| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
 Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:16:45
|
Hi all, this box will be updated and serve as a FAQ for easy reference.
Quick note:
* No more threads on forum-specific topics. Post your questions here.
* Brian or myself will lock all current forum-related threads, and refer them to this one.
So: What's Going On
I've been rather absent, and a few days ago i popped in, and noticed the 'Pictures of Beautiful Women' thread was huge (42 pages, 22k+ hits), and then there was a visit from a pedophile.
I found this shocking. I was never happy with the thread to begin with. I'd hoped when i first saw it, several months ago, that it would have faded away....unfortunately it continued.
I deleted this thread, and began this one:
http://forum.frankblack.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=13490
You're welcome to follow the thread, read what ensued. Mine opinion was that many people were being abusive and disrespectful, took things much too personally, and i felt i needed to take further action.
On to the FAQ:
* Why did you delete the thread?
I feel it was inappropriate, objectifying, disrespectful of women as people, and encouraging a wholly unhealthy attitude towards women.
* What business of yours is this?
Since i am ultimately responsible for the Forum, and the content, i need to lay down rules when i feel it's necessary.
* Why didn't you just lock it?
I do not want it, nor the consequences of such a thread impacting the future of the site, me, or Frank Black. Ultimately, anything that happens in the Forum trickles down to me, and is my responsiblity. If a thread is drawing pedophiles and making women (and men) uncomfortable, something needs to be done.
* Why now, and not six months ago?
I hoped the thread would have faded away..but it continued. I seem to recall that i might have posted something at some point, but i'm not sure. My bad.
* What about Floop?
After i requested that no more pictures and comments of women be posted, he posted another one. I requested he remove it, or i would lock his account (and anyone else.) He played dumb. I locked his account for a week.
* What about the images?
I've taken a temporary measure, both to get people's attention, and to impart the fact that posting images is a priviledge, and that with priviledges come responsibility.
I've started an opportunity to discuss this, and how we can come to a consensus, where my wishes for the Forum are respected, and the rules of posting are clarified and agreed upon. (Sorry for my delay in getting back there. Refer to here now.)
In the meantime, by preventing images from being displayed, i've made it that much more difficult for those who wish to be 'rebellious'. I do not wish to babysit, and will take these, and further measures, to ensure this.
* So what is the new rule?
No threads dedicated to 'beautiful women', or other such potentially demeaning topics. Successive postings (in any thread) of this nature will also be deemed inappropriate.
That said, on-topic discussion and pictures are fine. As an example, if a thread on a movie starts, with an image or two, comments are welcome, as long as they are respectful. If this leads to an abundance of images posted of the leading actress in skimpy outfits, then clearly it has gone too far.
Ultimately, the level of what's considered 'too much' is up to the Mods, and their decision should be treated respectfully. Insulting outbursts may lead to having your account locked.
* [Female Handle] is a "chick" and says she didn't mind the thread, so it's okay, isn't it?
As we've seen, with the backlash against myself, those who speak out against certain issues are punished quite furiously by the masses.
As such, you won't see many women (or men) speaking out, dispite their feelings.
To me, this is very problematic and troublesome, and serves to underscore how serious this issue truly is. (And yes, i have received private message from women on here indicating this. Men as well.)
Frankly, if a woman (or man) wishes to allow themselves to be objectified, that's their agenda. It's not appropriate to assume every other woman (or man) feels the same way.
* What if i want to log in with a different account and post messages in every thread? Or what if i want to call you names?
Your account will be locked. Possibly indefinitely. Best not to 'test' me, or other moderators.
Reminder of a previous rule: secondary accounts are NOT allowed. If you're found using a second account, it will be locked permanently, as well as your main account. (Possibly for a temporary amount of time.) If your account has been locked, and you wish to rectify this, please contact me privately. (ie, use the FB.net contact form.)
* You're killing the Forums!
Not likely. If people are going to leave because they can't objectify women, that's fine by me.
* Who are you?
I'm the guy that hosts the site on my server. I make sure it runs. I also set up the Forum, and did a lot of the design (thanks to many others, including Jim) and set-up most of the sections on the main site.
======
These are the main questions i've seen, feel free to post other items below. If it's FAQ-worthy, i'll post it here, otherwise i'll respond below.
Please do not post non-issue points, like 'where's Dave'.
Cheers,
- Dave |
|
|
darwin
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
5448 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:32:04
|
"After i requested that no more pictures and comments of women be posted, he posted another one. I requested he remove it, or i would lock his account (and anyone else.) He played dumb. I locked his account for a week."
