Goodbye, SmileySmile

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

Also that he who left returned so they could mysteriously exit once again

[Andrew G. Doe]

Also that he who left returned so they could mysteriously exit once again

Indeed. A clear violation of Message Board Helpful Hints & Splendid Wheezes #13a - if you flounce off, promising never to return and return (however briefly) within four days, expect to be greeted by wide smiles, hearty laughter and the odd barbed comment.

To return to the re-locking, an excellent call by Billy. It was getting nasty again, and should never have been unlocked in the first place. I'm awaiting the New ! Improved !! board rules with uncommon interest.

[MarcellaHasDirtyFeet]

I almost posted in that thread last night, and then realized that it would just be throwing fuel on the fire-- which I usually enjoy, but this has just become too sad. Despite my strong feelings about certain folks on this board, nobody really cares about my opinion, do they?

Some of my favorite posters have been twisted and corrupted by this feud, gone so far off the reservation that I cannot enjoy their posts.

But I will not be using the "ignore" script, even for the truly maddening posters. I used to "unfollow" the people I didn't want to read about on Facebook. By the end, my feed was so sterilized as to be useless and completely uninteresting. So instead, I've just unfriended those people I truly can't stand, and my feed is back to being... well, not useful, but at least it's not so fricking BORING.

I'm afraid the ignore function will result in this board never having a good conversation again. Already, some people who should be talking about the Beach Boys together have ignored one another, and I wonder if they will ever speak again. Is this really better than getting rid of some truly useless posters?!

I have no team. No agenda. I believe that mistakes have been made by posters on both sides of this argument. I hope the rules change will at least give us the tools to jettison some jetsam.

[filledeplage]

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

Please no!

John - I'm not sure about elections.  I don't have a problem with the mods.  It is a given that there is discretion to make decisions.  What is troubling is that there has been some equivalency as between certain poorly behaved but "tolerated" posters and Andrew.  

The difference is in many respects Andrew can be like that tough teacher who doesn't suffer fools, may not be the most patient, but you can learn something valuable from him, and a lot of his work has withstood time and attack. In that similar way he is like GF who also brings an enormous knowledge bank to the table and posts thoughtfully  and methodically as would a professor who wants the students to have the background, the bases-in-fact, to make their own decisions.  

What goes on behind the scenes, whether Andrew has to have a few "words" to correct something incorrect, he might be better off just ignoring them.  Or, just opening-the-door right on the board.  

But my analysis is that so long as we are allowed to have Andrew's expertise, we have to endure bad behavior, from some who may be ardent fans, but who are not scholarly in their methods, (and who provoke, foster hate and insult only ) while not making anyone any smarter.

They can all drink together, and should socialize.  There were suggestions of favoritism because some socialized off the board.  Ridiculous.  We  have a right to freely associate in the States.  

They should be friends.  God knows how hard it was to find someone like minded in the 60's and early 70's. No reason to be isolated in this pursuit.

However, those who continuously break either the now-in-effect board rules whether in the letter or the spirit (which I think require no modification) should go or at least get a good "time out."
  
That is my two cents.  

[AndrewHickey]

But I will not be using the "ignore" script, even for the truly maddening posters. I used to "unfollow" the people I didn't want to read about on Facebook. By the end, my feed was so sterilized as to be useless and completely uninteresting. So instead, I've just unfriended those people I truly can't stand, and my feed is back to being... well, not useful, but at least it's not so fricking BORING.

I'm afraid the ignore function will result in this board never having a good conversation again. Already, some people who should be talking about the Beach Boys together have ignored one another, and I wonder if they will ever speak again. Is this really better than getting rid of some truly useless posters?!

I agree about the dangers of filter bubbles, and only created the ignore script because the truly useless posters *weren't* being got rid of. I think that moderation designed to make this a useful community would be infinitely preferable, but at the moment there are people on the board deliberately trying to get a rise out of other people on the board, and not posting anything else. Most of their posts are the textual equivalent of bonobos marking their territory with faeces, and that is understandably hard for others to ignore. Writing the ignore script seemed to me the least-worst option. I *hope* that very few people feel like they have to use it, and that they will use it on very few posters.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Currently, the words "this poster is ignored" are among the sweetest in my extensive lexicon. 

