Missing Members

[Mirror Image]

Well, for the sake of argument, if the moderators did consider you to have said something wrong then in my view it would be far more helpful and informative for it to be a matter of public record as to what the moderators thought.

I'd love to know why for sure but I can imagine the deleted posts in regards to fellow member Carlo Gesualdo were deleted for a falsified notion that what I said was a form of bullying when the reality was I was making a complaint (along with several other members) that was about his continuous thread creation. I think the moderators believe that deleting posts somehow gives them the ability to silence other members, but, if anything, it makes their argument even more vocal.

[Madiel]

Yes, well, that's the problem isn't it? It's left to imagination.

And for anyone not directly involved, it's impossible to understand what happened, or to learn anything from it.

[Mirror Image]

Yes, well, that's the problem isn't it? It's left to imagination.

And for anyone not directly involved, it's impossible to understand what happened, or to learn anything from it.

Yep and once the magic eraser is in the moderators' hands, no one will know anything and that's the way they'd like to keep it evidently.

[bhodges]

No one here who had an objection to this member's endless threads bullied him, Gurn. If we're bullies for bringing up our annoyance, then, by golly, we need to be taken outside and horsewhipped but how could I forget that this isn't the moderators' style here is it? You guys would rather erase history than actually acknowledge those members who had a legitimate complaint. There were four members (Ken B, San Antone, Symphonic Addict, and myself) who took issue with Carlo Gesualdo. If you're making light of the situation and these complaints mean nothing to you, then you really should be stripped of your moderator title and actually give it to someone who does care about the concerns of these members.

We do care about the concerns of members.

We addressed yours both in private and in public, neither of which appears to have made any impact on you.

We told you our suggestion, to ignore this member, yet you still insist on making this an issue.

There are other boards out there, feel free to choose (and fund) one that is more to your liking.

--Bruce

[Mirror Image]

We do care about the concerns of members.

We addressed yours both in private and in public, neither of which appears to have made any impact on you.

We told you our suggestion, to ignore this member, yet you still insist on making this an issue.

There are other boards out there, feel free to choose (and fund) one that is more to your liking.

--Bruce

Award-winning moderation right here, ladies and gentlemen. Bravo, take a bow. You have done nothing to address our concerns. Your suggestion is turn the other cheek and it's difficult to do when the member posts a new thread every time he has an idea.

[Madiel]

There are other boards out there, feel free to choose (and fund) one that is more to your liking.

This shows a spectacular lack of insight into how people feel invested (and I choose that word deliberately) in a community they've been participating in for a lengthy period.

[Mirror Image]

This shows a spectacular lack of insight into how people feel invested (and I choose that word deliberately) in a community they've been participating in for a lengthy period.

Indeed. I'm not leaving. They'll have to ban me before that happens. If I do leave, which I've done before (numerous times), I'll leave on my own, but I can assure you it won't be because of any of the moderators, it will be because I feel that I'm simply not wanted here, which is what I basically got from that snippet you quoted from Brewski. It's no secret he doesn't like me and has basically told me in private message that I'm not 'one of his people', which is odd considering I've been nothing but nice to him in the past. Go figure.

[JBS]

Award-winning moderation right here, ladies and gentlemen. Bravo, take a bow. You have done nothing to address our concerns. Your suggestion is turn the other cheek and it's difficult to do when the member posts a new thread every time he has an idea.

I will point out again that in such a situation, there is no obligation on the part of anyone to read the thread(s). Do what I do: ignore the threads you don't like.

[Mirror Image]

I will point out again that in such a situation, there is no obligation on the part of anyone to read the thread(s). Do what I do: ignore the threads you don't like.

But it's difficult to do when so many are posted, Jeffrey. The way the forum is setup you can ignore a member, but you can still see their threads. Trust me, if there was an option to actually ignore the member, I would, but since there's not, I felt I had to say something about the sheer volume of threads being posted. And as it turned out, I wasn't the only one with the same complaint. But if turning my cheek is the only option I have, I guess I have no choice.

[Ratliff]

I'd love to know why for sure but I can imagine the deleted posts in regards to fellow member Carlo Gesualdo were deleted for a falsified notion that what I said was a form of bullying when the reality was I was making a complaint (along with several other members) that was about his continuous thread creation. I think the moderators believe that deleting posts somehow gives them the ability to silence other members, but, if anything, it makes their argument even more vocal.

You bullied CG mercilessly.

I will repeat a comment I made in a now deleted thread.

This is a public forum, owned and managed by people other than you. Why do you presume it is your place to lecture people about how they should use a public resource? You presume an authority you do not have and have not earned.

Put the shoe on the other foot. How would you feel if every time you posted here you were stalked by another user, who wrote paragraph after paragraph about how you are not using the forum appropriately, claiming that, for example, you make too many posts and crowd out other posts that are more interesting. How would you feel?

