Banning, Deleting and other sundry subjects

[Lois Gilbert]

I think one Scott Dolan is enough.

[crawjo]

Is this a general policy that one user can't have two handles?

[Stuckinagroove]

I didn't know Mo noyz was Scott!

[GoodSpeak]

OK.

Help me out here...is Scott banned, then?

[crawjo]

Originally Posted by GoodSpeak

OK.

Help me out here...is Scott banned, then?

Goodspeak, are you really this clueless or is this just a way for you to unwind in your spare time? Read Lois's initial post. Then think about it. Let me know if you reach any conclusions.

[frankenmeister7]

hey goody! i could give you a really neat clue...........................nah forget it. never mind.


just smile, smile, smile. don't forget to watch the birdy

[GoodSpeak]

Originally Posted by crawjo

Goodspeak, are you really this clueless or is this just a way for you to unwind in your spare time? Read Lois's initial post. Then think about it. Let me know if you reach any conclusions.

Buddy...you have no clue about how I reason things. Please don't pretend you know my mind.

This BBS is notorious for banning people they do not agree with...and as such, it would seem fairly obvious, to me at least, to ask if Scott had been banned permanently.

I've been on the recieving end of this banning bullshit.




Tell you what, Crawjo...come see me when they come for you, OK?

[Captain Hate]

Originally Posted by Lois Gilbert

I think one Scott Dolan is enough.

His multiple personalities are feeling very left out.

[Sergio Zamora]

Originally Posted by GoodSpeak

...you have no clue about how I reason things...

True

[Lois Gilbert]

Lois is back....

1. There will be no banning people for a week or any time period unless it's permanent. There will be also no warnings of being banned. You are all adults(?) and know when you're crossing the line. I did pm scott that his pseudonym was being banned.

2. Although we don't always know right away - 1 handle per customer. Alternative handles will be banned

3. Anybody can email me at lois@jazzcorner.com or send me a pm, if you have problems, concerns or conclusions or problems with how Speakeasy is being administered.

4. The reason Archtop Wonder was banned was not because of his all threads, but because he started a thread calling another poster an asshole.

5. You can put anyone on your ignore list - so you don't have to read their posts -

6. I would like to remind you that the artists and organizations on Jazzcorner are the folks that financially support Speakeasy. Please support them: visit their sites, buy their cds from them directly, tell them you'd love to have them involved in Ask the Musicians (I urge them every month)

That's pretty much it folks. Please think before you post and please respect each other, and thank you for your support

Lois

[Stuckinagroove]

So I guess posting with the alias "Stuckinacrevice" is out of the question?

[crawjo]

Lois,

Thanks for clarifying. Of course it is your site and it is a wonderful one at that, but as a mere poster here I would only suggest that everyone deserves one warning before being permanently banned. I just think people who make a mistake should get a second chance.

Thanks!

[Gordon B]

Originally Posted by Lois Gilbert

5. You can put anyone on your ignore list - so you don't have to read their posts -

Lois

I'd like to propose one more feature, the option to ignore threads started by a particular person. I'm sure I'm not the only person who didn't want to stare at a slew of threads started by Archtop Wonder. Chris A has started 337 threads, most of them very similar to each other.

Originally Posted by Gordon B

Chris A has started 337 threads, most of them very similar to each other.

And, more to the point, most of them expressing views that are contrary to my own, eh, Gordon?

[Lois Gilbert]

Crawjo, I don't know why it's necessary. C'mon you don't know when you're over the top? It's your responsibility to edit yourselves - and if you've started a thread that you want to change the title - just email me (don't PM me) cause if I'm not around Moné can't access my PMs, and I can't access them from my phone. But I can access email from my phone and forward to Moné and vice versa....

[crawjo]

Lois,

Yeah, obviously if somebody starts a thread calling someone an asshole or what have you, it's over the top. I think that most people know what is going too far, I was just thinking of someone who might lose their temper and post something and then regret having done it later.

[GoodSpeak]

Lois,

I appreciate the fact that this is your site and that you have the right to ban or accept anyone.

What I cannot find congruent is the manner in which this process is meted out. It appears to be VERY selective and at the absolute whim of the persons in charge.

I have, personally, changed the tenor of my posts in favor of being allowed to continue posting. What I am concerned with is the continued restriction and/or absolution of those who do post here.

A certain dichotomy exists and it would seem wise to be far more tolerant and/or consistant in the ultimate decision wherein a poster is, in fact, found to be less than circumspect.

In other words, the rules must apply to ALL not just for those the webmaster likes or dislikes.


I have been saying this for years.


