-->
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 09:45:20 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
News: Bellagio 10452
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  The Smiley Smile Message Board
|-+  Non Smiley Smile Stuff
| |-+  The Sandbox
| | |-+  Thread for arguments with or about moderation
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 24   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Thread for arguments with or about moderation  (Read 160323 times)
0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #175 on: May 24, 2016, 11:32:31 AM »

Just to expand on that a bit more, and it's only my opinion whether it's comparable or not.

I'm not sure what everyone's frame of reference is regarding American sports, but beyond music there are thousands of fan communities devoted to sports teams. Take one example, the New York Yankees.

When it was a hot topic, there were quite a few fans who had strong opinions of Alex "A Rod" Rodriguez. Fans either praised him or hammered him, sometimes mercilessly, whether it be his actions on or off the field. Not following each and every fan community or comments posted, would it not be expected when having such a fan forum to have fans being very opinionated on a player who was as much talented as he was a lightening-rod for criticism? If there as a game where A Rod didn't run out a play, or pulled up short on a defensive play to allow a hit instead of charging the ball, some fans would call him out for not giving his all, and others would defend his choices made in the heat of the game.

Would there be an expectation of whoever monitors those boards to delete all of the negative opinions being lobbed at A Rod in the name of making the community a more friendly place, or allowing the real fans to not have to wade through the negative comments when they want to read about A Rod's gameplay from the night before? I'm sure there were challenges also made to the negative commentators such as "You must not be a true Yankees fan if you think that way about A Rod", but among communities of fans are any of those challenges really valid when fans are offering opinions on what they see? Maybe some fan who has been following the Yanks for decades has issues with something an individual player like A Rod had done, would the community be expected to erase that fan and any comments in favor of only those who think A Rod should be standing alongside Ruth, Mantle, Jeter, and Gehrig in the Yankees Hall Of Fame lineup?

It suggests there is either an unrealistic expectation that fans when they get together to talk will all agree on the same thing, or it suggests all fans wearing a Yankees cap will bite their tongues and not offer an opinion on A Rod or whoever else because they're part of the team whose cap we're all wearing. Beyond that, whoever is running those fan communities would be expected to censor those fans who have issues with A Rod, and then bring that aura of censorship onto the board.

It's the choice of censorship versus allowing fans to express their opinions whether it be online chat rooms, boards, or even call-in sports radio shows. If Yankees fans want a place where everyone is expected to be 100% in praise of A Rod or any other Yankees player, despite what he may or may not do on or off the field, I don't think such a place exists. But that's part of the deal going in, isn't it? Any fan can debate with any other fan's opinions.

Should there be efforts made to sanitize fan communities from any fans who don't agree up and down the line with whatever someone else thinks they should agree with? It removes the entire nature and design of these communities and forums.

GF,

I understand this point completely. 

And I don't think that you, or any mod, should sanitize the SSMB. 

But, if you're not looking to sanitize the board of negative posts, why the long diatribe-like responses when somebody posts a mild criticism of a Brian Wilson track? 



You characterize with a broad brush what I write as a "diatribe". That's not fair, is it? If I or any fan have an opinion, and if that fan is passionate about the topic they're writing about, whether some think it's too many words or not, those fans can come to an open forum to express the opinions whether in 10 words or 200. And, if a fan feels strongly for or against an opinion posted, it's an open forum which allows that dialogue to happen. It is not an open forum if fans expect to post opinions and not have others disagree with them, up to and including strongly disagreeing with them.

Sanitizing a board would involve deleting posts that someone has to judge as being worthwhile or not, and a lot of it would come down to the opinions of the comments and of the person posting them. It also involves sanitizing board members whose opinions are deemed worthwhile or not. Again I ask, consider what if the posts of a fan named KDS or a fan named KDS in general were to become the target of the angry mob, and demands were made to have you thrown out entirely, beyond having your comments deleted by a moderator. I've seen that happen, I've seen it on previous boards where a mob mentality takes over and someone the mob doesn't want around will be targeted until they quit or get kicked out. It's not what this place is about.

I've no issue with you, or anyone disagreeing with my opinions. 

It's the way that it's done at times.  When I said two weeks ago that I didn't like Runaway Dancer, from NPP, because I don't like EDM.  You responded with a long post about the true definition of EDM, basically say that my opinion is wrong because I don't know what EDM is. 

I'm a fan of heavy metal, but if somebody says "I don't like Led Zeppelin because I don't like heavy metal," I don't think I'd challenge their opinion with a long post about what really defines heavy metal and basically say, "Led Zeppelin's not heavy metal, so the reason you dislike them is wrong." 

I'm fine with disagreements and exchanging ideas, but I just think stuff like that can discourage people from posting true opinions. 

I cannot control how you took that post or not. The reason why I posted it was to offer fans who may not be familiar with the genre yet have seen the label EDM used for any number of songs a background of the style and genre, with examples, and also a more accurate definition of what is considered EDM. Whether your post opened the door or not, or whether you felt I posted all that strictly directed at you or to say you specifically were wrong, I wanted to post information in order to clarify and also inform people of what was being discussed and how the label as it is or was being used well beyond your post or this board has been often inaccurate.

If anyone reading managed to learn something new about the genre, learn about the genre in general, or even checked out the video links to hear some of the familiar examples of what EDM is all about, I hope that happened because that was my intention. And using the label EDM for Runaway Dancer or any other example where it doesn't fit is to me like the Grammy award going to Jethro Tull for best heavy metal album, when most fans who know heavy metal would not have considered that Tull album metal.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
KDS
Guest
« Reply #176 on: May 24, 2016, 11:33:56 AM »

Just to expand on that a bit more, and it's only my opinion whether it's comparable or not.

