Goodbye, SmileySmile

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Really, though. This is not a new problem. I read this board for a long time before I ever created an account, and my impression of it, even before the current trolling, was that it was awfully confrontational for a fan board about this particular band. I was foolish enough to think that established fans would be eager to share with newer fans or would enjoy conversing with them about their interest in this band's history, but any time someone new posted an opinion or asked a question, they were inundated with snarky comments from people who "knew more,: or they were caustically instructed to use the search feature.  I decided to take the plunge with C50 because, I figured, that put us all on more or less equal footing, discussion wise; but I've been careful about what kinds of things I post. I only share my opinions of the classic music in a general sense, since anything else gets shot down; and I stick to news, interviews and recent releases.

It's a shame, really. Brian wants his music to project love into the world. But, on his biggest fan board, that's certainly not happening. And, it hasn't been since I first discovered the place.

Wow, it really is crazy how much more common my experience was then I thought. I really thought I was alone in feeling so unwelcome, and only coming around here and there because of the drama. Agreed too on the irony that many of the older fans dont seem too interested in passing on knowledge or hearing the new interpretations of the younger fans. Of course, the only two people who personally gave me grief for that have been banned so...yay?

Between this board, youtube, the bloo and various blogs, I've noticed that some fans feel the need to fight various members ongoing disputes for them. Really, it has f*** ALL to do with any of us. Posters should give opinions on stuff by all means but they should leave this imagined 'personal connection' they have to band member X at the door and quit getting offended if someone see things in a different light to them. If they did, that would be 90% of the arguing gone.

That, and people offering legit criticism (Hey, I noticed Mikes never expressed regret for anything/I dont like NPP) is misinterpreted as part of the infighting, so you get called a hater and flamed for it. Ironically, its this over the top response that turns people against whatever camp attacked them for expressing a real, balanced opinion and forces you into the other side by default. At least, thats whats happened to me with Mike Love.

Y'know, after this thread, I did some digging into rab's history to see if some big event Id missed had come up to make him leave. I came across the thread Mike's Band, apparently renamed from Mikes Whore Band or Mikes Band of Whores. I did something Im not proud of and wasted time reading thru the entire thing. I think, as ugly as that thread was, that it was totally necessary. I think it got a lot of repressed anger and frustration of most of those involved out into the open for better or worse. I was sad to see it ended so abruptly with so much undone about the very understandable demands of many of the participants. Im not familiar enough with OSD and SB to add my voice to those calling for their banning, but when you have a dozen or so members calling for the banning of one, two specific people then that to me seems significant. That's enough to warrant at least a reaction from the mods, if not banning then acknowledging the frustration and doing SOMETHING about it. I realize the thread is like 10 days old now, maybe something has been done that Im unaware of, w/e. But it was frustrating for me the misdirection and throwing the burden on us users to do something about trolling when IMO (and apparently that of many others) that job should land squarely on the mods. Im not trying to stir sh*t up again, or throw blame around on any particular mod, but the fact is we lost a valuable poster here now, largely due to those issues that were never resolved (as far as I can see) from back then. So...what's it gonna take? When is enough enough? I thought I was the only one who refrained from posting here on a regular basis because of the annoying cliques and bullshit. But going on that thread, it appears that my story is actually a fairly common one. I wont play backseat driver and say OSD should be banned, or this or that action should have been taken about him or anyone else personally, but I WILL say that that thread never should've been locked, nor this one moved to the sandbox. Yes, that original thread was TOXIC all around, but it was necessary to address all the bullshit thats been going on. I think the posters were pretty united in what they wanted--removal of certain troublemaking people and more active moderation--and they were silenced. It came to light that there are people afraid of speaking their minds for fear of being banned, which should never be the case. I think rab's thread, while perhaps melodramatic, was another opportunity for some of the issues with this board to be recognized and addressed and now that its been dumped on this less viewed side forum that wont happen.

I very well may be out of the loop. Maybe everyone's issues have been placated in the interrim, maybe theres another thread Im missing where such grievances are being aired again and discussed with the mods, but in any case I hope SOMETHING to that effect is happening. Its pretty undeniable this forum has suffered lately--Ive seen it myself firsthand as a newbie and can only imagine how those longtime posters feel. When I raised some of my grievances before about feeling bullied I was told "this is a big boys place, if you cant handle it leave" (obviously Im paraphrasing) but it seems like there's something to be said for more active moderation, or again, an Ignore button. I see the issue has its own thread here, and others shared my desire for one in that Mikes Band thread. I think its a great idea, and whoever we have to talk about that (the site's owner apparently?) we should. It really would solve a lot of problems, and wouldnt require the mods to take a more active hand which they seem unwilling to do.

