Jump to content
Hamer Fan Club Message Center

Political correctness gone too far?


MCChris

Recommended Posts

On 10/12/2018 at 3:49 PM, MCChris said:

 

As for the lying about purchases or the "you got that so I get this" dynamic, once again, those are manifestations of issues within particular relationships, not indictments of male-female relationships as a whole.

Totally agree.  My wife doesn't have a problem with my purchases, but I still joke about it.  And it's not just the guitar community that does this; it's cars, guns, motorcycles, and yeah, purses, shoes, clothing, etc...  Like someone said, he can do what he wants on his page, but honestly, if anyone is that easily offended by silly memes or age old jokes, I'm not sure how they function in life without a continuous case of the vapors.  It must be absolutely exhausting spending your entire day looking for reasons to be offended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

What "exactly" did you mean by that, Cary?!

I'm not sure whether or not I should be offended by your post...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, cmatthes said:

What "exactly" did you mean by that, Cary?!

I'm not sure whether or not I should be offended by your post...

The rule of thumb these days (and that's supposedly an offensive saying, BTW), is that if you're not sure, then to be on the safe side you should  be offended. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think once one becomes familiar with a forum community, getting along should be pretty instinctual and shouldn't need written rules. I mean, some of the things that we feel comfortable saying here would probably not be a good idea to say elsewhere until you're familiar with the zeitgeist of the forum, but it's a safe rule of thumb to treat people online the way you'd treat them in person (rather than using online anonymity to be a jerk).

On the other hand, I can see why someone would want written guidelines. The truth is, a moderator in any forum is just as capable of acting like a jerk as a forum member, and to prevent moderators from banning people simply because they don't like or agree with them (or to protect moderators from being accused of doing so), it's best to have written rules to which both the users and moderators can appeal when there's a difference of opinion or dispute.

Food for thought...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been a mod on Jemsite.com for 15 years and the rules there are basically the same as laid out in this thread - "don't be a richard" (I'm at work, so work safe lol). We have written rules somewhere, but they overwhelmingly deal with the classifieds section and it's expectations not other sections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, FGJ said:

I think once one becomes familiar with a forum community, getting along should be pretty instinctual and shouldn't need written rules. I mean, some of the things that we feel comfortable saying here would probably not be a good idea to say elsewhere until you're familiar with the zeitgeist of the forum, but it's a safe rule of thumb to treat people online the way you'd treat them in person (rather than using online anonymity to be a jerk).

On the other hand, I can see why someone would want written guidelines. The truth is, a moderator in any forum is just as capable of acting like a jerk as a forum member, and to prevent moderators from banning people simply because they don't like or agree with them (or to protect moderators from being accused of doing so), it's best to have written rules to which both the users and moderators can appeal when there's a difference of opinion or dispute.

Food for thought...

 

Good points.

It's also well within a moderator/admin's purview to ban somebody who gets abusive with another member either on the board or offline.  Pretty tough to commit that to writing because most situations are unique, but it should fall under the "Don't be a dick" catch-all wording.  There are plenty of things I don't agree with that I see online, but it's the internet, so tough to say if I can "like" or "dislike" somebody I don't actually know, but in general, we really do try to be as unbiased as possible here.   We're not perfect, but we've been doing this long enough to know when somebody is going to cause problems.


The fact that after 22 years I can still count on my fingers (give or take maybe a couple of toes) the number of times we've banned somebody, probably speaks to the formula's overall success.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cary said:

The rule of thumb these days (and that's supposedly an offensive saying, BTW), is that if you're not sure, then to be on the safe side you should  be offended. ;)

When I was in grammar school, one of my classmates was born with 5 fingers on each hand, but no thumbs.
He probably doesn't like the "rule of thumb" expression.
He probably also can't hitchhike. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kizanski said:

When I was in grammar school, one of my classmates was born with 5 fingers on each hand, but no thumbs.
He probably doesn't like the "rule of thumb" expression.
He probably also can't hitchhike. 

not nice to make fun of such a person,

 

although he probably will not be on a guitar forum.......😎

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gtrdaddy said:

He also probably got confused when he tried to flip you off.

No, that he could do. Because he had a middle finger.
He could also open a can of soda, eat a sandwich, write cursive, and turn a page in a textbook.
Try those without your thumbs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, cmatthes said:

Good points.

It's also well within a moderator/admin's purview to ban somebody who gets abusive with another member either on the board or offline.  Pretty tough to commit that to writing because most situations are unique, but it should fall under the "Don't be a dick" catch-all wording.  There are plenty of things I don't agree with that I see online, but it's the internet, so tough to say if I can "like" or "dislike" somebody I don't actually know, but in general, we really do try to be as unbiased as possible here.   We're not perfect, but we've been doing this long enough to know when somebody is going to cause problems.

 

I think the "Don't be a dick" rule is pretty much a matter of common sense and, in a perfect world, shouldn't require further explanation. However, we don't live in a perfect world and there will always be times when people (no matter how well they get along) will disagree. In such instances, a "dick" to one person may simply be a cigar to another, and a clear articulation of standards helps adjudicate such disputes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FGJ said:

I think the "Don't be a dick" rule is pretty much a matter of common sense and, in a perfect world, shouldn't require further explanation. However, we don't live in a perfect world and there will always be times when people (no matter how well they get along) will disagree. In such instances, a "dick" to one person may simply be a cigar to another, and a clear articulation of standards helps adjudicate such disputes.