I'm not sure what everyone's frame of reference is regarding American sports, but beyond music there are thousands of fan communities devoted to sports teams. Take one example, the New York Yankees.

When it was a hot topic, there were quite a few fans who had strong opinions of Alex "A Rod" Rodriguez. Fans either praised him or hammered him, sometimes mercilessly, whether it be his actions on or off the field. Not following each and every fan community or comments posted, would it not be expected when having such a fan forum to have fans being very opinionated on a player who was as much talented as he was a lightening-rod for criticism? If there as a game where A Rod didn't run out a play, or pulled up short on a defensive play to allow a hit instead of charging the ball, some fans would call him out for not giving his all, and others would defend his choices made in the heat of the game.

Would there be an expectation of whoever monitors those boards to delete all of the negative opinions being lobbed at A Rod in the name of making the community a more friendly place, or allowing the real fans to not have to wade through the negative comments when they want to read about A Rod's gameplay from the night before? I'm sure there were challenges also made to the negative commentators such as "You must not be a true Yankees fan if you think that way about A Rod", but among communities of fans are any of those challenges really valid when fans are offering opinions on what they see? Maybe some fan who has been following the Yanks for decades has issues with something an individual player like A Rod had done, would the community be expected to erase that fan and any comments in favor of only those who think A Rod should be standing alongside Ruth, Mantle, Jeter, and Gehrig in the Yankees Hall Of Fame lineup?

It suggests there is either an unrealistic expectation that fans when they get together to talk will all agree on the same thing, or it suggests all fans wearing a Yankees cap will bite their tongues and not offer an opinion on A Rod or whoever else because they're part of the team whose cap we're all wearing. Beyond that, whoever is running those fan communities would be expected to censor those fans who have issues with A Rod, and then bring that aura of censorship onto the board.

It's the choice of censorship versus allowing fans to express their opinions whether it be online chat rooms, boards, or even call-in sports radio shows. If Yankees fans want a place where everyone is expected to be 100% in praise of A Rod or any other Yankees player, despite what he may or may not do on or off the field, I don't think such a place exists. But that's part of the deal going in, isn't it? Any fan can debate with any other fan's opinions.

Should there be efforts made to sanitize fan communities from any fans who don't agree up and down the line with whatever someone else thinks they should agree with? It removes the entire nature and design of these communities and forums.

GF,

I understand this point completely. 

And I don't think that you, or any mod, should sanitize the SSMB. 

But, if you're not looking to sanitize the board of negative posts, why the long diatribe-like responses when somebody posts a mild criticism of a Brian Wilson track? 



You characterize with a broad brush what I write as a "diatribe". That's not fair, is it? If I or any fan have an opinion, and if that fan is passionate about the topic they're writing about, whether some think it's too many words or not, those fans can come to an open forum to express the opinions whether in 10 words or 200. And, if a fan feels strongly for or against an opinion posted, it's an open forum which allows that dialogue to happen. It is not an open forum if fans expect to post opinions and not have others disagree with them, up to and including strongly disagreeing with them.

Sanitizing a board would involve deleting posts that someone has to judge as being worthwhile or not, and a lot of it would come down to the opinions of the comments and of the person posting them. It also involves sanitizing board members whose opinions are deemed worthwhile or not. Again I ask, consider what if the posts of a fan named KDS or a fan named KDS in general were to become the target of the angry mob, and demands were made to have you thrown out entirely, beyond having your comments deleted by a moderator. I've seen that happen, I've seen it on previous boards where a mob mentality takes over and someone the mob doesn't want around will be targeted until they quit or get kicked out. It's not what this place is about.

GF the biggest problem I have with all of this is you don't practice what you preach.  You are all for open discussion.  Except you are not.  You and DKL resort to saying anyone who criticises Brian have an agenda.  You are like a dog with a bone.  Look at the recent Bubbs and Judd thread where to most of us here it was a case of why did you jump in and ruin the thread? Fair enough if you don't agree but don't suggest something more sinister at work.  Debbie was demanding to know why Bubbs changed his opinion.  The thread was a little tongue in cheek was how most of us saw it, but not you.  If you know for sure something underhand was going on share it with those of us who are not privy to that info and then we can see why you're annoyed.  

Also, witness Debbie's attack on Val and others.  Uncalled for but hey, Debbie can say what she likes it seems.  Again, if Val has done something and it's widely known in Beach Boys circles let us uninitiated know.  Otherwise it comes across as a crass attack on someone who hasn't even been part of the discussion on here.  It lacks class.  People like Val have worked tirelessly over the years to promote Brian's music.

Yep, I've seen this quite a bit when posters have been critical of NPP or any later day Brian Wilson projects. 
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #177 on: May 24, 2016, 11:37:44 AM »

Never write one word when 200 will do. Seriously, this has nothing to do with my message you quoted. I, too, had to put up with a pm from someone best described as a d*ckhead, but I decided to ignore it and him because his idiocy isn't worth the time. I'm talking about threads being derailed, not about pm tattle-tales. If you want to argue a point, fine, but don't use a thread about something else to trot out your views that figure A is a worthless piece of sh*t or that figure B hasn't written anything decent since The Lonely Sea and shouldn't be allowed out. It's just the sort of thing that makes me stop reading because I've seen it so many times. The board is reduced to schoolyard-level name-calling. Now, of course, we can add paranoia and desperate insinuation to this.