If you divide 10 members into the entire membership, it's an incredible minority. Just sayin'.

Still the first time Ive seen 10 (and I believe it was more than that, for what its worth) people on a single thread agree on something around here. Im not saying I agree with them that you should be banned necessarily--I have no beef with you personally and havent been here long enough to say who's to blame for a lot of the infighting--but I do think the mods reaction to deflect the conversation and then lock the thread was wrong. The conversation taking place there was one that needed to happen and one I personally have been hoping would happen since I got here. Its important for people to be able to air their grievances and its obvious to everyone theres a lot of hurt feelings here--evidenced if nothing else by Rab leaving.

Well, when some believe that there is a plot to replace board leadership with "pro-Mike" people (seriously; I've never read a more retarded strawman in my life) maybe the best way to deal with it is to let people call out bullshit for what it is, point out the elephant in the room, and let it all fizzle out. I still don't think rab should have left for good as I value many of his posts; so do many others here. But hey, that's his life and his decision. The thread should have either been locked or moved to the Sandbox to continue to its natural end, which certainly would have come.

I do think both sides of the pro-Brian/Mike camps make valid points but also become annoying when the same points are made ad nauseam to the derailment of just about every thread. I don't think it's an issue that can really be solved by moderators without enacting policies that will actively police the content of messages, even if the content does not include stuff that wouldn't pass the Miller test. There should be free exchange of ideas as long as the board isn't constantly disrupted by it. However, a thicker skin is also going to be required on the part of ALL members on here. Don't like someone's opinion? That's life. We're not going to agree on everything; calling for people to be banned based on differences of opinion reeks of the special snowflake desire for a "safe space;" this is the real world and those people need to grow up and fast. If they're going to get that ruffled over what someone on the internet says, well, let's just hope for the best for them otherwise because they'll have a lot of trouble in life.

Exactly. Theres obviously a lot of bad blood thats been boiling for a long time. It was really refreshing to see it brought to the forefront for once. Id always felt like a lone malcontent bringing it up before and knowing I havent been alone feeling the way I do was revelatory. Moved to the Sandbox is fair but I think it was definitely wrong to lock it. It feels like shutting up the community about legit and ungoing issues rather than letting things come to their end as you say.

Absolutely. Whats frustrating is the tribalism in the first place; where if you dare to criticize Mike youre a hater who doesnt respect ANYTHING hes contributed and vice versa for Brian. I also think theres something to be said about people who add nothing to a conversation but derisive quips or ridiculous, baseless theories (like the whole asinine Mike secretly wrote Vega-Tables thing I still cant understand the logic for). I think it can be stopped very easily if certain repeat offenders were warned and banned if they dont comply. Theres no need to be thought police (you dont like NPP/You think Mike contributed to SMiLE's demise? BAN!) but rather looking at people's aggregate contribution and determining "does this person actually make good points or do they just start fights and post intentionally inflammatory one sentence quips?" The problem is the forum IS undeniably disrupted by the whole thing. As stated in the older thread, posters have left. We just lost another here. Every other thread devolves into the same arguments, largely fought by the same people and that absolutely devolves the overall quality of discussion. I agree having a thick skin to dissenting opinions is required for the internet in general, but thats not what Im complaining about. Its people trolling the entire board with impunity, as well as an overall combative attitude of at least half if not more of the people here, largely due to the ingrained camps that have been allowed to form. Not only that, but people just looking to pick fights in general like Kitkat and Mikie and carrying them over the course of many threads, to where its literal harassment. I remember being completely baffled that those two in particular were allowed to talk to people like they did with seemingly no one calling them out or telling them that behavior wouldnt be tolerated (tho to be fair, its possible that was done thru PMs). Im not advocating for some Yale-esque safe space, just a functional one.

[RangeRoverA1]

-The first line of my post indicates that I'm agreeing with DonnyL. Sorry you missed that.
-I didn't call anyone a jerk, but I did say they come across as jerks, which is not the same. I actually think that some of the people who come across as jerks in these squabbles seem very nice, or funny, or helpful, or thoughtful, or informative, or insightful, etc. at other times, so I should not have said "complete jerks."
-That my post was a bit too aggressive, I accept. I will try better to keep cool. I know it's important. And I felt a little sorry for this post earlier. I lost my temper.
-But, as this thread is about the tone of the board, I don't feel it was out of line for me to talk about the tone of the board, which I find often to be rude, overly blunt and overly aggressive.

