[Fum]

Originally Posted by Erwin_Br

Well, written communication is a bitch. It's so much easier to understand each other when we're talking face to face.

--Erwin

Not me, I mumble like a mother****er. If I'd said all I said in the original post to you in person, you'd have no idea what the hell I was talking about.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Fum

sdlafk kl erwerwe popfdsa ;lksdfa ;;; 34434 ;s;ar

WHAT?? Good Lord, Fum, this is getting ridiculous. If you can't make yourself understood better than that, give it up.

[Erwin_Br]

Originally Posted by Fum

Not me, I mumble like a mother****er. If I'd said all I said in the original post to you in person, you'd have no idea what the hell I was talking about.

Eh? What?



Edit: Hehe, good one Jackal

--Erwin

[Intrepid Homoludens]

So Fum, what then exactly was the point of you posting what you posted to start this thread? I'm confused. If you were simply worried that this forum will go the way all those other forums under 'your syndrome' went, then you have nothing to worry about, it never has and never will. It's too laid back, as was stated, to go there. If you can't take my word for it, go by the behaviour of the mods and staff here for the next year or whatever span of time.

Threads here are closed for just or judicious reasons, whatever they be. Sometimes they go on and on in circles long after the original point was made or the original question answered and the inquirer satisfied. I've closed threads myself in the past because they served their original purpose (unless it's Chit Chat and thread topics can go wherever they want). Threads have been closed because the mod/admin feels they've descended to personal insults or tautology and it's time everyone took a breather (if people don't feel like putting the topic to rest, then they are FREE to start a new thread).

Originally Posted by Fum

(Sorry everyone, I have too much time on my hands...some admittedly unnecessary and overly idealistic ramblings are about to ensue....)

Ever heard of it? No? That could be because the syndrome doesn’t exist, I made it up a year or two ago when I was running a forum of my own. What it is to me is when persons are given authority over a small and well-behaved community; these persons, understandably, feel a responsibility – or a desire - to make a difference, to exert their authority. Like a town cop (at least the cops in my town), there really is very little for them to do - there is very little speeding, and just about no crime. So they resort to bothering people on very minor infringements, and I’m sure I don't need to run down a list of examples, I bet most of you have first-hand experiences of being pointlessly “hassled” by the police at one point or another (and if you don’t, then you clearly aren’t extreme enough to be reading this.). You know how you feel after being “hassled,” there’s a little bit of a bitter taste in the back of your mouth, you feel belittled, and all around you are not as happy a person as you were before. With this kind of behavior, all the police really accomplish in the end is making the community feel slightly more negative and oppressed, and creating a barrier between the people with authority and those without. This is, obviously, not the way it should be, authority is given to keep everyone happy - but that is plainly not always the case.

Maybe you are a keen individual, and if you are, you probably know where I’m going with this, and see the parallels I’m trying to draw between town cops and this forum and its moderators and administrators. If you happen to be, say, a libertarian, you might see this as an insult, but I can assure you it is not. I like town cops as do I like moderators and administrators - I know they are necessary. But in most cases they aren’t perfect, and in most cases they could feasibly do their job better to make the community they serve better. Mostly it just comes down to attitude, plain and simple. So many people with authority tend to “talk down” to people without authority, intentionally or not, and this can very easily tick someone off, make them angry, and create a hostile environment. Avoiding a hostile environment can be as easy as a simple rephrasing of words while maintaining the same meaning.

For example, if someone is breaking a rule, one authoritative figure could be curt and aggressive about it towards the perpetrator, and exude a sense of superiority, but this will not settle anything, it will just incite whoever is misbehaving further, I have seen it happen so many times before. A little respect makes all the difference in the world. If the authoritative figure understands clearly that his/her job doesn’t make him/her in anyway superior to anyone else, and if this understanding comes through in the way they conduct themselves, it will create for a much more positive town, and also, a much more positive forum.

So now the authoritative figures are being respectful, but respectful hassling can still be a, well, hassle. People with authority should really practice restraint, and identify when the exertion of authority will actually help anyone or not. I was at a party a few months ago, one with a very minimal amount of illicit activities such as underage drinking; mostly people were just socializing, playing cards, playing pool, or watching television. And the party was busted by the town cops. A lot of people’s nights were ruined, some got in trouble, and I can’t at all see any positives that came from it. This got me thinking, though, more about the “town cop” syndrome idea, because the cops reminded me a little of how I used to be – in my younger and less intelligent days - when I was a moderator for a fairly large hardware forum. I admit I used to scour the forum for anyone breaking any rules, and jumped on the opportunity to close threads or delete posts or any other way I could feel like I was doing something. But in hindsight, the truth is that I could have helped out a lot more by respectfully trying to direct things back on track, or just allow the forum’s intelligent members to work things out themselves. Because there is no sense of finality for anyone that comes from closing threads or deleting posts, it is just irritating to everyone. Once I thought about it, I really doubt my closing threads or deleting posts really helped out at all, except when it came to the few topics that were nothing but flamewars or posts that were nothing but flamebait. And the town cops busting that party weren’t really helping out at all either, but in the end they do serve essential purposes.