Smilin Ed, if I were as thin-skinned as some like to suggest, I would take your first line as a personal swipe since several posters who have had issues with me personally have used variations of the same comment to try to get a reaction. It's also been the case where other posters have dropped comments to me off the board telling me to ignore it, they're trying to provoke you. So I do ignore it, and I don't come back to escalate it. I write how I write, if someone doesn't like it I'm going to say that's their choice, simply don't read it. But I won't change how I write because of comments made by people who don't agree with what I do or say, and so far the comments have come strictly from those posters who seem to have issues with me beyond the surface.

It would be relevant to point out as well that comments which have been made and repeated about any number of band members for well over a decade continue to be posted. I've stayed away from trying to ask people why they didn't post, but I have to ask for the sake of discussion: There have been any number of similar comments posted and threads derailed on 'all sides' of the BB's spectrum, involving multiple band members. Were you as upset to see examples of other derailments and schoolyard-level name calling when it happened to other band members? Do you react as strongly when phrases like "the handlers" get injected into discussions that have nothing to do with handlers or anything related? There are people who when seeing an opinion they disagree with will offer a challenge in return. It's an open forum, unless there is a call to monitor and control what opinions people post rather than allow it to be a back-and-forth offering of opinions, it's everyone's choice to either read and respond or simply ignore.

There shouldn't need to be a board cop on duty to step in and remove comments, unless a majority of posters here now want censorship to become the standard instead of an open exchange. And it also opens up the issue of mob rule, where a group of people can decide what or who they'd like to see policed, and that next public target could be Smilin Ed H if you post something the angry mob disagrees with, or if your posts in general somehow manage to get portrayed as being a reason why the board is falling apart.

I don't think many here want that kind of board.

Mob rule? Cop on duty? You ought to write fiction, Craig. Your feature length post was totally unnecessary in regards my previous point. As is this: " Were you as upset to see examples of other derailments and schoolyard-level name calling when it happened to other band members?" You read my posts? You know the post I complained about that derailed AGD's thread about 1964?  It was a swipe at Brian not Mike. Remember? You have me pegged as a Kokomaoist? Seriously? Me? Far from it. You know who I'll be seeing this week, for the umpteenth time? Regardless of how allegedly 'frail' he is. You think I see the sh*t only coming from one side? Are you so paranoid you think this is a personal attack because you haven't been critical enough of the anti-Mike sh*t shovelling?

The board I want is one where we can discuss the music without the same bunch of idiots derailing it to say his well-polished piece about Mike being a turd or Brian being incapable of functioning on his own, both of which will be followed by the equally well-rehearsed counter claims.

Again with the "feature length" crack? Whether you deem it unnecessary or not, that was my reply. If you can offer guidelines for me to write a reply to you, please do, it would help!  Grin

 Where did I refer to you as anything you're insinuating? I didn't paint you as anything, I later asked what if you were on the receiving end of a group of posters who thought you should be the one removed if it ever came to that point in the future, and the board had rules set up to allow that. It's not what the board is about.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
Robbie Mac
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 877


Carl Wilson is not amused.


View Profile
« Reply #178 on: May 24, 2016, 11:38:07 AM »

My understanding was that Debbie had given Bubs or Judd or Studd their copy of NPP. If I gave somebody a gift and they did a 180 on its,merits, I'd be pretty pissed off too.


Logged

The world could come together as one
If everybody under the sun
Adds some 🎼 to your day
♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇
Pissing off drunks since 1978
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11844


🍦🍦 Pet Demon for Sale - $5 or best offer ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #179 on: May 24, 2016, 11:40:25 AM »

My understanding was that Debbie had given Bubs or Judd or Studd their copy of NPP. If I gave somebody a gift and they did a 180 on its,merits, I'd be pretty pissed off too.




Yeah, that would make sense, because it would possibly come across as being ungrateful.
Logged

Need your song mixed/mastered? Contact me at fear2stop@yahoo.com. Serious inquiries only, please!
KDS
Guest
« Reply #180 on: May 24, 2016, 11:42:47 AM »

My understanding was that Debbie had given Bubs or Judd or Studd their copy of NPP. If I gave somebody a gift and they did a 180 on its,merits, I'd be pretty pissed off too.




I received the Paul McCartney album Memory Almost Full as a gift.   I thanked the person who gave it to me, and I'm very appreciative.  

But, that would not stop me from saying that the album stunk.  Even to the person who gave me the album.  

So, I wouldn't think criticizing the album is an insult to the gift giver.

Now, had she given him a shirt, that might be a different scenario.  

(I'm in no way saying NPP stinks).  
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #181 on: May 24, 2016, 11:45:46 AM »

Just to expand on that a bit more, and it's only my opinion whether it's comparable or not.

I'm not sure what everyone's frame of reference is regarding American sports, but beyond music there are thousands of fan communities devoted to sports teams. Take one example, the New York Yankees.

When it was a hot topic, there were quite a few fans who had strong opinions of Alex "A Rod" Rodriguez. Fans either praised him or hammered him, sometimes mercilessly, whether it be his actions on or off the field. Not following each and every fan community or comments posted, would it not be expected when having such a fan forum to have fans being very opinionated on a player who was as much talented as he was a lightening-rod for criticism? If there as a game where A Rod didn't run out a play, or pulled up short on a defensive play to allow a hit instead of charging the ball, some fans would call him out for not giving his all, and others would defend his choices made in the heat of the game.

Would there be an expectation of whoever monitors those boards to delete all of the negative opinions being lobbed at A Rod in the name of making the community a more friendly place, or allowing the real fans to not have to wade through the negative comments when they want to read about A Rod's gameplay from the night before? I'm sure there were challenges also made to the negative commentators such as "You must not be a true Yankees fan if you think that way about A Rod", but among communities of fans are any of those challenges really valid when fans are offering opinions on what they see? Maybe some fan who has been following the Yanks for decades has issues with something an individual player like A Rod had done, would the community be expected to erase that fan and any comments in favor of only those who think A Rod should be standing alongside Ruth, Mantle, Jeter, and Gehrig in the Yankees Hall Of Fame lineup?