[Emily]

But I will not be using the "ignore" script, even for the truly maddening posters. I used to "unfollow" the people I didn't want to read about on Facebook. By the end, my feed was so sterilized as to be useless and completely uninteresting. So instead, I've just unfriended those people I truly can't stand, and my feed is back to being... well, not useful, but at least it's not so fricking BORING.

I'm afraid the ignore function will result in this board never having a good conversation again. Already, some people who should be talking about the Beach Boys together have ignored one another, and I wonder if they will ever speak again. Is this really better than getting rid of some truly useless posters?!

I agree about the dangers of filter bubbles, and only created the ignore script because the truly useless posters *weren't* being got rid of. I think that moderation designed to make this a useful community would be infinitely preferable, but at the moment there are people on the board deliberately trying to get a rise out of other people on the board, and not posting anything else. Most of their posts are the textual equivalent of bonobos marking their territory with faeces, and that is understandably hard for others to ignore. Writing the ignore script seemed to me the least-worst option. I *hope* that very few people feel like they have to use it, and that they will use it on very few posters.

I have a question about this, and I don't mean to put you on the spot, and won't be offended by any response, unless you break out calling me names or something crazy.
I am useless to this board. I don't bring any BB knowledge that isn't recorded here. I'd read this board for a while before I joined, but at some time I saw one tiny question that I could answer, so I joined and posted. Then I just sort of started responding now and then while reading, though not contributing any new, useful, knowledge.
Would you consider the proper thing, for the board you'd like to see, for people to be quiet unless they are posting something useful? Would you prefer that the board not involve trivialities and conversation that is not productive of knowledge?
If so, I wonder if it would make sense to have "knowledge" threads and "conversation" threads of some sort. Because I can certainly respect the idea that there are some people here wanting to talk as fact-finders and researchers, or people wanting to find already recorded facts. And the conversation beyond that can be distracting, and wading through tons of chitchat can certainly be tiresome when you're looking for information. But I think some people are sometimes here looking for a community beyond exchange of knowledge. I, for one, am living in a place where I have few acquaintances and won't be here long enough to make friends, really. So an online community is nice to have.
Would you consider I'm in the wrong place for that?

[Andrew G. Doe]

Not at all. Feel free to post any time. Opinions are valued as much as facts. All we ask is that posts be reasonably on topic, non-repetitive and not trollish in nature. World peace then ensues. 

[MarcellaHasDirtyFeet]

Not at all. Feel free to post any time. Opinions are valued as much as facts. All we ask is that posts be reasonably on topic, non-repetitive and not trollish in nature. World peace then ensues. 

What he said.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

But I will not be using the "ignore" script, even for the truly maddening posters. I used to "unfollow" the people I didn't want to read about on Facebook. By the end, my feed was so sterilized as to be useless and completely uninteresting. So instead, I've just unfriended those people I truly can't stand, and my feed is back to being... well, not useful, but at least it's not so fricking BORING.

I'm afraid the ignore function will result in this board never having a good conversation again. Already, some people who should be talking about the Beach Boys together have ignored one another, and I wonder if they will ever speak again. Is this really better than getting rid of some truly useless posters?!

I agree about the dangers of filter bubbles, and only created the ignore script because the truly useless posters *weren't* being got rid of. I think that moderation designed to make this a useful community would be infinitely preferable, but at the moment there are people on the board deliberately trying to get a rise out of other people on the board, and not posting anything else. Most of their posts are the textual equivalent of bonobos marking their territory with faeces, and that is understandably hard for others to ignore. Writing the ignore script seemed to me the least-worst option. I *hope* that very few people feel like they have to use it, and that they will use it on very few posters.