He requested you state the rule clearly (as many others have). It was commonly thought that the only rule was no nudity (nipples & gentalia). Then the rule seemed to suddenly change, but we had (I believe still have) no clear idea what the rule is. That's not playing dumb.
"* You're killing the Forums!
Not likely. If people are going to leave because they can't objectify women, that's fine by me."
People might be leaving the forum because they don't like being disrespected and treated as inferiors. |
 |
|
|
darwin
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
5448 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:36:47
|
From the No Images thread:
"Um...guys...the point is to discuss the issue, not just 'chat'. Thirty postings of 'where's Dave' doesn't really accomplish much, and waters down any postings with substance."
Do you recognize how rude this is? You suggested a discussion and then left. We were frustrated with your lack of attention. |
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:39:10
|
1) is this a thread where opinions can be discussed or it is an order?
2) define objectify. human body appreciation is accepted or not?
3) is irony and humour towards mod behaviour an\or opinions reason for banning?
4) do we have to obey to a precise political behaviour before posting?
5) what other arguments are prohibited?
Zen fascists will control you,100% natural |
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:44:05
|
6) what exactly does this mean? :"I'm the guy that hosts the site on my server. I make sure it runs. I also set up the Forum, and did a lot of the design (thanks to many others, including Jim) and set-up most of the sections on the main site."
i hope that you are aware of what you are saying. i'll help out. it means:this place is mine and i do what i want even if people paid and contributed to make it what it is.
if this is the case i have a suggestion: shut down the forum completely and leave a section where only people that you personally approve can access. it will save you money, time and stress.
Zen fascists will control you,100% natural |
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:45:26
|
7) do other mods like brian or dean have any power to contradict your word or are you the only one who takes the final decisions?
Zen fascists will control you,100% natural |
|
|
|
OldManInaCoffeeCan
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1467 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:46:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
From the No Images thread:
"Um...guys...the point is to discuss the issue, not just 'chat'. Thirty postings of 'where's Dave' doesn't really accomplish much, and waters down any postings with substance."
Do you recognize how rude this is? You suggested a discussion and then left. We were frustrated with your lack of attention.
Hey darwin, I was just about to post this same quote from Dave Noisy, but now I can quote yours...
Hey Dave Noisy, where were you yesterday after you banned all images, and why didn't you discuss the situation as you implied you would?
If you care to respond to this post I'll wait a few minutes, and then I've got some responses to your thread here.
|
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:49:19
|
not trying to push boundaries or anything but it's 1 am here so i'd appreciate it if you replied to at least a couple of questions here today.
Zen fascists will control you,100% natural |
|
|
|
OldManInaCoffeeCan
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1467 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 15:54:09
|
You know, fuck this shit, I ain't got time for this bullshit [trying to decipher and make sense of Dave Noisy's actions and rules,...I'm going to visit here and post here as I please and fuck you if you lock-out my account.
FREE FLOOP
DAY 4 OF THE ONE-WEEK LOCK-OUT |
Edited by - OldManInaCoffeeCan on 07/07/2005 15:56:23 |
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 16:31:53
|
8) is pornograohy objectifying? can we discuss it (with no pictures of course)?
Zen fascists will control you,100% natural |
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 16:57:23
|
This reply has no structure i now see, too tired to improve.
Some of the stuff you have to say is ok, some is not. I could live without pictures, and i would still use this place as my source of frank black news. Maybe you should just lock the genereal topics section. But i'd miss some of the discussions here. I'd even miss Erebus, even though i can't stand some of his political hysteria.
On topic: what do you mean by this sentence: "No threads dedicated to 'beautiful women', or other such potentially demeaning topics". No picture threads or no threads at all?
I have a major problem with you trying to define what can be an issue and what can not be an issue. It is probably your right, but it isn't nice. And it is absolutely mind-boggling that you fail to see that that's whats bothering people. Regarding women rights - you do exactly the same as generations of abusing men have been doing to women - you tell them what they think and feel.
"As such, you won't see many women (or men) speaking out, dispite their feelings".
Finally:
"I've started an opportunity to discuss this, and how we can come to a consensus, where my wishes for the Forum are respected, and the rules of posting are clarified and agreed upon."
This doesn't look like an invitation for a discussion. If all your wishes must be respected, there's no point in discussing anything. Just state how you want it. I am not being difficult here, but neither your previous posts or this one really indicates that you want a discussion.
