From the moderator

[Rumours]

YAWN

Sorcerer386, that is a really great song you were singing there!!
Most enjoyable post I've read in this entire thread. At least it was somehow Fleetwood Mac related. Thank you.
Well, off to read threads that actually have a point and a focus relating to the reason that this forum actually exists and the reason I come here........

Stephanie

[wondergirl9847]

HEAR HEAR, STEPHANIE!

P.S. I JUST HIT 800 posts! WOOHOO! Go me!

P.S.S. You would THINK that after 9-11, we would all feel love instead of spreading hatred and foulness around. Geez.

[CarneVaca]

"You would THINK that after 9-11, we would all feel love instead of spreading hatred and foulness around. Geez."

Wondergirl, thanks for your sentiment. I truly appreciate it. Just one thing, though: Let's be more careful in how we toss around the term "9/11" so casually. I was in New York that day, and I know people who lost loved ones. I make it a point to make sure not to trivialize the event by using it in such a casual contest.

Trust me, I am not criticizing you. I understand what you are saying. I am simply pleading with you to think about it a little more carefully before using the term. I hope you take my remarks in the spirit in which they are intended.

[wondergirl9847]

Carne, I know people who live in NYC, and trust me, it's not something I used casually. I was just saying that we need to quit being foul towards each other, that HATRED is what caused 9-11, and I would hope that we would be ABOVE that now. That is what I MEANT. Thanks.

[Vianna]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
— The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

There is the First Amendment. Thanks for the link, CarneVaca.

The amendment would apply if this were a public forum. This is not a public forum. It is Marty Adelson's private message board on which he graciously allows us to post and talk to each other online. Therefore no one has the right here to say just anything he/she wants. Rather, Marty has the right to kick the whole bunch of us off his private property if he so chooses.

[CarneVaca]

Vianna, I know all that, believe me. I went back and forth with Marty on this very issue back around 1998. Or was it 1999? As I've stated previously, kick me off if you wish. And all those who come after me who express themselves in the same way. Then you'll end up with all the hypersensitive teenagers (and some older ones too) who want to discuss trivial matters that have nothing do do with music.

I think you way overreacted on closing the other thread with no warning whatsoever. And that is why I went on the offensive against censorship here. As a moderator, you have a responsibility to make judgement calls, and I understand that. However, and I am sure many will disagree, what you did came across as an abuse of power.

I'm sure no matter what I say you're still going to think you did the right thing. But I wish you would think for a second about allowing people to express themselves freely. Obviously I am not the only who feels this way here. If you want to continue an intelligent exchange of ideas on this board, you're going to have to allow some vituperation. That is simply the way people communicate.

[ThePenguin]

CarneVaca--

I don't remember you (and therefore a discussion with you about first amendment rights) from a few years ago. Either you were using a different username or the whole thing just didn't move from my short-term to long-term memory.

However, as Vianna pointed out and you are concurring, this is a private board. *To me*, First Amendment rights have always therefore taken a backseat to my own rights as I could close this forum temporarily or permanently at any time. That being said though, I think we give A LOT of leeway around here. *To me*, the Ledge moderators are certainly not overly aggressive in closing or deleting threads-- intervention only happens to an extremely small percentage of what is posted. If anything, my impression usually is that the majority (not everyone...the majority) would prefer the moderators to step in more often then they currently do or have in the past. We want this to be a generally pleasant environment as discussions pertaining to the band and their (in)activities are hobbies for us all.

The FAQ was updated rather recently and contains what is and is not acceptable around here. At their discretion, the moderators can close or delete threads and issue strikes to offending posters. If you disagree with the FAQ and the enforcement of it provided by the moderators, then perhaps this forum just is not for you. The moderators and I acknowledge that the FAQ will not please everyone, but no possible incarnation would anyway.

You posted to Vianna that:

As a moderator, you have a responsibility to make judgement calls, and I understand that.

and that is exactly what she did. As I post this, there have been 791 threads in this Rumours forum since The Ledges reopened a few years ago. I think I would be shocked if Vianna closed/deleted more than three or four total, which would be around 0.5%. I don't think she is abusing any "power". Even this thread which has been (again, *to me*) too critical of her has remained open so far.

- Marty

[Carole Ann]

You sly minx, you! Don't forget his assault on Dutch cheese! I don't know what category THAT would fall under!

Where've you been?


Robert wrote:

What happened to the old days when we actually had a misogynistic homophobe to argue with?

[Vianna]

As a matter of actual fact, I don't always think I do the right thing. I try to do what seems to me to be the lesser of evils at the time.

I agree with you that debate can be a good thing, I like good discussion, it livens this place up; I don't agree with you that debate necessarily has to involve vituperation. I know in the past that it has, and you don't have to tell a history teacher like myself that we have had incidents in our Congress where people have been physically hurt as a result of debate. One guy lost an ear!I just don't believe it has to come to that.