Aye, I did miss it.
Agree with your 2nd point, nobody is goody-good & nobody's bad thru & thru. Glad you admit your fault. However, I don't still think you had any right to say that some of us "have zero self-awareness". It is condescending & bordering on psychology of human character. I mean you don't know these people enough, you can't read their mind why they wrote what they wrote. Just clarifying some things. No harm intended.
3rd, sure, you aren't initiator but you & some others seem to dismiss what the people who don't agree with rab2591 say. I don't even know why people keep on going supporting him leaving niceties here. rab2591 CLEARLY said that he doesn't care if this thread gets any replies & that he won't answer, he signed off just as he finished typing the original post. Weird lot.
   See, what I tried to say but maybe needs repeating is that he posted this thread originally in the main board - place to talk about the BEACH BOYS, obviously. and he's a mere poster, no connection to the band, he's just a fan. So, one's decision to leave the place has exactly what to do with the BBs? I don't agree with you, Mujan & with Micha that the thread shouldn't be moved to the Sandbox. If people want to discuss the issues with the board & address them, there is the "Welcome to the Smiley Smile board" subforum. There is a thread called "Ask the moderators". Everyone can go & post there. But posters, for some reason, seem to be fixated on the "General on topic" section. I thought people finding new board, would be curious enough to dig every corner, every feature & function of it. Not just be focused on few things. There are 8 sub-forums & rarely do people notice it which is baffling, frankly. By doing research on the board as a newbie, I found the "Who's online" feature that allows to monitor what other posters/guests read. It's not against the rules so I do it. It's not like those features are hidden, you just click on things & they open.
   Regarding what Cyncie said, I agree that this board had not been kind to newbies but when you get used to it it doesn't seem as offensive. F.ex. as a newbie, I was told not to revive old threads & it happens even now, iir. I did feel kind of unwelcome because of that. for a short time, then immediately got back to my overjoyed mood because of getting to talk with Americans (I'm from Russia). I just love this country, esp. California. Limeys are good too, some nice British folks here & other nation fans. Maybe I'm too optimistic but I don't see what's the big deal about the board's bad environment is.

[Emily]

-The first line of my post indicates that I'm agreeing with DonnyL. Sorry you missed that.
-I didn't call anyone a jerk, but I did say they come across as jerks, which is not the same. I actually think that some of the people who come across as jerks in these squabbles seem very nice, or funny, or helpful, or thoughtful, or informative, or insightful, etc. at other times, so I should not have said "complete jerks."
-That my post was a bit too aggressive, I accept. I will try better to keep cool. I know it's important. And I felt a little sorry for this post earlier. I lost my temper.
-But, as this thread is about the tone of the board, I don't feel it was out of line for me to talk about the tone of the board, which I find often to be rude, overly blunt and overly aggressive.

Aye, I did miss it.
Agree with your 2nd point, nobody is goody-good & nobody's bad thru & thru. Glad you admit your fault. However, I don't still think you had any right to say that some of us "have zero self-awareness". It is condescending & bordering on psychology of human character. I mean you don't know these people enough, you can't read their mind why they wrote what they wrote. Just clarifying some things. No harm intended.
3rd, sure, you aren't initiator but you & some others seem to dismiss what the people who don't agree with rab2591 say. I don't even know why people keep on going supporting him leaving niceties here. rab2591 CLEARLY said that he doesn't care if this thread gets any replies & that he won't answer, he signed off just as he finished typing the original post. Weird lot.
   See, what I tried to say but maybe needs repeating is that he posted this thread originally in the main board - place to talk about the BEACH BOYS, obviously. and he's a mere poster, no connection to the band, he's just a fan. So, one's decision to leave the place has exactly what to do with the BBs? I don't agree with you, Mujan & with Micha that the thread shouldn't be moved to the Sandbox. If people want to discuss the issues with the board & address them, there is the "Welcome to the Smiley Smile board" subforum. There is a thread called "Ask the moderators". Everyone can go & post there. But posters, for some reason, seem to be fixated on the "General on topic" section. I thought people finding new board, would be curious enough to dig every corner, every feature & function of it. Not just be focused on few things. There are 8 sub-forums & rarely do people notice it which is baffling, frankly. By doing research on the board as a newbie, I found the "Who's online" feature that allows to monitor what other posters/guests read. It's not against the rules so I do it. It's not like those features are hidden, you just click on things & they open.
   Regarding what Cyncie said, I agree that this board had not been kind to newbies but when you get used to it it doesn't seem as offensive. F.ex. as a newbie, I was told not to revive old threads & it happens even now, iir. I did feel kind of unwelcome because of that. for a short time, then immediately got back to my overjoyed mood because of getting to talk with Americans (I'm from Russia). I just love this country, esp. California. Limeys are good too, some nice British folks here & other nation fans. Maybe I'm too optimistic but I don't see what's the big deal about the board's bad environment is.