I have a question about this, and I don't mean to put you on the spot, and won't be offended by any response, unless you break out calling me names or something crazy.
I am useless to this board. I don't bring any BB knowledge that isn't recorded here. I'd read this board for a while before I joined, but at some time I saw one tiny question that I could answer, so I joined and posted. Then I just sort of started responding now and then while reading, though not contributing any new, useful, knowledge.
Would you consider the proper thing, for the board you'd like to see, for people to be quiet unless they are posting something useful? Would you prefer that the board not involve trivialities and conversation that is not productive of knowledge?
If so, I wonder if it would make sense to have "knowledge" threads and "conversation" threads of some sort. Because I can certainly respect the idea that there are some people here wanting to talk as fact-finders and researchers, or people wanting to find already recorded facts. And the conversation beyond that can be distracting, and wading through tons of chitchat can certainly be tiresome when you're looking for information. But I think some people are sometimes here looking for a community beyond exchange of knowledge. I, for one, am living in a place where I have few acquaintances and won't be here long enough to make friends, really. So an online community is nice to have.
Would you consider I'm in the wrong place for that?

You are more than welcome here!

[Andrew G. Doe]

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

... and unlocked, locked, unlocked and locked. Anyone got a hammer and some nails ?

[The Shift]

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

... and unlocked, locked, unlocked and locked. Anyone got a hammer and some nails ?

It's very, very frustrating. I've respected the line that Bily drew, as bave many, but it's like others keep hopping over the line then scurrying back into the trenches… it's frustrating but it seems we must respect the right if those who have such powers to exercise those powers.

[Micha]

I am useless to this board.

I hate it when people who post thoughtful posts get put down, so please STOP PUTTING YOURSELF DOWN!!!

I don't bring any BB knowledge that isn't recorded here.

If that was required, the only valid posters would be AGD, c-man, Jon Stebbins, Steve Desper, yrplace, a couple of friends of band members who post here, and maybe Howie Edelson.

But I think some people are sometimes here looking for a community beyond exchange of knowledge.

I think you're right.

I, for one, am living in a place where I have few acquaintances

Deep in the heart of Texas?

[AndrewHickey]

I have a question about this, and I don't mean to put you on the spot, and won't be offended by any response, unless you break out calling me names or something crazy.
I am useless to this board. I don't bring any BB knowledge that isn't recorded here. I'd read this board for a while before I joined, but at some time I saw one tiny question that I could answer, so I joined and posted. Then I just sort of started responding now and then while reading, though not contributing any new, useful, knowledge.
Would you consider the proper thing, for the board you'd like to see, for people to be quiet unless they are posting something useful? Would you prefer that the board not involve trivialities and conversation that is not productive of knowledge?
If so, I wonder if it would make sense to have "knowledge" threads and "conversation" threads of some sort. Because I can certainly respect the idea that there are some people here wanting to talk as fact-finders and researchers, or people wanting to find already recorded facts. And the conversation beyond that can be distracting, and wading through tons of chitchat can certainly be tiresome when you're looking for information. But I think some people are sometimes here looking for a community beyond exchange of knowledge. I, for one, am living in a place where I have few acquaintances and won't be here long enough to make friends, really. So an online community is nice to have.
Would you consider I'm in the wrong place for that?

I have no power or influence here, but...
I, at least, would definitely *not* prefer that the board "not involve trivialities and conversation that is not productive of knowledge" -- what I want is for this board to be a friendly, welcoming, community, where people can talk about the Beach Boys and (on this portion of the board) anything else they want.
Put it this way... if this was a physical space, I would want to be able to have a chat with AGD or Craig Slowinski or whoever, about who played the bass harmonica on I Know There's An Answer or something (obviously I know that's Tommy Morgan, but it's an example). But I'd also want to be able to chat with you about what your favourite record was, or your favourite memory of a live show. (And you seem like one of the more interesting, thoughtful, well-intentioned people to come along recently).
What I *wouldn't* want is for every time I was in the middle of a conversation, to have a couple of people come up and burp loudly in my ear and giggle. It would be distracting, and after they'd done it several thousand times, if it was in a physical space, I might well want them to be kicked out. Failing that, an earplug to put in the ear they always burped down would do the trick.
There are very, very, very few posts I would like to see deleted or posters I'd like to see banned. Were I a moderator (and I wouldn't take the job for all the money in the world, and nor would anyone want me to), a lot of threads that have been locked would still be open, a lot of banned posters would still be here. But there would be a few people -- not very many at all -- here that I'd tell to start behaving a lot better...

