also agree with Desper.

I don't hang out here as much as I once did.  I do feel there are times there have been mods who step in unnecessarily and forcefully to steer (sometimes bordering on squelch) conversation that goes in a non-preferred direction, and other times when a mod stepping in might have been helpful and things are allowed to really get out of control.  But having said that, it's not a job I would want.  Knowing that this is a sensitive topic (perhaps, again, too much so) it shouldn't be taken as more than constructive criticism.  But I know that has contributed to me not posting very much; there are times I've definitely felt -- well, like I didn't want to post here.  Let's leave it at that.

As for the posters on the board, sure, it's fun to take on distant rock stars' lives as avatars for our own beliefs, value systems, musical tastes, and things we would like to represent us and who we are.  We've all done it.  But there comes a point where you kind of have to step back and take a look at your own life.  To demonize anyone that you don't personally know and who has done nothing to you other than possibly offend your taste, or embarrass your own vision of what you think "your" rock band should be like (which is quite a different concern from that of someone for whom it is their livelihood), is really silly.  Asinine, really.  Shutting down all criticism is equally asinine, too.  It doesn't make for a good community.  A community cannot thrive without a petri dish where people can grow their thoughts safely and form bonds without feeling like they have to defend them.

Where I am right now, there's no Thanksgiving, but there sure are a lot of impoverished people who, because of the hardships in their lives and their need to rely on each other to get through each day, teach me to live better by their inspiration of hope and acceptance.  What is the Beach Boys' legacy?  Group squabbling?  Sure -- but none of the members wanted that.  It's just the inevitable outcome of very different personalities being forced to live in each others' worlds for a lifetime.  What every member strives for, and wants the band's legacy to be, is of positivity and personal connection.  So if this is really your favorite band, do you want to dwell on the worst aspects of each member and of the band's history, and make that the drama you play into -- or their best aspirations for themselves, and for you, the listener?  Drama is an intoxicating drug.  If you inject it, it will take you over and make you its master, and poison the well that surrounds you.  There are better choices to be made, and those choices will naturally draw in the positivity that everybody says they want to see here.  If it really is that important to you to defend your personal investment in a rock band, maybe it's time to broaden one's horizons?  For one's own sake?  

I'm rambling.  Much love to all from Southeast Asia.  Billy Hinsche's cousin, who drives for me sometimes when I'm here, asked me to bring him a Beach Boys CD from the U.S. once because it was beyond his ability to get one.  I did, and he listened to it in the car, and was happy and proud.  Something to reflect on.

[Custom Machine]

I don’t get it. I thought the issue we were discussing and so many of us are asking the mods for help with is the fact that we have a couple of members who are constantly posting stuff all over the board, whenever Mike Love is mentioned, that contributes nothing to the discussion at hand, but instead falls under the definition of trolling.

But then Guitarfool posts something about a couple of PMs from months ago. I don’t know what that’s all about, and at this point I really don’t care. I’m just one of many who would like some relief from the trollish pollution that is seriously damaging the integrity of this board.

It’s the lack of moderator action in that regard that has so many of us frustrated. If the “old” poster (who’s probably around my age, btw) doesn’t like Mike Love, that fine, but if so, express your opinion like an adult, with logical reasoning, rather than constantly clogging up the board with name calling, insults, and tons of “woots” just about every time Mike Love is mentioned. Constant posts in that regard are nothing but trolling.

I also agree that the board rules posted by Charles LePage 10 years ago concerning the moderators access to PMs (which are officially referred to as “Personal Messages” on the mailbox page) and the info posted by Craig are contradictory and should be rewritten to reflect the current reality.

[Mike's Beard]

I don’t get it. I thought the issue we were discussing and so many of us are asking the mods for help with is the fact that we have a couple of members who are constantly posting stuff all over the board, whenever Mike Love is mentioned, that contributes nothing to the discussion at hand, but instead falls under the definition of trolling.

But then Guitarfool posts something about a couple of PMs from months ago. I don’t know what that’s all about, and at this point I really don’t care. I’m just one of many who would like some relief from the trollish pollution that is seriously damaging the integrity of this board.

Add me to the list of people that fail to see the link between posters asking that OSD be banned and two PMs AGD sent at the beginning of the year being reported. Smells like a diversion tactic to me.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I'm probably misremembering that this forum used to have an "ignore" button, but I've been on one that did, and while using it made for a somewhat fractured reading experience (and as I seem to recall, you could still see the ignored posts if someone quoted them... I think), it would be a most useful function here. Saying "if you don't like someone's posts, don't read them" is easy enough if there's, say, a thread by Horatio Q. Birdbath entitled "Doodles is an asshole and a drunk", but not all such posts are signposted. There's a degree of threadjacking* involved. I'm down with the Thumper Theorem that Peter espouses. The Desper Dictum too.

[* I may copyright this term]

[Alan Smith]

I don’t get it. I thought the issue we were discussing and so many of us are asking the mods for help with is the fact that we have a couple of members who are constantly posting stuff all over the board, whenever Mike Love is mentioned, that contributes nothing to the discussion at hand, but instead falls under the definition of trolling.

But then Guitarfool posts something about a couple of PMs from months ago. I don’t know what that’s all about, and at this point I really don’t care. I’m just one of many who would like some relief from the trollish pollution that is seriously damaging the integrity of this board.

It’s the lack of moderator action in that regard that has so many of us frustrated. If the “old” poster (who’s probably around my age, btw) doesn’t like Mike Love, that fine, but if so, express your opinion like an adult, with logical reasoning, rather than constantly clogging up the board with name calling, insults, and tons of “woots” just about every time Mike Love is mentioned. Constant posts in that regard are nothing but trolling.

I also agree that the board rules posted by Charles LePage 10 years ago concerning the moderators access to PMs (which are officially referred to as “Personal Messages” on the mailbox page) and the info posted by Craig are contradictory and should be rewritten to reflect the current reality.

+1