On another level, CG has confessed on this forum that this place is in some sense a refuge from a difficult life. And yet you have typed in paragraph after paragraph scolding and belittling him. The slight inconvenience of seeing a larger than usual number of threads that don't interest you is more important the his sense of welcome and wellbeing on this site? It is a level of cruelty that I find disturbing to witness, let along be on the receiving end of.

[Mirror Image]

You bullied CG mercilessly.

I will repeat a comment I made in a now deleted thread.

This is a public forum, owned and managed by people other than you. Why do you presume it is your place to lecture people about how they should use a public resource? You presume an authority you do not have and have not earned.

Put the shoe on the other foot. How would you feel if every time you posted here you were stalked by another user, who wrote paragraph after paragraph about how you are not using the forum appropriately, claiming that, for example, you make too many posts and crowd out other posts that are more interesting. How would you feel?

On another level, CG has confessed on this forum that this place is in some sense a refuge from a difficult life. And yet you have typed in paragraph after paragraph scolding and belittling him. The slight inconvenience of seeing a larger than usual number of threads that don't interest you is more important the his sense of welcome and wellbeing on this site? It is a level of cruelty that I find disturbing to witness, let along be on the receiving end of.

You're blowing this completely out of proportion. Cruelty? Disturbing to witness? WTF? All I asked was the member to reconsider the number of threads he created because it was getting out-of-hand and, yes, I did post on several of his threads, which was MY RIGHT TO DO SO. It seems like if a person expresses an annoyance, they're the ones who end up backed into a corner. I don't presume I'm an authority of anyone on this forum. People have a right to come here and create as many threads as they like much like I have just as much the right to complain about it. Deal with it or don't deal with it, I gave my stance on the matter and the option I was given was to turn the other cheek and this is what I'm going to do from now on since it's controversial to share an honest complaint on something that was bothering me.

[amw]

I don't understand why people here seem to have a problem with someone else posting things they're not interested in reading. There are at least a dozen such people on the forum I can think of, I've had them on ignore for years and only unhide their posts when they're in a topic I'm interested in, everything runs smoothly.

As someone who has moderated large web forums in the past, I don't think deleting threads should be anything but a last resort (in fact we didn't delete anything—even spam or pornography—we just moved everything to a "deleted items" forum not visible to regular users, for record keeping) and disagree with the widespread use of that tactic here but am aware my opinion carries very little weight.

[Harry]

Mirror image and Madiel, maybe you should get a room together!
You just stop harassing the moderators on GMG, if anyone, both of you should be heavily moderated. You are very fortunate that our moderators are very tolerant of your childish pranks. If it was for me, I would have removed you after the things you wrote in this thread!
You disgust me, both of you.
A very happy and peaceful christmas to you both.........not!

[Ratliff]

You're blowing this completely out of proportion. Cruelty? Disturbing to witness? WTF? All I asked was the member to reconsider the number of threads he created because it was getting out-of-hand and, yes, I did post on several of his threads, which was MY RIGHT TO DO SO. It seems like if a person expresses an annoyance, they're the ones who end up backed into a corner. I don't presume I'm an authority of anyone on this forum. People have a right to come here and create as many threads as they like much like I have just as much the right to complain about it. Deal with it or don't deal with it, I gave my stance on the matter and the option I was given was to turn the other cheek and this is what I'm going to do from now on since it's controversial to share an honest complaint on something that was bothering me.

No, I have no right to tell you what you can or cannot post on this forum, but I refer you to the primary rule in the forum guidelines

Please treat other members of this forum with courtesy and respect. By all means, discuss and argue the topic at hand, but do not make personal attacks, belittle, make fun of, or insult another member.

You certainly belittled and insulted CG by making it clear that you felt you had the right to dictate to him how he was allowed to use the forum. You disrupted every topic he tried to discuss with your condescending hectoring. These posts, as far as I know, have been deleted by moderators, and rightfully so, and as a result I cannot quote them directly.

[Florestan]

I'm not happy with any member leaving. I hope Ken will reconsider.

Come  on, guys, this is an anonymous forum, nothing that's said here has the least importance in real life. Live and let live!

[Que]

Yes, well, that's the problem isn't it? It's left to imagination.

And for anyone not directly involved, it's impossible to understand what happened, or to learn anything from it.

If you're directly involved we are perfectly happy to offer an explanation on our decisions. If you're not, you could always ask us. But it is basically none of your concern and nobody is always "entitled" to an explanation. This is not a democracy or a people's court. As moderators we are accountable to to each other and to Rob, the site's owner. We don't do trails by jury, and we are not going to present evidence to justify our decisions. Self appointed Grand Inquisitors are kindly requested to leave their robes at the door, thank you.

Public discussions on members' behaviour and any moderating actions relating to it, are actually very, very counterproductive. I would think this whole episode is more than ample proof of that. I would like to encourage people to refrain from doing so.

It would be helpful if members contact us if they have any issues, instead of starting disruptive public debates.