It suggests there is either an unrealistic expectation that fans when they get together to talk will all agree on the same thing, or it suggests all fans wearing a Yankees cap will bite their tongues and not offer an opinion on A Rod or whoever else because they're part of the team whose cap we're all wearing. Beyond that, whoever is running those fan communities would be expected to censor those fans who have issues with A Rod, and then bring that aura of censorship onto the board.

It's the choice of censorship versus allowing fans to express their opinions whether it be online chat rooms, boards, or even call-in sports radio shows. If Yankees fans want a place where everyone is expected to be 100% in praise of A Rod or any other Yankees player, despite what he may or may not do on or off the field, I don't think such a place exists. But that's part of the deal going in, isn't it? Any fan can debate with any other fan's opinions.

Should there be efforts made to sanitize fan communities from any fans who don't agree up and down the line with whatever someone else thinks they should agree with? It removes the entire nature and design of these communities and forums.

GF,

I understand this point completely. 

And I don't think that you, or any mod, should sanitize the SSMB. 

But, if you're not looking to sanitize the board of negative posts, why the long diatribe-like responses when somebody posts a mild criticism of a Brian Wilson track? 



You characterize with a broad brush what I write as a "diatribe". That's not fair, is it? If I or any fan have an opinion, and if that fan is passionate about the topic they're writing about, whether some think it's too many words or not, those fans can come to an open forum to express the opinions whether in 10 words or 200. And, if a fan feels strongly for or against an opinion posted, it's an open forum which allows that dialogue to happen. It is not an open forum if fans expect to post opinions and not have others disagree with them, up to and including strongly disagreeing with them.

Sanitizing a board would involve deleting posts that someone has to judge as being worthwhile or not, and a lot of it would come down to the opinions of the comments and of the person posting them. It also involves sanitizing board members whose opinions are deemed worthwhile or not. Again I ask, consider what if the posts of a fan named KDS or a fan named KDS in general were to become the target of the angry mob, and demands were made to have you thrown out entirely, beyond having your comments deleted by a moderator. I've seen that happen, I've seen it on previous boards where a mob mentality takes over and someone the mob doesn't want around will be targeted until they quit or get kicked out. It's not what this place is about.

GF the biggest problem I have with all of this is you don't practice what you preach.  You are all for open discussion.  Except you are not.  You and DKL resort to saying anyone who criticises Brian have an agenda.  You are like a dog with a bone.  Look at the recent Bubbs and Judd thread where to most of us here it was a case of why did you jump in and ruin the thread? Fair enough if you don't agree but don't suggest something more sinister at work.  Debbie was demanding to know why Bubbs changed his opinion.  The thread was a little tongue in cheek was how most of us saw it, but not you.  If you know for sure something underhand was going on share it with those of us who are not privy to that info and then we can see why you're annoyed.  

Also, witness Debbie's attack on Val and others.  Uncalled for but hey, Debbie can say what she likes it seems.  Again, if Val has done something and it's widely known in Beach Boys circles let us uninitiated know.  Otherwise it comes across as a crass attack on someone who hasn't even been part of the discussion on here.  It lacks class.  People like Val have worked tirelessly over the years to promote Brian's music.

It's your opinion that I ruined the thread, but one of the original posters asked for opinions and I was one of a handful who offered opinions. Again if there is an expectation when asking for opinions that everyone replying will be in agreement or have positive things to say, it's simply not realistic. Should those who disagree with what someone posts not be allowed to offer a challenge or debate? I asked "Dudd" why he changed his opinion, because I was interested in knowing what changed his mind, how is that wrong?

How can you try to say I'm not for open discussion when I've repeated numerous times the same viewpoint? Maybe you are one who is not for open discussion if you're finding fault with how I or anyone else replies and trades opinions in an open forum discussion, or maybe you simply don't want to see people challenging opinions on this forum.

Who is more supporting an open discussion forum if you're accusing me of ruining threads and finding fault with what I post or how I post it if you want an open forum? If something is posted that some disagree with, they can feel free to open it up to challenge and debate. Doing otherwise or expecting moderators to step in and control who posts what is pure censorship. Put that power in the hands of a mod or anyone else, and the open forum concept is gone for good.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #182 on: May 24, 2016, 11:48:18 AM »

My understanding was that Debbie had given Bubs or Judd or Studd their copy of NPP. If I gave somebody a gift and they did a 180 on its,merits, I'd be pretty pissed off too.




Yeah, that would make sense, because it would possibly come across as being ungrateful.

Maybe that was exactly why Debbie asked why the change of opinion from when they originally received the album as a gift? It could be a simple as that versus trying to read anything else into the questions or the reasons behind them. It could very well have come across as being ungrateful.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
Smilin Ed H
Guest
« Reply #183 on: May 24, 2016, 11:48:55 AM »

Never write one word when 200 will do. Seriously, this has nothing to do with my message you quoted. I, too, had to put up with a pm from someone best described as a d*ckhead, but I decided to ignore it and him because his idiocy isn't worth the time. I'm talking about threads being derailed, not about pm tattle-tales. If you want to argue a point, fine, but don't use a thread about something else to trot out your views that figure A is a worthless piece of sh*t or that figure B hasn't written anything decent since The Lonely Sea and shouldn't be allowed out. It's just the sort of thing that makes me stop reading because I've seen it so many times. The board is reduced to schoolyard-level name-calling. Now, of course, we can add paranoia and desperate insinuation to this.

