.

I hope this thread doesn't blow up like some other similar ones have

It's not rocket science people. Just be nice.

.

Stratisfear wrote: Secondly, in the interests of clarity, I'd like to know how you will define the "ganging up" you mention. Let's say I come on here one day and say something that offends a good portion of the membership. Is only one person allowed to respond, otherwise the original poster (me) is automatically given protection he/she doesn't deserve?

This one bothers me too. It can be the case that a poster is provocative or insulting and several people reasonably take objection and express that objection. That shouldn't be seen as ganging up.

There have also been trumped up claims of ganging up and persecution on occasion - certainly on forum and I would not be surprised if there were off-list complaints as well. Just because somebody claims that "ganging up" is going on doesn't mean that it actually is happening.

I think if someone is trying to be offensive off the bat, it will be quite obvious. I think users like that should be reported to the moderator and ignored by the rest of us. Replying to these types just adds fuel to the fire and encourages them to continue, as they are just looking for attention.

A lot of things in life is subjective, especially when it comes to taste in guitars and musical equipment and sound. And everyone is on their own learning curve. So let just respect each other's opinions and debate topics without getting nasty.

There is ganging up happening fosho. But who is arguing? Just play by the house rules is all as stated in another thread. So, why this is open to discussion I dunno. Just now you'll have all the self-appointed experts and elders adding what they think should and shouldna be.

Ray wrote: There is ganging up happening fosho. But who is arguing? Just play by the house rules is all as stated in another thread. So, why this is open to discussion I dunno. Just now you'll have all the self-appointed experts and elders adding what they think should and shouldna be.

But don't you think this post of yours is already quite inflammatory Ray? By self-appointed experts are you meaning guys like Stratisfear who have questions? By elders do you mean blokes like Bob (God knows he's old enough ?)?

I don't think this post of yours is playing by the "be nice" rule at all. It appears to me to be provocative and amounts to taking a dig, but not enough of a dig to call it out directly. Others might disagree. But I raise the point here since it's the topic of discussion, and it's an open question: I'm not trying to start a fight.

If Alan hadn't wanted feedback or comment he could have posted and locked this thread, so I'm assuming that comments and questions are allowed on this one.

I find in some instances Alan does need to step in, thats what moderators do, as there have been instances in the past where things did get ugly and went way off track and off topic. Its interesting to note that some members 'make peace' with each other, that were just yestereday almost involved in a fist fight. So there is a certain maturity with our members and I don't think Alan will be hiding behind every corner with a red card

CostaFonix wrote: I find in some instances Alan does need to step in, thats what moderators do, as there have been instances in the past where things did get ugly and went way off track and off topic. Its interesting to note that some members 'make peace' with each other, that were just yestereday almost involved in a fist fight. So there is a certain maturity with our members and I don't think Alan will be hiding behind every corner with a red card

I can confirm this: I have had some altercations (not big ones, really) which were then resolved between myself and the other person away from the public threads.

However, the animosity that was at some point visible to everyone still impacts the general vibe of the forum. Sometimes it also pays to reconcile things publicly, when a disagreement was public in the first place.

how about resolving issues privately and just stating publicly that they have been resolved ?

...mario... wrote: how about resolving issues privately and just stating publicly that they have been resolved ?

Well, ideally fights shouldn't be started in public ? But this is the internet, after all...

But yeah, also an option I guess.

...mario... wrote: how about resolving issues privately and just stating publicly that they have been resolved ?

I don't think there's a hard and fast rule about this. I've certainly made posts where I think "oh crap! That looks like I'm having a go at so-and-so" or I word things ambiguously or just get things plain wrong. If I've done that and realise what's happened then I think the quickest, simplest way to deal with it is to apologise and clarify immediately - that reduces the chances of there being lingering animosity or of other people getting sucked into what looks like an argument.

OTOH, and talking about "ganging up", there was a thread a while back in which, it seemed to me, lies about me were being systematically told. I addressed some of the other parties off-line and was basically shown a toffee. I kind of wish I'd dealt with it on-line to make my objections a matter of record rather than be seen to be tacitly conceding the point. But then I can also argue that my life and my ego aren't that important and there's more pressing matters - like what colour Jazzmaster Mika should buy.

More seriously, I don't think we should underestimate the potential for lasting offence to be caused on on-line forums. I've had enraged late night phone calls about things I've said on this forum. I felt justified and certainly was being 100% factual. The other party now refuses to talk to me, to answer emails, accept phone calls etc. We might say that he's being childish or that I should have kept it zipped. It's in the past now and the rift is unlikely to be repaired. However my point is that we are dealing with real people with real feelings. I think it's easy to forget that when you're typing words in a web browser.

all true and honest yes, I'm not a very active participant in discussions and also haven't come across any hangups with anyone here, although I don't feel offended quite easily, so I would considder myself of limited right to comment other than giving my opinion of what has worked best for me in my short life (highschool is a B*, seriously, haha ?)