And now, finally: this is a wonderfull place and you and the contributors and the members have done a fantastic job. A lot of stupid and retarded posts have been made lately, but this whole thing has been blown out of proportion. This discussion should be postponed, at least a week, and hopefully a discussion might be possible then. |
Edited by - ivandivel on 07/07/2005 17:00:22 |
|
|
|
Chris Knight
= Cult of Ray =
USA
899 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 17:47:11
|
For the benefit of those members who are just joining this debate, these are the primary topics of interest (in addition to Dave's new "pictures of beautiful women" thread, for which he has already posted the link):
no more images on fb.net (locked but viewable)
http://forum.frankblack.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=13559
pictures of nonoffensive women (the stated reason for no more images on fb.net)
http://forum.frankblack.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=13540
pictures of beautiful men (a strong reason why some male forum members and at least one female member are calling dave's deletion of the original "pictures of beautiful women" thread an act of sexism
http://forum.frankblack.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=10898
I think you will find by reading these threads that very many people (including women) have voiced their opinions on this matter, despite Dave's claims of otherwise. This forum belongs to fans of Frank Black who should not have to agree with Dave Noisy's *opinions* in order to interact with each other - don't allow this forum to turn into forum.davenoisy.net . |
|
|
|
Carl
- A 'Fifth' Catholic -
Ireland
11546 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 18:06:53
|
"If a thread is drawing pedophiles and making women (and men) uncomfortable, something needs to be done."
It's not called 'Pictures Of Beautiful Underage Girls'. Ok, so it's a fairly boneheaded thread, but if someone posts want we'd all agree to be truly inappropriate material, the way to deal with this problem is not by stopping any images being posted on the forum. That's ridiculous. It's frustrating and confusing for so many people ont he forum to subjected to this. Someone posts a picture of an underage girl, and instead of protecting us , you punish us all. And what about the Pictures Of Beautiful Men thread? Why is'nt that wrong now? Believe me, I understand your concerns and it is important to have rules and not allow certain material, and indeed people, onto the forum, but for fucks sake, we're not a bunch of little kids. Give us some respect! |
|
|
|
Thomas
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1615 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 19:18:34
|
Thanks Dave.
I never had a problem with you deleting the thread in question. I only questioned the way it was done.
Keep up the good work.
PS. We all love Tony (floop) but as punishment maybe you should start him back at 0 posts. :)
"Our Love is Rice and Beans and Horses Lard" |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 21:00:18
|
I will try and answer as many of these as possible later tonite.
I mainly logged in after getting a note that there were MP3's posted...to make sure it was deleted.
 "Live life like you're gonna die...because you are." - William Shatner, You'll Have Time / Has Been |
|
|
|
danjersey
> Teenager of the Year <
USA
2790 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 21:17:30
|
William Shatner huh?
thats cool.
} ' ) |
|
|
|
MissMaceo
= Cult of Ray =
USA
388 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2005 : 23:19:00
|
yeah, it's a non-issue (sort of) but I gotta ask.....
Dave, are you a fellow Taurus?
Those who find themselves ridiculous, sit down next to me. |
|
|
|
Joey Joe Jo Jr. Chabadoo
* Dog in the Sand *
1056 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 02:06:23
|
I agree with the host bla bla... A bit of awareness is necessary...
But, dear Sir, when will we be able to post and view nice and artitic pictures again???
Thank U
**** |
|
|
|
dayanara
* Dog in the Sand *
Australia
1811 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 05:55:37
|
you know, i started to type out a really long response here but i'm not even going to bother as it will clearly fall on deaf ears. dave, i don't know how many more people need to tell you that the problem everyone has has nothing to do with that stupid thread and everything to do with your behavior before that little tid-bit of information will sink in.
i am sitting here observing my emotional discomfort. |
|
|
|
Thomas
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1615 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 06:37:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by dayanara
you know, i started to type out a really long response here but i'm not even going to bother as it will clearly fall on deaf ears. dave, i don't know how many more people need to tell you that the problem everyone has has nothing to do with that stupid thread and everything to do with your behavior before that little tid-bit of information will sink in.
i am sitting here observing my emotional discomfort.
I hear you.
My plea for the song database to help me work on the article database has fallen on deaf ears. Dave? and before you say e-mail me I did. Once should be enough.
"Our Love is Rice and Beans and Horses Lard" |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 11:27:31
|
Okay, got a bit of time now, starting from the top. If i've ignored you, sorry, but i don't feel your question is relevant enough, or has already been explained...and i wish to focus on what i believe is most relevant.