Again, this is your website and you do with it as you choose to. All I'm saying is you need to level the playing field so that all may play by the same rules and suffer the same consequences across the board.

Anything less is sure to draw fire from the various posters who have the guts to take risks or express themselves in less than acceptable ways.


If chasing people off is your goal, then so be it.

If encouraging public discourse free from arbitrary restraints is your goal...then this dichotomy will begin to kill it, IMHO.

[willy]

"All I'm saying is you need to level the playing field so that all may play by the same rules and suffer the same consequences across the board."


A nice goal to strive for, but this isn't the way it works in real life. It never will be.

[Lois Gilbert]

Goody, I absolutely agree. And when Moné gets back, I plan to change some of the admin controls around here. As many complaints as I got about Conan, I refused to ban him, but when Moné explained to my why he banned him, I fully agreed. NOONE will ever be banned again for editorial posting.
Also Goody, for me banning people has never been arbitrary. In fact on the old board, it was nearly impossible to ban somebody. Often stuff goes on that you might not be aware of. For eg, at the same time Deep was emailing me to please let him back in and actually called me - he was sending out email and posting on other bbs that I was the Mistress of Death, that I was a "c**t, etc. So all those people that werecampaigning to let Deep back in --had no idea how vile he was being to me personally.

I didn't ban or pm Monte when he started the thread Cheney says Fuck You...I just changed the title. I'm not into banning people, I want you guys to have the Alley as your "playground"

Any of the musicians on JC will tell you, I provide the same services to all my clients - whether I like them personally, whether I like their music or not or whether there name has more value than someone else's. For me it's the same thing on this side of JC.

Crawjo, I didn't mean to imply that we were automatically going to ban people. That's never been what I've been about. There is a poster here that got a little crazed last winter. I spent alot of time emailing with him & suggested that he take a break. But I never banned him.

You can edit yourself, and if you don't have enough restraint, even in the heat of an argument to refrain from calling a woman poster a C**T, or another poster a pedophile - then we don't want you here. AND CRAWJO, I AM NOT IMPLYING YOU DID THIS - I'M JUST ADDRESSING YOUR POST ABOVE.

Yes, we will automatically ban a second user name unless there are extenuating circumstances. For example, I know right now of a poster who posted under his real name for a long time, but then was unable to post. He's using another screen name - so he does have 2 user names. I emailed him to ask him which name he wants to keep. It's a different circumstance than Scott who posted under the same thread with 2 user names.

Unlike some similar looking bulletin boards, I have never manipulated the number of posters or any of the stats you see at the bottom of the opening of JC. I don't care about the # of posters we have. I could up the # right now to 5,000 or 10,000 if I wanted. I could suggest you all have multiple screen names... that's not how I pursue advertising or clients.

Maybe I'm being naive to think that we're like an apt house, and maybe I'm the landlord, but as long as you don't spray graffiti all over the walls and respect your neighbors - you're cool. Well, if you paid rent that might be even cooler (smile)

And again, I appreciate all your support and I will say it loud and proud, I think this a great bulletin board, and the best is yet to come.

Lois

[Lois Gilbert]

I'd like to propose one more feature, the option to ignore threads started by a particular person.

Gordon - I don't know if that's possible. I doubt it. Just don't read it. Moné tech guru around these parts and he'll know if anybody knows...

[Gary Sisco]

Really, man. Anyone can see who it is who's started a thread. If you know you're not going to dig it, don't read it. How hard is it?

[Gordon B]

Originally Posted by Rainman

Really, man. Anyone can see who it is who's started a thread. If you know you're not going to dig it, don't read it. How hard is it?

Don't read a thread is parallel to don't read a post.
There are people here, myself included, who try to turn the other cheek but sometimes get sucked in. That's why we have the ignore the poster function. However, it doesn't work when that poster starts the thread. It's impossible not to read the headline.

I thought it might be technically daunting. No big deal.

Chris, most people in the Alley express political viewpoints opposed to mine but you are the only one who bugs me by starting thread after thread after thread about the same stuff. Several of your political allies have also expressed annoyance at your prolific rate of thread creation, yet you've remained tone deaf to it all. Why not respond more and inititate less?

Gordon obviously wants to avoid threads that don't support his ideology, but isn't that tantamount to sticking your head in the sand? Isn't that what Bush supporters routinely do?