Smilin Ed, if I were as thin-skinned as some like to suggest, I would take your first line as a personal swipe since several posters who have had issues with me personally have used variations of the same comment to try to get a reaction. It's also been the case where other posters have dropped comments to me off the board telling me to ignore it, they're trying to provoke you. So I do ignore it, and I don't come back to escalate it. I write how I write, if someone doesn't like it I'm going to say that's their choice, simply don't read it. But I won't change how I write because of comments made by people who don't agree with what I do or say, and so far the comments have come strictly from those posters who seem to have issues with me beyond the surface.

It would be relevant to point out as well that comments which have been made and repeated about any number of band members for well over a decade continue to be posted. I've stayed away from trying to ask people why they didn't post, but I have to ask for the sake of discussion: There have been any number of similar comments posted and threads derailed on 'all sides' of the BB's spectrum, involving multiple band members. Were you as upset to see examples of other derailments and schoolyard-level name calling when it happened to other band members? Do you react as strongly when phrases like "the handlers" get injected into discussions that have nothing to do with handlers or anything related? There are people who when seeing an opinion they disagree with will offer a challenge in return. It's an open forum, unless there is a call to monitor and control what opinions people post rather than allow it to be a back-and-forth offering of opinions, it's everyone's choice to either read and respond or simply ignore.

There shouldn't need to be a board cop on duty to step in and remove comments, unless a majority of posters here now want censorship to become the standard instead of an open exchange. And it also opens up the issue of mob rule, where a group of people can decide what or who they'd like to see policed, and that next public target could be Smilin Ed H if you post something the angry mob disagrees with, or if your posts in general somehow manage to get portrayed as being a reason why the board is falling apart.

I don't think many here want that kind of board.

Mob rule? Cop on duty? You ought to write fiction, Craig. Your feature length post was totally unnecessary in regards my previous point. As is this: " Were you as upset to see examples of other derailments and schoolyard-level name calling when it happened to other band members?" You read my posts? You know the post I complained about that derailed AGD's thread about 1964?  It was a swipe at Brian not Mike. Remember? You have me pegged as a Kokomaoist? Seriously? Me? Far from it. You know who I'll be seeing this week, for the umpteenth time? Regardless of how allegedly 'frail' he is. You think I see the sh*t only coming from one side? Are you so paranoid you think this is a personal attack because you haven't been critical enough of the anti-Mike sh*t shovelling?

The board I want is one where we can discuss the music without the same bunch of idiots derailing it to say his well-polished piece about Mike being a turd or Brian being incapable of functioning on his own, both of which will be followed by the equally well-rehearsed counter claims.

Again with the "feature length" crack? Whether you deem it unnecessary or not, that was my reply. If you can offer guidelines for me to write a reply to you, please do, it would help!  Grin

 Where did I refer to you as anything you're insinuating? I didn't paint you as anything, I later asked what if you were on the receiving end of a group of posters who thought you should be the one removed if it ever came to that point in the future, and the board had rules set up to allow that. It's not what the board is about.

This bit: "Were you as upset to see examples of other derailments and schoolyard-level name calling when it happened to other band members? Do you react as strongly when phrases like "the handlers" get injected into discussions that have nothing to do with handlers or anything related? "

This smacks a bit of living in a fool's paranoid. The assumption behind your phrasing is, I guess, that I only get worked up when I see criticism of one side. I don't. As for someone coming up with rules in the future that might lead to me being removed... For what? I wouldn't want to be a member of any board that wouldn't have me...
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #184 on: May 24, 2016, 11:55:49 AM »

Never write one word when 200 will do. Seriously, this has nothing to do with my message you quoted. I, too, had to put up with a pm from someone best described as a d*ckhead, but I decided to ignore it and him because his idiocy isn't worth the time. I'm talking about threads being derailed, not about pm tattle-tales. If you want to argue a point, fine, but don't use a thread about something else to trot out your views that figure A is a worthless piece of sh*t or that figure B hasn't written anything decent since The Lonely Sea and shouldn't be allowed out. It's just the sort of thing that makes me stop reading because I've seen it so many times. The board is reduced to schoolyard-level name-calling. Now, of course, we can add paranoia and desperate insinuation to this.

Smilin Ed, if I were as thin-skinned as some like to suggest, I would take your first line as a personal swipe since several posters who have had issues with me personally have used variations of the same comment to try to get a reaction. It's also been the case where other posters have dropped comments to me off the board telling me to ignore it, they're trying to provoke you. So I do ignore it, and I don't come back to escalate it. I write how I write, if someone doesn't like it I'm going to say that's their choice, simply don't read it. But I won't change how I write because of comments made by people who don't agree with what I do or say, and so far the comments have come strictly from those posters who seem to have issues with me beyond the surface.

It would be relevant to point out as well that comments which have been made and repeated about any number of band members for well over a decade continue to be posted. I've stayed away from trying to ask people why they didn't post, but I have to ask for the sake of discussion: There have been any number of similar comments posted and threads derailed on 'all sides' of the BB's spectrum, involving multiple band members. Were you as upset to see examples of other derailments and schoolyard-level name calling when it happened to other band members? Do you react as strongly when phrases like "the handlers" get injected into discussions that have nothing to do with handlers or anything related? There are people who when seeing an opinion they disagree with will offer a challenge in return. It's an open forum, unless there is a call to monitor and control what opinions people post rather than allow it to be a back-and-forth offering of opinions, it's everyone's choice to either read and respond or simply ignore.

There shouldn't need to be a board cop on duty to step in and remove comments, unless a majority of posters here now want censorship to become the standard instead of an open exchange. And it also opens up the issue of mob rule, where a group of people can decide what or who they'd like to see policed, and that next public target could be Smilin Ed H if you post something the angry mob disagrees with, or if your posts in general somehow manage to get portrayed as being a reason why the board is falling apart.