[The Shift]

I have a question about this, and I don't mean to put you on the spot, and won't be offended by any response, unless you break out calling me names or something crazy.
I am useless to this board. I don't bring any BB knowledge that isn't recorded here. I'd read this board for a while before I joined, but at some time I saw one tiny question that I could answer, so I joined and posted. Then I just sort of started responding now and then while reading, though not contributing any new, useful, knowledge.
Would you consider the proper thing, for the board you'd like to see, for people to be quiet unless they are posting something useful? Would you prefer that the board not involve trivialities and conversation that is not productive of knowledge?
If so, I wonder if it would make sense to have "knowledge" threads and "conversation" threads of some sort. Because I can certainly respect the idea that there are some people here wanting to talk as fact-finders and researchers, or people wanting to find already recorded facts. And the conversation beyond that can be distracting, and wading through tons of chitchat can certainly be tiresome when you're looking for information. But I think some people are sometimes here looking for a community beyond exchange of knowledge. I, for one, am living in a place where I have few acquaintances and won't be here long enough to make friends, really. So an online community is nice to have.
Would you consider I'm in the wrong place for that?

I have no power or influence here, but...
I, at least, would definitely *not* prefer that the board "not involve trivialities and conversation that is not productive of knowledge" -- what I want is for this board to be a friendly, welcoming, community, where people can talk about the Beach Boys and (on this portion of the board) anything else they want.
Put it this way... if this was a physical space, I would want to be able to have a chat with AGD or Craig Slowinski or whoever, about who played the bass harmonica on I Know There's An Answer or something (obviously I know that's Tommy Morgan, but it's an example). But I'd also want to be able to chat with you about what your favourite record was, or your favourite memory of a live show. (And you seem like one of the more interesting, thoughtful, well-intentioned people to come along recently).
What I *wouldn't* want is for every time I was in the middle of a conversation, to have a couple of people come up and burp loudly in my ear and giggle. It would be distracting, and after they'd done it several thousand times, if it was in a physical space, I might well want them to be kicked out. Failing that, an earplug to put in the ear they always burped down would do the trick.
There are very, very, very few posts I would like to see deleted or posters I'd like to see banned. Were I a moderator (and I wouldn't take the job for all the money in the world, and nor would anyone want me to), a lot of threads that have been locked would still be open, a lot of banned posters would still be here. But there would be a few people -- not very many at all -- here that I'd tell to start behaving a lot better...

Andrew, you keep hitting the nail on the head. Emily, you bring a sense of decorum to what can sometimes, sadly, be a bear pit. I'm conscious that I bring little to the table in terms of scholarship or academic study, but I enjoy chatting about my fave band with fellow fans. I hope we can all continue to do that, happily, for years to come.

[DonnyL]

Hey Folks,

I'd like to point out something with more clarity that I think is important that doesn't seem to be much of a focus in recent discussions:

For the most part, I don't think it's what's being said that is causing any problem at any point on this board. It's how it's being said.


Here's something worth reading and thinking about (I think most everyone can admit to guilt in 80-90% of the items in this list below):

15 Styles of Distorted Thinking

Filtering: You take the negative details and magnify them, while filtering out all positive aspects of a situation. A single detail may be picked out, and the whole event becomes colored by this detail. When you pull negative things out of context, isolated from all the good experiences around you, you make them larger and more awful than they really are.

Polarized Thinking: The hallmark of this distortion is an insistence on dichotomous choices. Things are black or white, good or bad. You tend to perceive everything at the extremes, with very little room for a middle ground. The greatest danger in polarized thinking is its impact on how you judge yourself. For example-You have to be perfect or you're a failure.