[Gary Sisco]

Chris -- It changes no one's political ideology to post thread after thread about more or less the same things. There's no development to any argument. Nothing becomes of any of it except more of the same. It reflects, in fact, the allegedly political sniping that goes on in the power circles, where no one changes anyone'd mind, either, and doesn't even try to persuade anymore. This thing they insist on calling politics, and which goes on here all day as well, is nothing more than a kind of pong game of endless back and forth that goes nowhere at all. So what's the point? It has nothing to do with sticking one's head in the sand. Gordon won't agree with you, or you with him, if you post millions of threads. Or he. Or whoever.

I don't agree with anyone here, you and Gordon included, but consider many my friends anyway, you and Gordon included. But our friendship is based on the common ground that makes it possible in the first place: music. To tell the truth, I miss the posts where you used to tell stories about your life in the jazz world and such. But if I never hear another word about Alfred E. Bush, or John Kerry, or Ralph Nader, I'll die a happy man.

[Gary Sisco]

Lois -- Is there a way to delete (if the person wants) former user names and etc, as opposed to listing them as "banned"? After the format change, here, I was unable to sign in or reregister under my real name -- which I prefer to use -- and hence the "Rainman" user name, which is my dj handle, because reregistering under a different user name was the only way I found that enabled me to post again. Perhaps if you deleted the old "Gary Sisco" member listing, I could reregister again under my own name. ?

Originally Posted by Rainman

Chris -- It changes no one's political ideology to post thread after thread about more or less the same things. There's no development to any argument. Nothing becomes of any of it except more of the same....

Gary, my purpose is not to change anyone's ideology, but to share with my fellow posters items that I find interesting. Unlike Gordon (as I understand him), I welcome opinions with which I disagree--sometimes they strengthen my beliefs, sometimes they cast a new light on them. Rarely do I agree with anything Willy posts, but--unless it is Coulter or someone as closed-minded--I read them. I have put certain people on my "ignore" list because my experience is that they are generally hateful and have nothing positive to contribute (i.e. a waste of my time).

[RainyDay]

What Goodspeak said. The rules here are indeed arbitrary. One gets banned or suspended, it seems, based on who was offended, not based on what the actual offense was. Not all offendees are equal at JC.

Apparently the word c**t is not a problem if it's used in jest or it is used by someone that everyone likes a lot. There is a thread with a comment by a poster who refers to his wife, apparently in jest, as a "c**t b***h." Or a male poster who calls another male poster a c**t. When I protested the latter comment, the poster was soundly defended by the JC faithful.

Another poster on this board went on for at least a year referring to Muslims and Arabs as "t"-heads after 9-11. I must assume that no Muslim or Arab musicians participate at JC. Or women.

Whatever. I don't spend much time here anymore. Anybody who runs a BBS has a right to set any and all the rules they want. I just like for the rules to be consistently applied.

[jesus marion joseph]

Originally Posted by Chris A

Gordon obviously wants to avoid threads that don't support his ideology, but isn't that tantamount to sticking your head in the sand? Isn't that what Bush supporters routinely do?

From a guy who regularly makes insinuations about people whose postings are on his "ignore" list, that's pretty humorous.

[Cem]

Originally Posted by RainyDay

Apparently the word c**t is not a problem if it's used in jest or it is used by someone that everyone likes a lot. There is a thread with a comment by a poster who refers to his wife, apparently in jest, as a "c**t b***h." Or a male poster who calls another male poster a c**t. When I protested the latter comment, the poster was soundly defended by the JC faithful.

I thought this had been resolved. Must we go through this again. I thought, you were satisfied with my *own* defence, explanation & apology. Obviously not...

If you see justice being served in me being banned or suspended, ask Lois. I'm fine with it, as I know where I'm coming from & a ban or suspension would simply tell me I wouldn't wanna be here, anyway...

[crawjo]

Originally Posted by RainyDay

What Goodspeak said. The rules here are indeed arbitrary. One gets banned or suspended, it seems, based on who was offended, not based on what the actual offense was. Not all offendees are equal at JC.

Apparently the word c**t is not a problem if it's used in jest or it is used by someone that everyone likes a lot. There is a thread with a comment by a poster who refers to his wife, apparently in jest, as a "c**t b***h." Or a male poster who calls another male poster a c**t. When I protested the latter comment, the poster was soundly defended by the JC faithful.

Another poster on this board went on for at least a year referring to Muslims and Arabs as "t"-heads after 9-11. I must assume that no Muslim or Arab musicians participate at JC. Or women.

Whatever. I don't spend much time here anymore. Anybody who runs a BBS has a right to set any and all the rules they want. I just like for the rules to be consistently applied.

RainyDay,

Lately you seem to be making a lot of posts about how you don't spend much time here anymore. Perhaps you'd be happier if you devoted the time you spend writing those posts to doing the things you do when you aren't here.