Darwin - it was clear that more 'pictures of women' was inappropriate at that point. I clearly asked for him to remove the image. He didn't. End of story. I have nothing further to say on the Floop issue.
re: inferiors, sorry if people feel this way, i didn't mean to make people feel this way, and perhaps people are taking things much too personally.
re: discussion, i don't have time to hang out on FB.net all day, perhaps a little patience would be nice. I don't see why people had to make several 'where's Dave' postings. In the end it was a waste of time, instead of responding i had to read the same thing over and over.
MCA - 2) objectifying another human is where you treat them as an 'object', rather than a multi-faceted human. Value is based strictly on appearance.
Ask yourself: is that how you wish to be treated? Ask yourself: how do people who don't appear that way feel when they see a thread like that, but would like to be considered and feel 'beautiful'?
6) i've considered this. If people can be respectful, i would rather not do this.
7) i suppose i have the 'final word', but i take their suggestions very seriously, and i believe that i've been pretty reasonable in this respect. I'll let them speak for themselves.
8) much of it is very objectifying, but we're not discussing porn.
MCA, i am left wondering if you're being sincere with your questions. Please try and stay focused.
[REMINDER: POSTINGS ASKING FOR ME ARE USELESS. IF YOU WANT A MORE IMMEDIATE ANSWER, SEND ME A PRIVATE MESSAGE. AFTER THIS MESSAGE, I WILL IGNORE QUESTIONS FROM PEOPLE WHO POST THIS TYPE OF QUESTION. How many times must i repeat myself??]
ivandivel - specifically threads that objectify people.
Some people want to talk about the issues, and so i'm providing a means. It will also eliminate the 10 or so 'Forum Death', 'Free Floop' and 'What's Going On' topics that sprung up.
I agree some time would be good, but as you can see, several people can't even wait a day for responses...and it's not like this is anywhere near being a 'life or death' issue.
Chris Knight - please read my first posting in this thread. As i have stated, i am ultimately responsible for the Forum, and what goes on here. I have to answer to Ken and Charles, and every single Forum member, and every person who visits. Do you understand what this means?
Carl - again, read my first post. It's a temporary means to get people's attention.
MissMaceo - off topic, but no. I'm a Vegetarius.
JJJJC - i will re-enable pictures when i get the impression that people understand what's inappropriate, and are willing to respect my request.
dayanara - so far the messages in here indicate otherwise. I agree that's an influence as well.
Thomas - thanks for the compliment, but the Song/ArticleDB is not the topic of this thread. PM me about this please.
Everyone - please try to be focused with your q's. Stay on topic, and stick with issues that are relevant. Thanks.
"Live life like you're gonna die...because you are." - William Shatner, You'll Have Time / Has Been |
|
|
|
MissMaceo
= Cult of Ray =
USA
388 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 12:35:00
|
sorry, I was the kid poking olives in my nose at Christmas dinner when the inevitable feud broke out amongst the grown ups.
trying to add a little levity, it's like a courtroom in here and plus you just really seem like a taurus and I can say that without any fear of offending because I am one.
Cheers.
Those who find themselves ridiculous, sit down next to me. |
|
|
|
darwin
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
5448 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 12:55:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
Darwin - it seems to me the majority of comments are actually about posting images of women, and that they think they should be able to, and that it doesn't demean women.
I don't agree. I think many (maybe most) of the postings are about how you are treating us.
quote:
I don't doubt that some people are also upset with my attitude. If you re-read the thread i started (picture of beautiful women thread), i tried very hard not to be demeaning. In my first few postings, what specifically did i write that was demeaning, rude or insulting?
Your 1st post:
"Hi all, i've deleted the former thread of this title... I was never crazy about it, and it really bothers me seeing 42 pages and 22,000+ views on such a shallow thread.
I would like to try and make a more positive twist on this.. Instead of relying on the physical characteristics of a woman to make her beautiful..tell us in your words something that you find beautiful in a woman you know."
You're treating us like children. My translation: "Here kids, try to be better people and describe what you think makes a woman beautiful."
Your 2nd posting:
"Wow..talkin' 'bout everything but what really matters...
This was more of a challenge than anything...and so far not very successful..
To permeate the belief that beauty is skin deep is pretty sad...and that was exactly what's going on.
I give you an opportunity to prove that you are actually *above* the standard (and unacceptable) level of sexism, and some of you go on defending it, citing 'free speech' and other unrelated bullshit.