Overgeneralization: You come to a general conclusion based on a single incident or piece of evidence. If something bad happens once, you expect it to happen over and over again. 'Always' and 'never' are cues that this style of thinking is being utilized. This distortion can lead to a restricted life, as you avoid future failures based on the single incident or event.

Mind Reading: Without their saying so, you know what people are feeling and why they act the way they do. In particular, you are able to divine how people are feeling toward you. Mind reading depends on a process called projection. You imagine that people feel the same way you do and react to things the same way you do. Therefore, you don't watch or listen carefully enough to notice that they are actually different. Mind readers jump to conclusions that are true for them, without checking whether they are true for the other person.

Catastrophizing: You expect disaster. You notice or hear about a problem and start "what if's." What if that happens to me? What if tragedy strikes? There are no limits to a really fertile catastrophic imagination. An underlying catalyst for this style of thinking is that you do not trust in yourself and your capacity to adapt to change.

Personalization: This is the tendency to relate everything around you to yourself. For example, thinking that everything people do or say is some kind of reaction to you. You also compare yourself to others, trying to determine who's smarter, better looking, etc. The underlying assumption is that your worth is in question. You are therefore continually forced to test your value as a person by measuring yourself against others. If you come out better, you get a moment's relief. If you come up short, you feel diminished. The basic thinking error is that you interpret each experience, each conversation, each look as a clue to your worth and value.

Control Fallacies: There are two ways you can distort your sense of power and control. If you feel externally controlled, you see yourself as helpless, a victim of fate. The fallacy of internal control has you responsible for the pain and happiness of everyone around you. Feeling externally controlled keeps you stuck. You don't believe you can really affect the basic shape of your life, let alone make any difference in the world. The truth of the matter is that we are constantly making decisions, and that every decision affects our lives. On the other hand, the fallacy of internal control leaves you exhausted as you attempt to fill the needs of everyone around you, and feel responsible in doing so (and guilty when you cannot).

Fallacy of Fairness: You feel resentful because you think you know what's fair, but other people won't agree with you. Fairness is so conveniently defined, so temptingly self-serving, that each person gets locked into his or her own point of view. It is tempting to make assumptions about how things would change if people were only fair or really valued you. But the other person hardly ever sees it that way, and you end up causing yourself a lot of pain and an ever-growing resentment.

Blaming: You hold other people responsible for your pain, or take the other tack and blame yourself for every problem. Blaming often involves making someone else responsible for choices and decisions that are actually our own responsibility. In blame systems, you deny your right (and responsibility) to assert your needs, say no, or go elsewhere for what you want.

Shoulds: You have a list of ironclad rules about how you and other people should act. People who break the rules anger you, and you feel guilty if you violate the rules. The rules are right and indisputable and, as a result, you are often in the position of judging and finding fault (in yourself and in others). Cue words indicating the presence of this distortion are should, ought, and must.

Emotional Reasoning: You believe that what you feel must be true-automatically. If you feel stupid or boring, then you must be stupid and boring. If you feel guilty, then you must have done something wrong. The problem with emotional reasoning is that our emotions interact and correlate with our thinking process. Therefore, if you have distorted thoughts and beliefs, your emotions will reflect these distortions.

Fallacy of Change: You expect that other people will change to suit you if you just pressure or cajole them enough. You need to change people because your hopes for happiness seem to depend entirely on them. The truth is the only person you can really control or have much hope of changing is yourself. The underlying assumption of this thinking style is that your happiness depends on the actions of others. Your happiness actually depends on the thousands of large and small choices you make in your life.

Global Labeling: You generalize one or two qualities (in yourself or others) into a negative global judgment. Global labeling ignores all contrary evidence, creating a view of the world that can be stereotyped and one-dimensional. Labeling yourself can have a negative and insidious impact upon your self-esteem; while labeling others can lead to snap-judgments, relationship problems, and prejudice.

Being Right: You feel continually on trial to prove that your opinions and actions are correct. Being wrong is unthinkable and you will go to any length to demonstrate your rightness. Having to be 'right' often makes you hard of hearing. You aren't interested in the possible veracity of a differing opinion, only in defending your own. Being right becomes more important than an honest and caring relationship.