I also don't want people to feel they can't post an opinion here without having to be thick-skinned enough to be called names or to have references made to their lack of mental ability, and so on and so forth. As a teacher, I have been called every name in the book so you are not going to hurt me but so much no matter what you call me. I am used to it, and I don't let it get to my opinion of myself. I say to myself, "That is one person's opinion. I don't have to buy that". I have the advantage of being old enough and experienced in the ways of the world enough to let it go. It's not the same for everyone on this board and some of them are more easily hurt and put down. I perhaps want to protect people too much. That is my nature.

I closed a thread that was perceived as hurtful by people who reported it. The moderators have a rule about harassment and those who reported the post perceived it as harassment. Harassment is difficult to define, I admit, but I saw elements of harassment in it. I did not close it because I wanted power over anybody. If you perceive it that way, I am sorry. It was not meant that way.

I personally allow you to have your opinion. Please be willing to let me have mine.

[CarneVaca]

Marty, I didn't expect you to remember our discussion. I'm sure you've had many e-mail exchanges with other Ledge participants over the years. I see you hold the same views now as you did then, and you certainly have that right, since you own this board. At the risk of repeating myself, I only ask that you and whoever else you've charged with policing the words posted here be willing to err on the side of allowing people to exchange ideas. I didn't post here for years because I thought that it had gotten way too restrictive.

Vianna, you most certainly did overreact. It looked as if the discussion was winding down, and you acted without issuing any warning. At the very least, you could have posted a warning on the thread in question. If that is the policy here, than it is a bad policy.

When you say,

"I personally allow you to have your opinion. Please be willing to let me have mine,"

you're missing the point, and being less than accurate at that. When you close a board in which people are expressing opinions, you've just disallowed them from doing just that. And you acted on an opinion (in my view, a bad one) from which you concluded the thread should be closed. Surely you could see how someone might construe that as an abuse of authority. And as far as my allowing you to have an opinion, that is a rather ironic comment, considering that by exercising your authority based on your opinion, you deprived others of doing just that.

Yes, you are right that I made remarks about a couple of people's mental capacities, and so forth. What seems to be lost on the folks who have taken issue with how I've posted here is that a discussion is a two-way thing. If you opt to post in reaction to something I posted, and in doing so you choose to make malicious remarks about supposed sexual perversions because you misunderstood something that was posted, you've just opened yourself up to a very strongly worded retort. I didn't go running to the moderator accusing someone of "harrassment" or whatever the standard is here. I handled it myself.

If you didn't see the remarks in question, I suggest you scroll back to those comments. If someone had posted a similar comment directed at you, I would be willing to bet that you would have some kind of response. You too, Marty. So let's not kid ourselves here. I've never denied that my language was discourteous once or twice, but I haven't seen the same kind of concern expressed here over the remarks similar to those I just mentioned, which by the way were unprovoked. If I say something about the band, and someone attacks me in response, I would call that unprovoked. Is this band so sacrosanct on this board that you cannot criticize it and its members without being attacked? What's the policy on that?

[highpriestess53]

I like that word 'verbage' you know it conjures up the image of verbal garbage that keeps coming out on this thread...albeit in written form

verbal + garbage = 'verbage' very possibly a new word meaning verbal garbage, spouting crap with no purpose

of course there is the dictionary defined word 'verbiage' that defines the excessive and often meaningless use of words.....I knew what you meant....



Mmmmmmm....verbage...one to think about....

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by highpriestess53
I like that word 'verbage' you know it conjures up the image of verbal garbage that keeps coming out on this thread...albeit in written form

verbal + garbage = 'verbage' very possibly a new word meaning verbal garbage, spouting crap with no purpose

of course there is the dictionary defined word 'verbiage' that defines the excessive and often meaningless use of words.....

Mmmmmmm....one to think about....

Is this supposed to be witty?

[highpriestess53]

Originally posted by CarneVaca


Is this supposed to be witty?

You wouldn't know dear as you have none...wit that is..

[Wild Heart]

Originally posted by highpriestess53
I like that word 'verbage' you know it conjures up the image of verbal garbage that keeps coming out on this thread...albeit in written form

verbal + garbage = 'verbage' very possibly a new word meaning verbal garbage, spouting crap with no purpose

of course there is the dictionary defined word 'verbiage' that defines the excessive and often meaningless use of words.....I knew what you meant....



Mmmmmmm....verbage...one to think about....

Actually the word "verbiage" is the word I meant to use. In my fury I left out the "i" but you could be on to something with "verbage"! I have a terrible habit of skipping letters and whole words when I type messages. I should proof read but I'm too lazy. I figure whoever is reading will get the point one way or another!

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by highpriestess53



You wouldn't know dear as you have none...wit that is..

I guess that would depend on your standard of wit.

Oh, and I think the rules and regulations of this board should have a section on spelling and grammar, and on knowing what such words as "masturbatory" mean... On second thought, don't do that. You'll end up with only a handful of people, all of whom have expressed points of view similar to mine. With whom would I argue then?