I still believe though that if you have developed an issue with someone on a personal basis it is to be delt with privately, as it is easier for the person who may be wrong to admit to the offended person alone rather than infront of everybody, and it should be a relief to both parties if an issue is resolved, not with a mentallity of "hah! see, now you were the *(fill in what you like), I win" coz that is when other public parties might question the motivs of the "resolved" issue in question (I hope I'm making sense now)

Sorry to hear about your friend lost though Bob, I think we all can relate to a similar circumstance from some time or another :-[

Please... I'm not going to be running around like the Spanish Inquisition (woosh! ?), cracking my whip or publicly nailing anyone's foot to the deck.When have I ever done that? Basically I intend to enforce the existing rules a little tighter than usual, giving less benefit of the doubt and also try step in with a word or two to calm things down before things escalate to the point of nastiness. In cases where the offence is very minor or nebulous, I'll ask the user to edit their own post to make their point clearer without the possibility of offence being taken by a third party.

Stratisfear wrote: I suppose I'm just stating the obvious if I say we'd be looking for consistency most of all.

Understood. For my part, I can assure you I try to be fair and consistent, but it's impossible to always appear so from everyone's perspective. Two users at odds with one another each have their own perspective and I have a third. So in settling a dispute there is always going to be at least one person who does not agree with my decision - and sometimes that might be you.

I also handle every single incident - many of which, only the participants are aware of - and these incidents may influence my future actions in some way. Sometimes I may have my own reasons for handling something in a particular way - reasons that operate on a larger "macro" or somehow politic level.

There have also been instances where a particularly defamatory or libellous comment is left intact while the offended party investigates legal recourse (defamation, libel and slander being after all legal terms, not to be used), while PMs, emails and even telephone conversations flurry about behind the scenes. So trust me, you do not always know what the full score is.

I also admit that sometimes my mood has an influence on things - it's hard to remain 100% objective and balanced at all times. I can only really promise to try to do so - and live up to that promise as best as I am able.

So, if there are going to be instant bans

Well, there have always been instant bans - I add probably five to ten a week to the ban list (which currently stands at more than 230 individuals). It's just they are rarely regular posters and they are usually done in the early hours of the morning so few others see the offence or the punishment.

Secondly, in the interests of clarity, I'd like to know how you will define the "ganging up" you mention. Let's say I come on here one day and say something that offends a good portion of the membership. Is only one person allowed to respond, otherwise the original poster (me) is automatically given protection he/she doesn't deserve?

If someone has offended you or others enough that it creates the desire to publicly disembowel them, why are you not reporting it? Then I would take action and the matter would be settled. Instead of this a number of people respond with comments and together they all add to the first post in lowering the tone. Even worse - some take that as an open invitation to snipe at the original offender on other threads, lowering their tone too. Someone may say something imprudent and cause ire (we have all done it), but that does not give anyone else the right to shout insults and follow them around making snide comments - that's schoolyard behaviour and amounts to nothing less than bullying, irrespective of what the original offender did or said.

Occasionally someone says something that is mildly offensive and others step in to say "hey - you can't say that!". I have no problem with this - it makes my job easier after all. But there is a big difference between that and some of the behaviour I have seen lately.

Alan Ratcliffe wrote: Please... I'm not going to be running around like the Spanish Inquisition (woosh! ?)

Alan Ratcliffe wrote: Also please note: a smiley after an offensive remark does not excuse the remark itself or soften the impact.

?

...mario... wrote: all true and honest yes, I'm not a very active participant in discussions and also haven't come across any hangups with anyone here, although I don't feel offended quite easily, so I would considder myself of limited right to comment other than giving my opinion of what has worked best for me in my short life (highschool is a B*, seriously, haha ?)

I still believe though that if you have developed an issue with someone on a personal basis it is to be delt with privately, as it is easier for the person who may be wrong to admit to the offended person alone rather than infront of everybody

Well as a general principle it's a good and a wise thing to not put people in a situation where they may have to lose face. I was really referring to a thing that happens to me from time to time, where I post on the forum and somewhere between 10ms and 10 minutes later I think "uh oh!". In those cases, if the matter hasn't escalated, I can nip the whole thing in the bud by making a public correction or apology and it's only my ego and only me that needs to worry about it.

I've mentioned this before, this is now the only forum I frequent, the reason being that the rules are actually enforced by the administrator. It's the vibe that draws me to this forum. And yes, over the last coupe of months or so, that vibe took a hit, because of the type of posts that Alan was referring to in his original post. Healthy debate and good humour is cool, but snide, caustic and sarcastic posts simply are not.

Sean wrote:
I've mentioned this before, this is now the only forum I frequent, the reason being that the rules are actually enforced by the administrator. It's the vibe that draws me to this forum. And yes, over the last coupe of months or so, that vibe took a hit, because of the type of posts that Alan was referring to in his original post. Healthy debate and good humour is cool, but snide, caustic and sarcastic posts simply is not.

+1

May shame be harnessed to all inflamatory posts...