I emailed something like this - with some of the above points - to the moderators of the forum I was running a few years ago, and they listened. I hope some of the moderators here will listen, even though in this case I’m not some big, powerful, administrator, just a lowly visitor. I’m not telling anyone what to do, I’m just working towards the same goal you are: to create and maintain a better community.

(Hot damn, that's a lot of text I just produced! This has got to be a forum record for the most words in one post.)

Didn't read.

[Fum]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

So Fum, what then exactly was the point of you posting what you posted to start this thread? I'm confused. If you were simply worried that this forum will go the way all those other forums under 'your syndrome' went, then you have nothing to worry about, it never has and never will. It's too laid back, as was stated, to go there. If you can't take my word for it, go by the behaviour of the mods and staff here for the next year or whatever span of time.

I posted the thread because I was a little bit worried, I've been lurking around here a long, and maybe I'm just looking at things through "rose colored glasses," but I have seen some inflammatory and slightly elitist posts from some of the moderators lately, and I don't remember seeing any of that back in the day. But as I've stressed, it has all been very minor. I also posted the thread because, yes, I was a little irritated with tobacco arbitrarily closing the "Friends and Fables" topic; sure it probably wasn't going to go anywhere, but it was active and we were all having fun, and no one was breaking any rules. But most of all I posted it because I was just bored at the time, honestly. I admit I was surprised by some of the posts implying me bringing this up was a big deal, 'cause I don't think it's a big deal at all, not my worries nor my bringing them up.

And at least for me this has been a helpful discussion, I feel better having said all I have said.

By the way, give it a read, SamNMax, I’m really a pretty good writer, I must say.

[fov]

Originally Posted by Fum

And fov, watch it with the chocolate talk, that beautiful woman named tobacco might shut us down.

That Beautiful Woman Named Tobacco

Sounds like film noir.

[Fum]

Originally Posted by fov

That Beautiful Woman Named Tobacco

Sounds like film noir.

That's funny you noticed that, that was a the affect I was going for, I even thought about capitalizing the words like you did. I love film noir. (Max Payne totally roxored my boxors...or something....)

[fov]

Originally Posted by Fum

That's funny you noticed that, that was a the affect I was going for, I even thought about capitalizing the words like you did. I love film noir. (Max Payne totally roxored my boxors...or something....)

It's especially funny because I don't really know what film noir is. I mean, I know it when I see it, but if you asked me what it meant I'd get all flustered.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Girl, haven't ya ever got no learnin'?

Film Noir (literally 'black film or cinema') was coined by French film critics (first by Frank Nino in 1946) who noticed the trend of how 'dark' and black the looks and themes were of many American crime and detective films released in France following the war. It was a style of black and white American films that first evolved in the 1940s, became prominent in the post-war era, and lasted in a classic "Golden Age" period until about 1960 (marked by Orson Welles' Touch of Evil (1958)). Strictly speaking, however, film noir is not a genre, but rather the mood, style, point-of-view, or tone of a film.

http://www.filmsite.org/filmnoir.html

[fov]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Girl, haven't ya ever got no learnin'?

Worthless $100,000 education.

[Crunchy in milk]

I disagree that there is no grounds for a genre of film noir, and it certainly didn't die out in the 60's (thank god, there should be more films where 'manly' men are completely emasculated by beautiful, driven women). It might bleed at the edges a lot more than many other genres but then no genre is really cut and dried.

What genre does The Last Seduction fall into if not film noir? (blatant excuse to post a Fiorentino pic)


Linda you can @#$% me, steal all my money and leave me for dead... please!

You might even put Sin City in the film noir 'genre', despite many trying to classify it soley for its action or because its based on a comic book...

[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by RLacey

We should all live in one, big room. Then we wouldn't have these problems .

OK, but I feel I should warn you I snore so loudly that someone I was sharing a room with once half-tried to strangle me just to get the noise to stop.

I've never had any problems with the mods around here. The rockers on the other hand...............

If that last sentence didn't make sense to anyone maybe this plot summary for Quadrophenia might help.

Now I have to get back to eating my big bar of chocolate. I'm sure any mods who feel so inclined are more than welcome to join me.