Translation: "give you an opportunity" is demeaning (i.e. you're superior and are giving us a chance to prove our worth)
<snip>
If you really want to demonstrate that you accept women for who they are, and that beauty is *more* than skin deep, then put your money where your mouth is, and post something beautiful about a woman, that isn't based on a photograph.
Translation: "If you really want to demonstrate" once again is language that we need to prove ourselves to you, a superior.
Otherwise, you're only succeeding in substantiating my viewpoint.
Translation: "succeeding in substantiating my viewpoint" - the same ("parental disapproval")
You have an opportunity here to really, truly shine. Challenge yourself, rather than attempting to challenge me.
Damn that makes my blood boil. Do you see how you've tried to place yourself above all of us? "rather than attempting to challenge me" - language of adult to a child or a teacher to student. Attempt to challenge - you can attempt a challenge, but you can't actually challenge me because I'm your superior
Your reply to me last night:
"And besides all this silliness, it's clear that a progressive view of sexism and the significance of objectification is very unfamiliar ground for many. (Sorry if that sounds patronizing..that is not my intent.) I certainly misunderstood it for many years, and thought that 'letting women work and not pinching their butts' was what it was all about....and i was an idiot for not looking any deeper all those years."
Translation: I use to be dumb like you but I educated myself.
quote:
I agree that i'm not a better person than anyone here, and i don't mean for people to think i am. That is just a way to sidestep a point...being that i'm resposible for this Forum.
Your words don't support this claim. |
|
|
|
dayanara
* Dog in the Sand *
Australia
1811 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 14:05:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
dayanara - so far the messages in here indicate otherwise. I agree that's an influence as well.
in here meaning this thread? certainly not, because i don't see a single person supporting your deletion of the thread because they found it objectionable, and show me ANYONE that thinks removing images from this site was a good idea. even those that didn't like that thread don't think it should be deleted. you need to start actually reading what people are writing. the people who do support your decision end up writing something like this: "well, it's dave's forum. i don't agree with this, but what can you do?" is that really how you're interested in running this place? what you also may not realise is that some long standing members (not trolls, not pedophiles) are so fed up with you (you, not the lack of nudie pictures) that they've already stopped reading/posting here.
oh and darwin, you forgot the "wow. you guys suck" quote. i'd say that was pretty condescending seeing as we're being accused of attacking for no reason and not acting like adults.
i am sitting here observing my emotional discomfort. |
Edited by - dayanara on 07/08/2005 14:07:44 |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 14:52:41
|
Darwin - thank you for your interpretations. I don't feel the messages you're relaying represent the messages i wrote, i think you're digging a little too deep, jumping to conclusions, and putting too many words in my mouth. That's my feeling.
I can now see why you're upset, and i'm sorry if that's the message you've gotten from me.
The superiority you're talking about is inherent in the fact that i am an authority here, and that i have to make a decision that some people obviously aren't going to like.
How could i have presented this without appearing 'superior'?
dayanara - i don't have much to say. You're dealing with Forum-only messages, and i'm dealing with these, plus private messages. There's a bit more here than meets the eye.
You haven't seen any posts in support of deleting the thread because people know they will be labeled and attacked like me...and considering the numbers, it's no wonder they're staying quiet. Who would want to deal with this level of hostility?
"Live life like you're gonna die...because you are." - William Shatner, You'll Have Time / Has Been |
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 15:32:18
|
[quote]Originally posted by Dave Noisy
MCA - 2) objectifying another human is where you treat them as an 'object', rather than a multi-faceted human. Value is based strictly on appearance.
says who? i don't think that people here did so, nor i've noticed misogynist behaviour of any kind. that thread (and mind you i didn't even post there nor i visited it but rarely)was about celebrities. so what? it was gossip, stupid and superficial. i'll repeat:so what? is this forum a clinic for the insicure personalities that can't handle a little of healthy jokes? nothing to do with explicit nude or worse paedophile material which as i stated 1000 times i condemn and i would never criticise deleting or banning.
Ask yourself: is that how you wish to be treated? Ask yourself: how do people who don't appear that way feel when they see a thread like that, but would like to be considered and feel 'beautiful'?
i don't have to ask myself anything. i am perfectly conscious of the fact that i don't look like bradd pitt and i couldn't care less. and those who snob me for my looks i don't bother.
whoever posted in that thread would never actually treat a lady as a j.connely foto. is it so hard to get? is it so difficult to understand that there is a difference between pub gossip and actual beliefs? have you never wished a referree dead because he bashed your team? would you actually kill him?