I see what you did there...

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FGJ said:

 In such instances, a "dick" to one person may simply be a cigar to another, and a clear articulation of standards helps adjudicate such disputes.

When the Forum Admin tells you to cool it because you're being a dick, it's time to cool it, even if you feel that you're actually being a cigar.
Not having read the guidelines since I co-wrote them 10+ years ago (true story), I think it still says something in there about this not being a Democracy. It did at the time, anyway. But even if it doesn't it still isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2018 at 1:50 PM, MCChris said:

Aaaaaaaand the Rear Page thread has been locked lol.

I like the way he tried to recruit his readership to become tattle tales, as in,

"It would help us tremendously if you would hit that "report to admins' button"
if you see one [i.e., offensive post] as we can't be here all the time."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JohnnyB said:

I like the way he tried to recruit his readership to become tattle tales, as in,

"It would help us tremendously if you would hit that "report to admins' button"
if you see one [i.e., offensive post] as we can't be here all the time."

They're a buncha cocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kizanski said:

When the Forum Admin tells you to cool it because you're being a dick, it's time to cool it, even if you feel that you're actually being a cigar.
Not having read the guidelines since I co-wrote them 10+ years ago (true story), I think it still says something in there about this not being a Democracy. It did at the time, anyway. But even if it doesn't it still isn't.

I think you're missing the point. When a person disagrees in good conscience and isn't trying to be difficult, and should a moderator accuse such a person of being a dick, the accused will suspect the moderator of being a dick himself for either being biased, overly-sensitive, or exhibiting some prejudice. That's why being able to point to rules may help adjudicate any dispute. Of course, we could always hold a vote and ask everyone in the thread if the accused is actually being a dick, but since this isn't a democracy and we don't want this to devolve into mob rule, it seems an appeal to a fixed written standard will at least appear fair and impartial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, FGJ said:

I think you're missing the point. When a person disagrees in good conscience and isn't trying to be difficult, and should a moderator accuse such a person of being a dick, the accused will suspect the moderator of being a dick himself for either being biased, overly-sensitive, or exhibiting some prejudice. That's why being able to point to rules may help adjudicate any dispute. Of course, we could always hold a vote and ask everyone in the thread if the accused is actually being a dick, but since this isn't a democracy and we don't want this to devolve into mob rule, it seems an appeal to a fixed written standard will at least appear fair and impartial.

Nope. I didn't miss the  point.
See: "Not a Democracy" above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we think of it around here as a "self-policing community of generally good people who aren't dicks", rather than "mob rule".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, FGJ said:

I think you're missing the point. When a person disagrees in good conscience and isn't trying to be difficult, and should a moderator accuse such a person of being a dick, the accused will suspect the moderator of being a dick himself for either being biased, overly-sensitive, or exhibiting some prejudice. That's why being able to point to rules may help adjudicate any dispute. Of course, we could always hold a vote and ask everyone in the thread if the accused is actually being a dick, but since this isn't a democracy and we don't want this to devolve into mob rule, it seems an appeal to a fixed written standard will at least appear fair and impartial.

Moxie is showing a lot of moxie.  Lots of attitude in his posts.  Good conscience or not, there is a way to present your point of view without insulting moderators.  Or as the case may be, without being a dick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cmatthes said:

I think we think of it around here as a "self-policing community of generally good people who aren't dicks", rather than "mob rule".

Yeah, I totally agree that we're self-policing. I think that's the ideal.

By "mob-rule", I meant we shouldn't allow a vote to overrule a moderator whose attempting to uphold standards, mete out justice to people being dick-ish, and generally settle disputes. If we allowed everything to be settled by a vote, there would be no point in having a moderator, without which things could get ugly.

And my suggesting that written rules exist is for pragmatic reasons that protect the moderators as much as they protect members, i.e., written rules can't be accused of being biased or dick-ish. If one doesn't like the rules, he can go elsewhere. It's as simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BubbaVO said:

Moxie is showing a lot of moxie.  Lots of attitude in his posts.  Good conscience or not, there is a way to present your point of view without insulting moderators.  Or as the case may be, without being a dick.

Yeah, I think he was being argumentative, even if I agree with his point that there should be written rules. I'm all for debating a point, but one ought to be civil to the best of one's abilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're on the same page, ultimately.  The whole "don't be a dick" thing is pretty much common sense to most people, and unless there is some sort of aggressive behavior towards a moderator or another member, we typically start with warnings - suspensions, if warranted.  

Since we have considerable experience working with this forum over many years, we reserve the right to take accelerated action if we spot a problem. That is entirely at our discretion, and honestly, not really open for debate.  You're either a member, a guest or neither.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Creating rules simply for the sake of having rules is silly.  Rules create work.  Rules require consequences.  There are multiple posts here each day that would likely violate any reasonable list of rules.  I appreciate the latitude given here that allows us to express real feelings without fear of reprimand in the form of some rehash of lessons we were taught as children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...