You know, when I read your post yesterday I realized that this is like a conga line of exasperation. You're exasperated with me and some others, so you're telling me off. I became exasperated with the Mike's Band thread, so I told people off. Some people on that thread were exasperated with each other so they told each other off. On and on.
The best way to end it is to follow my own advice and cut it out. Which I will do right now.

[RangeRoverA1]

Yes, we aren't going to agree, everybody sticks to their line of thinking. But I think it would be right to say that the best thing to deal with bad environment/trolls is be apathetic. It isn't our business that rab2591 made up his mind, we can't change it. I think some people will agree with me, you too.
And no, you read it wrong. I was by no means exasperated by what your post stated. Merely said that self-awareness is offensive thing to say. Mere disagreement.

[Andrew G. Doe]

But I think it would be right to say that the best thing to deal with bad environment/trolls is be apathetic.

I think many, if not most, reasonable posters here would disagree with that. Apathy, or a very reasonable facsimile thereof, has ruled here for a good few months, and the result is the current situation. My feeling, and that of over a dozen others (which is a modest yet substantial percentage of the active posters) it that this forum would strongly benefit from some firm (not aggressive - with Clay on that, we don't want Gorts here) moderating which addressed the concerns raised in the Mike's Band thread - which I agree was locked with unseemly haste for no plausible reason beyond sheer, and understandable, exasperation. Andrew Hickey's anti-troll script, speaking personally, has transformed my experience of this board almost at a stroke (try it) into something much more agreeable. I just have to keep remembering it doesn't work on my cell phone.  

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

But I think it would be right to say that the best thing to deal with bad environment/trolls is be apathetic.

I think many, if not most, reasonable posters here would disagree with that. Apathy, or a very reasonable facsimile thereof, has ruled here for a good few months, and the result is the current situation. My feeling, and that of over a dozen others (which is a modest yet substantial percentage of the active posters) it that this forum would strongly benefit from some firm (not aggressive - with Clay on that, we don't want Gorts here) moderating which addressed the concerns raised in the Mike's Band thread - which I agree was locked with unseemly haste for no plausible reason beyond sheer, and understandable, exasperation. Andrew Hickey's anti-troll script, speaking personally, has transformed my experience of this board almost at a stroke (try it) into something much more agreeable. I just have to keep remembering it doesn't work on my cell phone.  

Exactly. I just dislike how each time issues of trolling or harassment are raised, its always thrown back at us "oh well what kinda board do you want, one where no one can speak their minds?" No obviously not. But one where trolls and obviously bullying posters are told "Youve been warned; cut the sh*t or you're out" would be nice.

[bluesno1fann]

I would have to agree that this place has become very negative and unpleasant; in fact that's why I hardly ever come here anymore. I must admit however, that when I was active around here I did post far too much, and a large bulk of that was inanely moronic. So a large part of the hostility I received was justified in hindsight - but much of it did go way too far though. There was also a crippling lack of action towards much of that, which left me quite bitter, and gradually I just stopped coming here. It seems that things have only gotten worse around here, which is truly a shame, because this place at its best is absolutely exhilarating to say the least. But I can fully understand the OP's point of view on how this place has become lately.

[The Shift]

Glad I've revisited this thread. It's a far more level-headed discussion of the issues than is happening in the "Mike's Band" thread.  Mujan, you're talking a lot of sense… that thread was shut down too early, but it's resurrection overnight is shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted and resulting in, to my eyes, an even more vitriolic discussion that before.

Andrew Hickey's RoboMod button is a great invention (though I won't be using it as I tend to view the board on my phone) but should it have been necessary?

I appreciate (having run a message board which had it own miscreants) the fact that the mods have their own lives to lead and their own real life issues to get through; they cannot be here all the time, and they have to judge those issues they are able to react to on an individual basis; I also accept that, as the mods are, like the rest of us, mere humans, it's nigh-on impossible to perform that task in an objective way, and personal preferences will always intrude and influence. Being a mod is a thankless task – a lot of the time it seems that whatever you do is viewed as the wrong action by someone.