6) i've considered this. If people can be respectful, i would rather not do this.
what does this phrase mean?
7) i suppose i have the 'final word', but i take their suggestions very seriously, and i believe that i've been pretty reasonable in this respect. I'll let them speak for themselves.
am i to assume that they are with you on this? since nobody said anything contrary it is that either they agree or that they disagree but they are not allowed in the decision making process. i would liek to hear from them. in pubblic.
8) much of it is very objectifying, but we're not discussing porn.
yes we are in a way. since you make a principle out of this and you are not open to other people's point of view nor you tollerate it you must clearly explain what you consider offending and what not.
MCA, i am left wondering if you're being sincere with your questions. Please try and stay focused.
that's funny. give me one reason for spending my time typing if i didn't care about this place. i'm as sincere as it gets, and i'm finding it hard to fight my impulse to abbandon this right now 'cause i find this discussion abstract, academic and not productive at all. it is all focused on avoiding the real issues and meant to derail attention to irrelevant generic discussion about good manners and forum etiquette. if you want the truth i think that this is more about your hurt ego and not about an actual emergency of paedophiles or misogynist invaders.
Zen fascists will control you,100% natural |
Edited by - mun chien andalusia on 07/08/2005 16:19:24 |
|
|
|
darwin
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
5448 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 15:40:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
The superiority you're talking about is inherent in the fact that i am an authority here, and that i have to make a decision that some people obviously aren't going to like.
How could i have presented this without appearing 'superior'?
You can't fix the problem until you realize you aren't the superior. We aren't here to follow your orders, to make you proud of us, to "prove" ourselves, to "truly shine" in your eyes.
Do you really want me to give advice about how to treat people with respect? There are people with far more responsibilities than running a forum that treat their coworkers, employees, and partners with far more respect than you have given us.
|
|
|
|
Broken Face
-= Forum Pistolero =-
USA
5155 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 20:02:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by mun chien andalusia
7) i suppose i have the 'final word', but i take their suggestions very seriously, and i believe that i've been pretty reasonable in this respect. I'll let them speak for themselves.
am i to assume that they are with you on this? since nobody said anything contrary it is that either they agree or that they disagree but they are not allowed in the decision making process. i would liek to hear from them. in pubblic.
donnie,
i see no reason to take sides on this publically. if anyone private messaged me, i'd speak to them a bit more frankly than i would here. i do that for 2 reasons:
1) i don't need my words taken out of context and twisted to support someone else's argument and
2) as moderator, my job is to be a liason between the administrators and the forum. how does it help either side for me to be partial?
i know people want to know what i think, but i think that the more important part is that rather than post my every last opinion, i'm trying to be proactive and actually try and get the forum back to its friendly self. how am i doing this? by emailing people (like you donnie) and getting their take on things and talking to the admins and coming up with compromises and discussing alternative ways to do things. i feel in the long run that this is much more useful than me spilling my guts about what i feel is good or not. right now i don't have internet at my apartment and i spent 2 nights in a row in my office until after 11 (i'm @ a friend's now) doing forum stuff. that may not be 'public discussion' but it is forum activity that hopefully will make this place better.
not only that, but if you dig around you'll see a lot more that i said than i probably shouldn't have. but, i'll give everyone the short version:
i want images back asap. but that isn't my call
i think that we need to keep discussing the pictures... threads and come to a forum consensus on what should be done
i think tony should (and will) be back sooner than later
i think that everyone needs to cool out and relax
i hope this clears things up a bit
-Brian
If you move I shoots!
|
|
|
|
danjersey
> Teenager of the Year <
USA
2790 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 20:18:51
|
all of us RAOK.
bring back the LOCKED. |
|
|
|
Chris Knight
= Cult of Ray =
USA
899 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 22:30:31
|
Dave,
OK, this is (hopefully) my last post on this subject, given that I am becoming ever more aware that the problems this forum is currently facing are of much less importance to me than the ones I am currently dealing with in real life. Dave, I can see that, by your continuation of this thread and your thorough addressing of questions (though some parts of questions do seem to be unaddressed, perhaps because of your refusal to accept some blatant facts), you at least care a little about what the people here think/feel about your actions thus far and are willing to entertain ideas for a quick solution to this problem.