I don't think many here want that kind of board.

Mob rule? Cop on duty? You ought to write fiction, Craig. Your feature length post was totally unnecessary in regards my previous point. As is this: " Were you as upset to see examples of other derailments and schoolyard-level name calling when it happened to other band members?" You read my posts? You know the post I complained about that derailed AGD's thread about 1964?  It was a swipe at Brian not Mike. Remember? You have me pegged as a Kokomaoist? Seriously? Me? Far from it. You know who I'll be seeing this week, for the umpteenth time? Regardless of how allegedly 'frail' he is. You think I see the sh*t only coming from one side? Are you so paranoid you think this is a personal attack because you haven't been critical enough of the anti-Mike sh*t shovelling?

The board I want is one where we can discuss the music without the same bunch of idiots derailing it to say his well-polished piece about Mike being a turd or Brian being incapable of functioning on his own, both of which will be followed by the equally well-rehearsed counter claims.

Again with the "feature length" crack? Whether you deem it unnecessary or not, that was my reply. If you can offer guidelines for me to write a reply to you, please do, it would help!  Grin

 Where did I refer to you as anything you're insinuating? I didn't paint you as anything, I later asked what if you were on the receiving end of a group of posters who thought you should be the one removed if it ever came to that point in the future, and the board had rules set up to allow that. It's not what the board is about.

This bit: "Were you as upset to see examples of other derailments and schoolyard-level name calling when it happened to other band members? Do you react as strongly when phrases like "the handlers" get injected into discussions that have nothing to do with handlers or anything related? "

This smacks a bit of living in a fool's paranoid. The assumption behind your phrasing is, I guess, that I only get worked up when I see criticism of one side. I don't. As for someone coming up with rules in the future that might lead to me being removed... For what? I wouldn't want to be a member of any board that wouldn't have me...


I just used that as one example, maybe even choosing an example to offer requires treading on eggshells in order not to suggest some deeper meaning.

The question "for what?" is exactly what I'm getting at. What if the definition of "for what?" changes based on whatever group happens to be the vocal majority, and under board rules that some are hinting at creating, it happens to be Smilin Ed who runs afoul and gets banned? The "for what" often doesn't matter, in fact any number of reasons can be invented to justify what the angry mob hopes to accomplish. I'll say it yet again, that's not what this board is and it should never even come close to being that way. If there is an opinion posted, challenge it with your own counter opinion. Don't expect and definitely don't allow a group of mods to come in and delete opinions that the most vocal people or the angry mob disagree with as part of the board rules, unless you don't want an open forum.

I've always agreed with Groucho on that last point.  Smiley
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
The Shift
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 7427


Biding time


View Profile
« Reply #185 on: May 24, 2016, 01:23:18 PM »

-Also on the woman tip, I will leave Debbie to fight her fights, but I don't appreciate some of the ways people have referred to what she's said. Using references to 'claws' and implying that it must be some personal squabble seems condescending and sexist. Maybe just an unfortunate choice of terms, but some terms are loaded. Eta- Let me be clear here - this is my opinion I'm expressing. If you disagree, I'm not asking for censorship.
-Lastly, without pms, I wouldn't have been able to expand my relationships on the board to off-board. Again, I'm not comfortable plunking too much identifying information onto an open board. For that reason, I'm personally happy for the pm function.

BBB is a sad little joke.  Some of the multiple-identity posters there (and there are so few posters on that board that they're easy to spot) are so obviously people banned from here.  I won't name who Nicko (whatever set of numbers he chooses) really is, but he's all over the place there, I'm thinking with other id's as well - unless there are others as stupid as him, which is possible.  I know who the pathetic little whiner is, but I'll leave it at that. 

And the woman who runs the place, well...She's still running her sad little story that Brian is "frail" and "shouldn't be forced to tour," only now through others (or possibly she has more than one id there - it wouldn't be hard as the sole moderator). She's been chanting that mantra for 12 years now.  I guess Brian's not that frail, nor forced - d'ya think?  If she outlives him, she may get to say, "See! See! - many years later and not so believably.  I'm wondering what her posting history might be as well.  What name(s) might she have used here and on BW? I only managed to spot one on BW, but I haven't been on these boards that long.

Sorry if my "claws" comment was unPC; it was an instinctive reaction to the shameful section of Debbie's post as quoted here, an unwarranted attack on Val, who rarely ever posts here.

I'll withdraw my "claws" comment.
I'm not critiquing your reaction; just part of the wording. Sorry if that's annoying of me - but that's my instinctive reaction. :-)

No worries at all Emily you're right to pull me up, intentionally of otherwise. You're one of the good guys … (darn, did I just mess up again??) Wink
Logged

“We live in divisive times.”
mikeddonn
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 976


View Profile
« Reply #186 on: May 24, 2016, 01:25:17 PM »

Just to expand on that a bit more, and it's only my opinion whether it's comparable or not.

I'm not sure what everyone's frame of reference is regarding American sports, but beyond music there are thousands of fan communities devoted to sports teams. Take one example, the New York Yankees.

When it was a hot topic, there were quite a few fans who had strong opinions of Alex "A Rod" Rodriguez. Fans either praised him or hammered him, sometimes mercilessly, whether it be his actions on or off the field. Not following each and every fan community or comments posted, would it not be expected when having such a fan forum to have fans being very opinionated on a player who was as much talented as he was a lightening-rod for criticism? If there as a game where A Rod didn't run out a play, or pulled up short on a defensive play to allow a hit instead of charging the ball, some fans would call him out for not giving his all, and others would defend his choices made in the heat of the game.