I regarded the position of mod as being a bit like that of a guy being elected to referee a soccer match between friends. If he applies a fair approach to all players, no problem and he's respected for it. But if he red or yellow cards others some for fouling while letting friends on the other team get away with similar fouls, then where's the respect going to come from? Only someone with genuine malice in mind is going to hold a fair and level approach against him, and that's no real friend. By the same token, the friend who's allowed to get away with fouls will seize on that advantage and get away with more and more indiscretions/fouls, at the same time having less and less respect for his "buddy", though he's not going to lose his advantage by letting anyone know that. Fair refereeing would result in the ref being bought drinks by all parties, not just his fouling "buddies".

I still wake in the night troubled by the havoc that insensitive people used to wreak on my old (non-BBs) board, and it's 18 months since I handed that board over to others. I had to give a virtual slap-of-the-wrist to several posters who were friends in the real world, and had been long before I took on the board. As I was sat at a screen at the time I couldn't gauge their reactions and I'd stress out for ages afterwards, though I don't think I misjudged things too badly and still enjoy a round with them all when we meet up.

[Micha]

Theres no need to be thought police (you dont like NPP/You think Mike contributed to SMiLE's demise? BAN!) but rather looking at people's aggregate contribution and determining "does this person actually make good points or do they just start fights and post intentionally inflammatory one sentence quips?"

That's just the thing. Can't put it any better than that.

To pick up the "You think Mike contributed to SMiLE's demise? BAN!" subject, the only one who always claims Mike was totally cooperative during the SMiLE sessions is Cam, but if you disagree with him, he doesn't get rude or start conspiracy theories, just the way it should be. I want to be able to criticize and praise all band members where I feel adequate. Unfortunately, not all posters take such criticism or praise level-headedly, and unfortunately, this board isn't the only online place where things like that happen at all.

In this sandbox I had a conversation with filledeplage about gun restriction, and though we had completely 180 degree point of views, the conversation kept civil. None of us convinced the other, either, but no bad feelings seem to have been produced. (Taps own shoulder )

[Andrew G. Doe]

For those who might be wondering (both of you...), I'm laying back out of the resurrected "Mike's Band" thread, partly because I'm laughing too much to type properly, partly because someone doesn't need any further help in digging a deeper hole than they're already in. But mostly because I'm not dumb enough to rise to the obvious bait.

Should Billy or Klass be dropping by, my formula for World Peace & candy bars is...

1 - completely re-write the rules, in collaboration with the rest of the board: as they stand, some are a bit vague. The duties and responsibilities of a mod are similarly codified. Trolling is defined.

2 - the rules being approved by the board, a general amnesty is declared so that everyone starts afresh with a level playing field. All probations are wiped out, those currently banned are invited back.

3 - the clock is reset to midnight, and we start afresh. Board rules are applied stringently, but fairly. No mod can act in isolation.

4 - in line with the fresh start an election for fresh mods: the existing mods can put their names forward, of course.

Not going to happen, but a man can dream...

[The Shift]

Cripes, an election for mods? Now there's a fresh battle zone…

Please no!

[Emily]

Cripes, an election for mods? Now there's a fresh battle zone…

Please no!

Yeah I really like the first 3 suggestions though.

[The Shift]

All probations are wiped out…

Given the recent intelligence revelation in the Mike's Band thread, I can see your line of thinking there…

…  those currently banned are invited back.

Cripes, night of the living dead! I'd need to see a list of those in line for resurrection before I signed up for that. 'Cept Mikie. But only if he wants to come back…


Anyone else feel like chiming in?

[Andrew G. Doe]

Cripes, an election for mods? Now there's a fresh battle zone…

Please no!

To badly misquote the sainted Gertrude, clean sheet is a clean sheet is a clean sheet.  

[guitarfool2002]

The mods do not act in isolation when decisions are made as has been explained many times on the board, whoever is on board at the time discusses everything involved before a decision is made, and at least two mods are always involved depending on who is available. The only time a singular decision happened recently was when a mod moved this thread to the Sandbox and failed to inform the other mods. I don't know who did that.

Some posters have lifetime bans and no matter what happens, will never be allowed back.

We'll first get to work on enforcing existing rules so they apply evenly across the board to all members, then maybe pull out the quill pen and parchment to add to what's already there.