Well, here is my solution: delete the "pictures of beautiful men" thread, and do not allow the creation of ANY threads devoted to pictures inclusive/exclusive to one sex. You may ask, "Why should the 'pictures of beautiful men' thread be deleted?" Because (1) the determination of what is unacceptable (other than pornographic materials, paedophilia or otherwise) is wholly subjective. What purpose do the pictures posted in the "pictures of beautiful men" serve, other than for arousal of libido-derived fantasies (no matter how innocuous/miniscule)? The pictures certainly aren't there to remind the viewer of the picture subject's favorable personality traits or impressive talents in their vocation of choice. (2) To delete the "pictures of beautiful women" thread, which contained at least SOME pictures which were, by any rational human being's standards, wholly acceptable for viewing in the context of this forum, and to leave the "pictures of beautiful men" thread wholly unscathed is, without a doubt, a form of sexual discrimination against the men on this forum. I never, ever gave a damn about the thread you deleted, but when an act of sexism is perpetrated on this message board by any/all of the moderators, it upsets me deeply.
To answer your comments that address me personally, I think it's pretty obvious that I did read your first post, since I stated that it contained a link to your "pictures of beautiful women" thread. Also, just because you are technically responsible for this forum does not mean that you are necessarily CAPABLE of being responsible for this forum. The fact that it has taken so much influence from the people on this forum (who make this forum what it is, not the server, software, etc.) for you to entertain even slightly the validity of the popular forum opinion shows that you are at least a little lacking in the areas of "open-mindedness" and "listening ability", which you yourself cite as prerequisites for being a moderator on this forum.
On a different note, your repeated citation of intimidating/inflammatory remarks as the reason why very few in agreeance with your so-called principles are speaking up is, to be frank, absurd. Most (maybe all) of the people participating in this thread are speaking in a civil (if aggressively intellectual) manner. Are we to assume that your proponents on this issue are incapable of the intellectual capacity or lacking in the self-assuredness that it takes to participate effectively in this discussion? Maybe you'd like to start a forum poll inquiring about how many people agree with your decisions to delete the "women pictures" thread and leave the "men pictures" thread intact? I'd love to be surprised at the number of "yay" votes such a survey would receive, but I just don't think it's going to happen.
Finally, if you do not take the actions I prescribed or at least similarly rational ones, I would suggest in lieu of this that you more thoroughly assume your role of maintaining the home page (www.frankblack.net) and relegate your moderating duties to someone more representative of the popular opinion of this forum. I apologize for any remarks I have made here or elsewhere that come across as too personal, but I stand by this sentiment. |
Edited by - Chris Knight on 07/08/2005 22:33:53 |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2005 : 22:39:15
|
MCA - you're mixing terms. I don't think i've said people are being misogynistic (women hating). And it's pretty clear that the thread was almost entirely based on objectifying women...since their appearance was the main reason an image would appear.
I'm happy you're comfortable with how you appear. I don't think many men will tell you that they have more pressure on them to look a certain way, vs women. It's not how most men feel that concerns me.
re: 6 - i'm referring to shutting down the Forum and making it private.
re: 7 - no, the decision is entirely mine. Brian respects my request. You may contact him privately for the full dirt. ;)
If you want to focus on the 'real issue', then ask questions about the 'real issue'. You asked questions, i answered them. You're directing the traffic here buddy.
Darwin - again, i think you are taking this far too personally. I am sorry that i've made you feel this way. I hope you can overlook my personal flaws, and try to understand why i'm making this request, and respect my decision.
Brian - sorry you gotta deal with this. =(
Dan - you're lucky i'm in a good mood.
"Live life like you're gonna die...because you are." - William Shatner, You'll Have Time / Has Been |
|
|
|
darwin
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
5448 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2005 : 01:09:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
Darwin - again, i think you are taking this far too personally. I am sorry that i've made you feel this way. I hope you can overlook my personal flaws, and try to understand why i'm making this request, and respect my decision.
Apparently you'll never take responsibility for your words and attitude and instead push it off as me taking it personally (many other people that I have spoken to share the same opinion), despite me taking the time to answer your request to show how your postings have been offensive. I'm done wasting my time. |
Edited by - darwin on 07/09/2005 01:31:16 |
|
|
|
starmekitten
-= Forum Pistolera =-
United Kingdom
6370 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2005 : 01:51:56
|
re-post. got chicken then got brave then got chicken then got ach I don't care anymore..