Would there be an expectation of whoever monitors those boards to delete all of the negative opinions being lobbed at A Rod in the name of making the community a more friendly place, or allowing the real fans to not have to wade through the negative comments when they want to read about A Rod's gameplay from the night before? I'm sure there were challenges also made to the negative commentators such as "You must not be a true Yankees fan if you think that way about A Rod", but among communities of fans are any of those challenges really valid when fans are offering opinions on what they see? Maybe some fan who has been following the Yanks for decades has issues with something an individual player like A Rod had done, would the community be expected to erase that fan and any comments in favor of only those who think A Rod should be standing alongside Ruth, Mantle, Jeter, and Gehrig in the Yankees Hall Of Fame lineup?

It suggests there is either an unrealistic expectation that fans when they get together to talk will all agree on the same thing, or it suggests all fans wearing a Yankees cap will bite their tongues and not offer an opinion on A Rod or whoever else because they're part of the team whose cap we're all wearing. Beyond that, whoever is running those fan communities would be expected to censor those fans who have issues with A Rod, and then bring that aura of censorship onto the board.

It's the choice of censorship versus allowing fans to express their opinions whether it be online chat rooms, boards, or even call-in sports radio shows. If Yankees fans want a place where everyone is expected to be 100% in praise of A Rod or any other Yankees player, despite what he may or may not do on or off the field, I don't think such a place exists. But that's part of the deal going in, isn't it? Any fan can debate with any other fan's opinions.

Should there be efforts made to sanitize fan communities from any fans who don't agree up and down the line with whatever someone else thinks they should agree with? It removes the entire nature and design of these communities and forums.

GF,

I understand this point completely. 

And I don't think that you, or any mod, should sanitize the SSMB. 

But, if you're not looking to sanitize the board of negative posts, why the long diatribe-like responses when somebody posts a mild criticism of a Brian Wilson track? 



You characterize with a broad brush what I write as a "diatribe". That's not fair, is it? If I or any fan have an opinion, and if that fan is passionate about the topic they're writing about, whether some think it's too many words or not, those fans can come to an open forum to express the opinions whether in 10 words or 200. And, if a fan feels strongly for or against an opinion posted, it's an open forum which allows that dialogue to happen. It is not an open forum if fans expect to post opinions and not have others disagree with them, up to and including strongly disagreeing with them.

Sanitizing a board would involve deleting posts that someone has to judge as being worthwhile or not, and a lot of it would come down to the opinions of the comments and of the person posting them. It also involves sanitizing board members whose opinions are deemed worthwhile or not. Again I ask, consider what if the posts of a fan named KDS or a fan named KDS in general were to become the target of the angry mob, and demands were made to have you thrown out entirely, beyond having your comments deleted by a moderator. I've seen that happen, I've seen it on previous boards where a mob mentality takes over and someone the mob doesn't want around will be targeted until they quit or get kicked out. It's not what this place is about.

GF the biggest problem I have with all of this is you don't practice what you preach.  You are all for open discussion.  Except you are not.  You and DKL resort to saying anyone who criticises Brian have an agenda.  You are like a dog with a bone.  Look at the recent Bubbs and Judd thread where to most of us here it was a case of why did you jump in and ruin the thread? Fair enough if you don't agree but don't suggest something more sinister at work.  Debbie was demanding to know why Bubbs changed his opinion.  The thread was a little tongue in cheek was how most of us saw it, but not you.  If you know for sure something underhand was going on share it with those of us who are not privy to that info and then we can see why you're annoyed.  

Also, witness Debbie's attack on Val and others.  Uncalled for but hey, Debbie can say what she likes it seems.  Again, if Val has done something and it's widely known in Beach Boys circles let us uninitiated know.  Otherwise it comes across as a crass attack on someone who hasn't even been part of the discussion on here.  It lacks class.  People like Val have worked tirelessly over the years to promote Brian's music.

It's your opinion that I ruined the thread, but one of the original posters asked for opinions and I was one of a handful who offered opinions. Again if there is an expectation when asking for opinions that everyone replying will be in agreement or have positive things to say, it's simply not realistic. Should those who disagree with what someone posts not be allowed to offer a challenge or debate? I asked "Dudd" why he changed his opinion, because I was interested in knowing what changed his mind, how is that wrong?

How can you try to say I'm not for open discussion when I've repeated numerous times the same viewpoint? Maybe you are one who is not for open discussion if you're finding fault with how I or anyone else replies and trades opinions in an open forum discussion, or maybe you simply don't want to see people challenging opinions on this forum.

Who is more supporting an open discussion forum if you're accusing me of ruining threads and finding fault with what I post or how I post it if you want an open forum? If something is posted that some disagree with, they can feel free to open it up to challenge and debate. Doing otherwise or expecting moderators to step in and control who posts what is pure censorship. Put that power in the hands of a mod or anyone else, and the open forum concept is gone for good.

GF you know fine well what I'm saying.  But as usual you try to turn it around.

I'll clarify again:

I love a difference of opinion, it's what a discussion forum is all about.  You don't because as KDS says you want to have everyone round to your way of thinking.  The example he gave was another good example of the condescending tone you bring to the 'discussions'.  You can't accept people having a different point of view about Brian's work lest you accuse them of having an agenda.  You and I both know why you asked Bubs why he changed his opinion.  It was also clear with Debbie it was more than feeling scorned because she had given him the CD.  I'm sure she was implying dark forces had corrupted him.