Heaven's Reward Fallacy: You expect all your sacrifice and self-denial to pay off, as if there were someone keeping score. You fell bitter when the reward doesn't come as expected. The problem is that while you are always doing the 'right thing,' if your heart really isn't in it, you are physically and emotionally depleting yourself.

*From Thoughts & Feelings by McKay, Davis, & Fanning. New Harbinger, 1981. These styles of thinking (or cognitive distortions) were gleaned from the work of several authors, including Albert Ellis, Aaron Beck, and David Burns, among others.

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

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

... and unlocked, locked, unlocked and locked. Anyone got a hammer and some nails ?

It's very, very frustrating. I've respected the line that Bily drew, as bave many, but it's like others keep hopping over the line then scurrying back into the trenches… it's frustrating but it seems we must respect the right if those who have such powers to exercise those powers.

Why yes! I just don't know what to do about this...hmmm, I'm so perplexed that it's just ruining my little day. They should change the rules so I don't get upset because when such big things like this happen I'll probably get a little headache. Maybe if I wish real hard, it'll change. No wait, If I yell and scream real loud and stomp my feet or throw something, they'll listen. I just know if I don't get MY way, I won't be able to sleep tonight and then I'll be crabby again tomorrow. Ohhh, what will I do? I know, I just won't let them alone and I'll keep crying until they give me what I want. Oh boy!

[The Shift]

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

... and unlocked, locked, unlocked and locked. Anyone got a hammer and some nails ?

It's very, very frustrating. I've respected the line that Bily drew, as bave many, but it's like others keep hopping over the line then scurrying back into the trenches… it's frustrating but it seems we must respect the right if those who have such powers to exercise those powers.

Why yes! I just don't know what to do about this...hmmm, I'm so perplexed that it's just ruining my little day. They should change the rules so I don't get upset because when such big things like this happen I'll probably get a little headache. Maybe if I wish real hard, it'll change. No wait, If I yell and scream real loud and stomp my feet or throw something, they'll listen. I just know if I don't get MY way, I won't be able to sleep tonight and then I'll be crabby again tomorrow. Ohhh, what will I do? I know, I just won't let them alone and I'll keep crying until they give me what I want. Oh boy!

[clack]

You would think folks would appreciate a forum where you could chat and exchange info about some interest you all share. But acting under some perverse impulse, there are always some more interested in stirring up trouble and creating drama.

I don't understand it. Who wouldn't want a relaxed, genial atmosphere? Why would anyone prefer a tense, unpleasant series of exchanges while pursuing fun in your spare time?

But there it is.

[Emily]

Thanks for the validation folks! When I was reading Andrew Hickey's earlier post and saw the word 'useful' it sort of occurred to me that I should get a sense of whether my sort of chit chat is OK, blended as it is with more serious exploratory talk.
Andrew Hickey, your physical space analogy is of great use to me. Thank you.

[Cam Mott]

I don't have a problem with disagreement, 90% of my posts eventually end with "we will agree to disagree".  I have a problem with insult, condescension, and name calling. Those are the things that should be more stringently self-moderated by many posters in my opinion.

[AndrewHickey]

Thanks for the validation folks! When I was reading Andrew Hickey's earlier post and saw the word 'useful' it sort of occurred to me that I should get a sense of whether my sort of chit chat is OK, blended as it is with more serious exploratory talk.
Andrew Hickey, your physical space analogy is of great use to me. Thank you.

I do apologise for giving the wrong impression. I have Asperger's, and one of the ways that shows itself is I sometimes use words which have completely the wrong emotional resonances. I consider "useful" to encompass "helpful", "friendly", "funny", "interesting" and so on.

[Andrew G. Doe]

So... that's what happens when a line is drawn. Have to confess, it was exactly what I expected, which is pretty depressing, and hardly bodes well for the future of this forum.

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

So... that's what happens when a line is drawn. Have to confess, it was exactly what I expected, which is pretty depressing, and hardly bodes well for the future of this forum.

What are you referring to?

[SMiLE Brian]

Munich 1938.