Should these "duties" of a mod be subject to the demands of self-important posters with a bloated sense of authority and influence over this community and its membership? Just to clarify...

[guitarfool2002]

All probations are wiped out…

Given the recent intelligence revelation in the Mike's Band thread, I can see your line of thinking there…

…  those currently banned are invited back.

Cripes, night of the living dead! I'd need to see a list of those in line for resurrection before I signed up for that. 'Cept Mikie. But only if he wants to come back…


Anyone else feel like chiming in?

Sure.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Some posters have lifetime bans and no matter what happens, will never be allowed back.

Agreed. I'm in the process of looking over every single life time ban, and have yet to see one that is going to be overturned.

[guitarfool2002]

Some posters have lifetime bans and no matter what happens, will never be allowed back.

Agreed. I'm in the process of looking over every single life time ban, and have yet to see one that is going to be overturned.

My thoughts exactly.

[guitarfool2002]

Again, on the mods acting in isolation point: This has not been the case leading up to this week, and decisions are made in agreement with at least two mods.

So to clarify again, whatever misunderstandings or lies are being used to say otherwise, none of the decisions such as bans, enforcement of rules, etc was made by a mod acting alone.

Perhaps it's time to say stop suggesting or claiming otherwise, those who are doing it, because it's not true and has not been true at least since I have been here. Any decision made was done in agreement with another mod. All of them.

Someone claimed mods were "bullied" into making a decision. This is not only untrue, it's absurd. Maybe under previous moderators this happened, but not since I have been a mod has another mod been bullied. End of story.

[Cam Mott]

I mostly agree with you Mujan about this thread except for... "baseless theories (like the whole asinine Mike secretly wrote Vega-Tables thing I still cant understand the logic for)".  In spite of your inaccurate and condescending language I'll let it pass for board peace.  Back to mostly agreeing.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

I mostly agree with you Mujan about this thread except for... "baseless theories (like the whole asinine Mike secretly wrote Vega-Tables thing I still cant understand the logic for)".  In spite of your inaccurate and condescending language I'll let it pass for board peace.  Back to mostly agreeing.

Oh was that you Haha, my bad man. I just remembered someone saying that and it getting under my skin. But yeah, lets just forget it

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

For those who might be wondering (both of you...), I'm laying back out of the resurrected "Mike's Band" thread, partly because I'm laughing too much to type properly, partly because someone doesn't need any further help in digging a deeper hole than they're already in. But mostly because I'm not dumb enough to rise to the obvious bait.

Should Billy or Klass be dropping by, my formula for World Peace & candy bars is...

1 - completely re-write the rules, in collaboration with the rest of the board: as they stand, some are a bit vague. The duties and responsibilities of a mod are similarly codified. Trolling is defined.

2 - the rules being approved by the board, a general amnesty is declared so that everyone starts afresh with a level playing field. All probations are wiped out, those currently banned are invited back.

3 - the clock is reset to midnight, and we start afresh. Board rules are applied stringently, but fairly. No mod can act in isolation.

4 - in line with the fresh start an election for fresh mods: the existing mods can put their names forward, of course.

Not going to happen, but a man can dream...

Sounds like a good plan to me. We ought to combine these ideas with Donny and Sam's from the Mike's Band thread as the new "Constitution" for the thread.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Anything that gets the place back to something like normality after recent events. Not entirely sure what constitutes normal here, but this past week sure as hell wasn't it.

[filledeplage]

Theres no need to be thought police (you dont like NPP/You think Mike contributed to SMiLE's demise? BAN!) but rather looking at people's aggregate contribution and determining "does this person actually make good points or do they just start fights and post intentionally inflammatory one sentence quips?"

That's just the thing. Can't put it any better than that.

To pick up the "You think Mike contributed to SMiLE's demise? BAN!" subject, the only one who always claims Mike was totally cooperative during the SMiLE sessions is Cam, but if you disagree with him, he doesn't get rude or start conspiracy theories, just the way it should be. I want to be able to criticize and praise all band members where I feel adequate. Unfortunately, not all posters take such criticism or praise level-headedly, and unfortunately, this board isn't the only online place where things like that happen at all.

In this sandbox I had a conversation with filledeplage about gun restriction, and though we had completely 180 degree point of views, the conversation kept civil. None of us convinced the other, either, but no bad feelings seem to have been produced. (Taps own shoulder )

Thanks, Micha for those very kind words.  You are bilingual.  And, I'll tap your other shoulder, too!

[Andrew G. Doe]

I see that which was locked, then unlocked, is once more locked.