As far as people who agreed with the thread being deleted I am one of them. I've said I wouldn't have deleted it myself, and thats true, I couldn't deal with the backlash. Whilst I think the way it was handled wasn't great (Sorry Dave, but it was terrible) I think there is an unadressed gender dynamic that is hard to talk about on forum. Here there are a minority of women posters, and that can be weird where you have a largely male group with few gals about. For the large part, the people on this forum are sound and sweet and people I wouldn't mind chatting away to for an afternoon in a coffee shop.
However, as with any internet site you get your fair share of creeps and predators who think the girls are after the same things they are. I've had e mails and IM's that have bordered on (and in rare cases leapt into) the innapropriate. I didn't want to post this, because the wrong people would take it to heart and think they have to censor themselves, the good souls who are sweet and harmless and we all love.
But you guys are kidding yourself if you think this doesn't happen.
As far as womens image perception is concerned, I think it would do some of you good to read through this thread - but please not ressurect it because it was hard enough the first time round -
(http://forum.frankblack.net/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12923&SearchTerms=b )
to see what media and social pressure and related issues makes girls feel like. These posts are all forum girls that you chat to every day and we have all suffered through these feelings.
Before any backlash and any "men too" I know, I know, if the majority of you feel the "beautiful men thread" propogates an attitude that causes these issues in men too then I would also agree with this thread being deleted for balance. Although I say again, I started that thread in direct retaliation to the gender imbalance/beautiful women in many threads that was occuring at the time. One of the reasons I liked beautiful women was because it contained most of it.
I question, as I think Dave should, whether the majority of complaints about the thread deletion is not to do with the deletion or the surrounding objectification issues but more to do with a hit to the pride, an insult as it were in the way it was handled. Which is a very real and very valid complaint
|
Edited by - starmekitten on 07/09/2005 02:02:42 |
|
|
|
klikger
= Cult of Ray =
693 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2005 : 02:00:58
|
Dear Dave,
Please unlock the pictures, explain to us that you don't think yourself morally superior to people with other viewpoints, and let's forget that this little disagreement ever happened. Minor issues such as illegal content can be dealt with in a proactive way as needed.
Love always,
The Forum |
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2005 : 06:10:57
|
brian: you know that i appreciate your efforts and of course i understand that you are in a delicate position and you cannot post here everything. but i do think that your (and other mods') pubblic expression on the subject is important just to underline that this is not personal but about how this place is run. so thanks for clarifiing.
dave n: how exactly a man that objectifies women on purpose and consciously is not a misogynist? i don't find any contradiction in this. it's not the same term but one implies the other. and that's what you are saying when you accuse someone of considering women mere objects. that he doesn't consider them normal or equal to men, ergo hates them. so following your argument whoever appreciates female form in any situation (including admiring fotos of celebrities) is intimately misogynistic. i am not against your general principle on the argument. i'm against your totaly narrow,unelastic and unrealistic position on the argument that excludes even a funny and innocent passtime like gossip and pub-type coments and attributes so much importance on a silly thread and its "implications". i will repeat that i don't care that you deleted that thread. as i read there was some serious trolling going on there and that some female members didn't approve much from the beginning so i guess i understand it (even if i fail to understand why people take internet stupidity so seriously). what i don't understand is your exagerated response. deleting, banning and taking all pics down offending not only trolls but people who had nothing to do with this story and generating useless animosity (you didn't expect that such drastic measures would pass uncommented did you?). having morals doesn't exclude humour and some superficiality. we are not priests after all nor kids that need their parents to change channel when boobies pass on the screen (a stupid thing to do as a parent but i may start a thread on this).
bottom line:
1) images back.
2) i don't think that we need to keep discussing the pictures... threads since it's pretty clear (it was always) that the majority of us never did nor would post offending pictures. if you still think that there is an issue post some general guidelines on women appreciation threads just to make sure.
3) tony and chickenwith2heads should be back
i'm cool and relaxed but i would like some apologies here. i'm ready to apologise if i went out of line. my excuse is that i got heated with this indiscriminated banning and foto deleting.
Zen fascists will control you,100% natural |
|
|
|
Carl
- A 'Fifth' Catholic -
Ireland
11546 Posts |
Posted - 07/09/2005 : 06:23:00
|
| How about a Pictures Of Beautiful People thread, that everybody can post in? That way, it's easier for both sexes to share there opinions on what is sexist or off-putting. And it would'nt seperate it into 'the boys, straight or bi-sexual and the gay women post here, the girls, straight or bi-sexual and the gay men go here.' |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
THE 'Whats Going On' Thread - Refer to 1st Message