I'm a big fan of the original 'V' sci-fi show from the 80s and I think it can explain what's going on here.  Mike Love has managed to get a hold of Diana's Conversion Chamber and is using it to corrupt people on this board.  It would explain the about turn of Bubs!   Wink (Apologies to those who have never watched 'V' and don't know what I'm talking about!) Cheesy

I'm not going to post anymore about this as it's going nowhere and I don't want to argue with people whom I've never met, never mind on the best message board for the best band ever.  Grin
Logged
The Shift
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 7427


Biding time


View Profile
« Reply #187 on: May 24, 2016, 02:56:55 PM »

What is this 'concert buddy' stuff?

Legit question... I really don't know what you mean by that or are implying

GF and L-SOD apparently had drinkies before or after some Brian gig a while back. If I recall, it was virtually set up in the open, on-board. Not that it would have affected any moderating decisions, we all get together before gigs afterall. Someone else will have to dig out the relevant threads though cos I've been communing with Talisker th'night! Smiley thanks in advance…
Logged

“We live in divisive times.”
The Shift
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 7427


Biding time


View Profile
« Reply #188 on: May 24, 2016, 02:59:53 PM »

[Perhaps those who were involved could shed more light on what they were doing and why if you'd ask them. Try Facebook since one of them just got banned.

Someone else got banned? Or are you referring to Mike's Beard/China Pig (?)?

I think, btw, that fuel was thrown on the objectivity fire when someone (forget who) pointed out that you also moderate on Brian Wilson's board. When some here were accusing AGD of being on Mike's payroll (blatant nonsense … would Mike let go of money so easily?!?!), this revelation looked unfortunate in light of the fact that the board's two prime trolls, LOSD and his young familiar Snail Brian, appeared able to attack Mike with impunity.*

For the same of clarity, then - purely honesty and clarity, note -  can I ask whether you receive any form of remuneration for your work on that board? CDs? Free concert tickets? Upgrades (m&g, soundcheck) to concert tickets? Etc etc - or is it purely voluntary with no reward?


* I have noted, at long last, an apparent reduction in their misbehaviour. If this is due to a restraining order, then you, GF, and Billy are due a note of grateful thanks!

Another great post John, yes worth clarification, and it doesn't have to be a condemnation of GF in any way.

I am not on any payrolls.

So no favours? Gifts? Incentives?  It's done purely for the love of it? Just to be absolutely sure…

John, I have received nothing. I was given mod access October 26th 2015.

Many thanks Craig, appreciate the honesty and the transparency that offers. I also tip my hat to you - moderating on two boards cannot be good for the blood pressure! Smiley
Logged

“We live in divisive times.”
Douchepool
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 883


Time to make the chimifuckingchangas.


View Profile
« Reply #189 on: May 24, 2016, 03:18:08 PM »

Christ, you guys need to get laid.
Logged

The Artist Formerly Known as Deadpool. You may refer to me as such, or as Mr. Pool.

This is also Mr. Pool's Naughty List. Don't end up on here. It will be updated.
The Shift
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 7427


Biding time


View Profile
« Reply #190 on: May 24, 2016, 03:23:52 PM »

Christ, you guys need to get laid.

Are you offering? Wink
Logged

“We live in divisive times.”
Douchepool
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 883


Time to make the chimifuckingchangas.


View Profile
« Reply #191 on: May 24, 2016, 03:46:18 PM »

Nope. I already get it...twice a day, every day.
Logged

The Artist Formerly Known as Deadpool. You may refer to me as such, or as Mr. Pool.

This is also Mr. Pool's Naughty List. Don't end up on here. It will be updated.
The Shift
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 7427


Biding time


View Profile
« Reply #192 on: May 24, 2016, 03:47:24 PM »

Nope. I already get it...twice a day, every day.

On prescription. Or by subscription?
Logged

“We live in divisive times.”
Douchepool
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 883


Time to make the chimifuckingchangas.


View Profile
« Reply #193 on: May 24, 2016, 03:50:56 PM »

It's a Love thang.
Logged

The Artist Formerly Known as Deadpool. You may refer to me as such, or as Mr. Pool.

This is also Mr. Pool's Naughty List. Don't end up on here. It will be updated.
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #194 on: May 24, 2016, 04:01:50 PM »

Playing the skin flute again? Wink
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
Douchepool
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 883


Time to make the chimifuckingchangas.


View Profile
« Reply #195 on: May 24, 2016, 04:54:07 PM »

You must have me confused with someone else here.
Logged

The Artist Formerly Known as Deadpool. You may refer to me as such, or as Mr. Pool.

This is also Mr. Pool's Naughty List. Don't end up on here. It will be updated.
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #196 on: May 24, 2016, 05:15:00 PM »

The real beach boy?
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
Douchepool
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 883


Time to make the chimifuckingchangas.


View Profile
« Reply #197 on: May 24, 2016, 07:24:36 PM »

If it ain't a nut and a bolt it's not a Love thang. LOL
Logged

The Artist Formerly Known as Deadpool. You may refer to me as such, or as Mr. Pool.

This is also Mr. Pool's Naughty List. Don't end up on here. It will be updated.
You Kane, You Commanded, You Conquered
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 467


spoons rattling


View Profile
« Reply #198 on: May 24, 2016, 08:27:58 PM »

Christ, you guys need to get laid.

I think they're too busy arguing to do that.
Logged

"Oh! Don't beat on those sticks!"
Douchepool
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 883


Time to make the chimifuckingchangas.


View Profile
« Reply #199 on: May 24, 2016, 09:00:39 PM »

Basically, everyone here is Deadpool and this argument is skeeball...since, apparently, Deadpool likes skeeball more than vagina (or dick).
Logged

The Artist Formerly Known as Deadpool. You may refer to me as such, or as Mr. Pool.

This is also Mr. Pool's Naughty List. Don't end up on here. It will be updated.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 24   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.603 seconds with 22 queries.