Now, there are a lot of strong feelings against any form of moderating. This often leads to very unhelpful interferences  by members that are not involved in a particular issue. They invariably invoke the Sacred Right of Free Speech. However, I like to point out that this is a classical music community and not a debating club. And more importantly, it is not a public space and your membership of this forum is not a soapbox in the park on which you can say anything you like.This is a privately owned site and anyone that wants to be a guest in this house will have to abide by the house rules, as applied and enforced by the moderators. The basic assumption is that anyone that is here out of his or her free choice, is willing to accept that. Frankly, anyone that is not willing to do so, has no business  being here....

Unlike some like to think, being a moderator is not a power trip. It is a responsibility that can be an unpleasant burden in terms of personal time and energy, and peace of mind. In the eyes of those concerned, as a moderator you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. Threads must absolutely be merged and threads can't be touched under any circumstance since they are (supposedly) the "personal property" of the member that started them. Some take anything we do as a personal attack, but most of the time we are noting more than traffic police trying to make things run smoothly.
Whether you agree with a particular decision or not, it is our call and responsibility, no one else's.

Fortunately this is a peaceful forum most of the time, and months go by without the need of any intervention. And then we have disruptive episodes we have seen this week. Often these are fueled by a handful of "usual suspects" that are channelling their personal frustrations, which are not necessarily connected to the forum. And usually the moderating ends up as the main focus of attention.

Deleting of posts or threads is not a frequent occurrence  but can be an effective way to end undesirable behaviour or conflicts. Leaving offensive, insulting, or contentious stuff out there to sit and fester, is generally not a good idea.
We are not changing history (I'd wish), but we're keeping the peace the best we can and cleaning up the garbage. Sometimes that is a thankful job, and sometimes it isn't. But in any case it is our job.

Q

[Karl Henning]

I will point out again that in such a situation, there is no obligation on the part of anyone to read the thread(s). Do what I do: ignore the threads you don't like.

Yes, and creating a thread titled To Discuss N's Threads Makes N a target of derision, doesn't it? Who among the complainers would applaud that prize-winning civility?

[Karl Henning]

You bullied CG mercilessly.

I will repeat a comment I made in a now deleted thread.

This is a public forum, owned and managed by people other than you. Why do you presume it is your place to lecture people about how they should use a public resource? You presume an authority you do not have and have not earned.

Put the shoe on the other foot. How would you feel if every time you posted here you were stalked by another user, who wrote paragraph after paragraph about how you are not using the forum appropriately, claiming that, for example, you make too many posts and crowd out other posts that are more interesting. How would you feel?

On another level, CG has confessed on this forum that this place is in some sense a refuge from a difficult life. And yet you have typed in paragraph after paragraph scolding and belittling him. The slight inconvenience of seeing a larger than usual number of threads that don't interest you is more important the his sense of welcome and wellbeing on this site? It is a level of cruelty that I find disturbing to witness, let along be on the receiving end of.

Thank you.

[Karl Henning]

You're blowing this completely out of proportion. Cruelty? Disturbing to witness? WTF? All I asked was the member to reconsider the number of threads he created because it was getting out-of-hand and, yes, I did post on several of his threads, which was MY RIGHT TO DO SO. It seems like if a person expresses an annoyance, they're the ones who end up backed into a corner. I don't presume I'm an authority of anyone on this forum. People have a right to come here and create as many threads as they like much like I have just as much the right to complain about it. Deal with it or don't deal with it, I gave my stance on the matter and the option I was given was to turn the other cheek and this is what I'm going to do from now on since it's controversial to share an honest complaint on something that was bothering me.

You're blowing this completely out of proportion. Cruelty? Disturbing to witness? WTF? All I asked was the member to reconsider the number of threads he created because it was getting out-of-hand and, yes, I did post on several of his threads, which was MY RIGHT TO DO SO. It seems like if a person expresses an annoyance, they're the ones who end up backed into a corner. I don't presume I'm an authority of anyone on this forum. People have a right to come here and create as many threads as they like much like I have just as much the right to complain about it. Deal with it or don't deal with it, I gave my stance on the matter and the option I was given was to turn the other cheek and this is what I'm going to do from now on since it's controversial to share an honest complaint on something that was bothering me.

So what's the right proportion? That you were consistently and actively discourteous to him? Which is not illegal, so you insist on your right to do this?

It's Christmas, how about a little consideration for those less fortunate than we?

[Madiel]

If you're directly involved we are perfectly happy to offer an explanation on our decisions. If you're not, you could always ask us. But it is basically none of your concern and nobody is always "entitled" to an explanation. This is not a democracy or a people's court. As moderators we are accountable to to each other and to Rob, the site's owner. We don't do trails by jury, and we are not going to present evidence to justify our decisions. Self appointed Grand Inquisitors are kindly requested to leave their robes at the door, thank you.

That is not the meaning I was intending to convey. I said it's impossible to learn anything from it. I didn't refer to judging.

My concern is that it's not possible to learn lessons about what is okay and not okay (a point which I think dissily Mordentroge has made previously).

If you want to just carry on going through cycles of the same stuff, then have at it. I think we can be fairly confident that if the membership aren't going to learn anything, then that's okay because the moderators have little intention of doing so either.