EDIT Well done to Crunchy in Milk for finding a blatant excuse for posting a Fiorentino pic. Any other lady film star pics you feel would help the discussion?

Originally Posted by Fum

By the way, give it a read, SamNMax, I’m really a pretty good writer, I must say.

But it's long.

[tabacco]

Originally Posted by Fum

I posted the thread because I was a little bit worried, I've been lurking around here a long, and maybe I'm just looking at things through "rose colored glasses," but I have seen some inflammatory and slightly elitist posts from some of the moderators lately, and I don't remember seeing any of that back in the day. But as I've stressed, it has all been very minor. I also posted the thread because, yes, I was a little irritated with tobacco arbitrarily closing the "Friends and Fables" topic; sure it probably wasn't going to go anywhere, but it was active and we were all having fun, and no one was breaking any rules. But most of all I posted it because I was just bored at the time, honestly. I admit I was surprised by some of the posts implying me bringing this up was a big deal, 'cause I don't think it's a big deal at all, not my worries nor my bringing them up.

And at least for me this has been a helpful discussion, I feel better having said all I have said.

By the way, give it a read, SamNMax, I’m really a pretty good writer, I must say.

I 'arbitrarily' closed it because it was going nowhere except to antagonize Jack, and the forum really doesn't need that. Reminds me a lot of this thread, actually.

If you're trying to make a point, make the point. Don't backpedal all the time, it leaves everyone with no idea what you're saying, except a general impression that you don't like me. And if you don't like me, that's fine. I really couldn't care less. But if that's all you're trying to say, just say it.

[Fum]

Originally Posted by tabacco

I 'arbitrarily' closed it because it was going nowhere except to antagonize Jack, and the forum really doesn't need that. Reminds me a lot of this thread, actually.

If you're trying to make a point, make the point. Don't backpedal all the time, it leaves everyone with no idea what you're saying, except a general impression that you don't like me. And if you don't like me, that's fine. I really couldn't care less. But if that's all you're trying to say, just say it.

1. I don't dislike you, in fact I think I've said about three times that I love you... 2. I haven't and don't intend to backpedal, I think I've made all the points I want to make quite clear. 3. I'm not sure if you were talking with Jack behind the scenes or something, but while it was clear in the beginning he was frustrated with us, I thought it was pretty obvious near the end that it had all shifted into friendly ribbing. But whatever, I don't much care about that anymore.

[Jackal]

Tabacco's talking about the thread closed in Adventure, which probably saved someone from completely hanging themselves.

Without putting words in his mouth, I think the other one was just closed BECAUSE it had run its course, and as you said, already started to move into the typical banter that happens everywhere. Closing just saves the potential hassle of some yahoo coming back in just to stir up trouble and misunderstandings again. Since it wasn't closed BEFORE it had served its purpose, no one should really be upset that it was closed at all.

As a final note from me on the subject, I really don't think it's THAT hard to figure out why a thread is closed. The fact is, a single thread can take on a life of its own (so to speak), and at some point it may become beneficial to snuff it out. Even if the topic is resumed in another, the break still makes it clear that behaviour has gotten out of control. Usually people get the message, even if they occasionally squawk about the measures.

So, um... yeah. Give and take. We'll try to communicate clearly, and you guys cut us enough slack to realize we aren't made of patience and free time.

[After a brisk nap]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Without putting words in his mouth, I think the other one was just closed BECAUSE it had run its course, and as you said, already started to move into the typical banter that happens everywhere. Closing just saves the potential hassle of some yahoo coming back in just to stir up trouble and misunderstandings again. Since it wasn't closed BEFORE it had served its purpose, no one should really be upset that it was closed at all.

While maybe there's no reason to get upset, I can certainly understand why someone might bridle at an apparently gratuitous exercise of authority.

To make another unfortunate police analogy, let's say you and some friends are sitting in a park. A cop comes by and tells you to "move along". You might have been getting ready to leave anyway, and it's not like this part of the park is nicer than any other part, but why should the cop be telling you what to do?

It's an exaggerated example, but I think the reasoning that "if there's no important reason to keep a thread open, nobody should mind if we close it" is flawed.

As a final note from me on the subject, I really don't think it's THAT hard to figure out why a thread is closed. The fact is, a single thread can take on a life of its own (so to speak), and at some point it may become beneficial to snuff it out. Even if the topic is resumed in another, the break still makes it clear that behaviour has gotten out of control. Usually people get the message, even if they occasionally squawk about the measures.

This might be one of those issues that mods and other posters experience differently. It may seem obvious to a mod why a thread is being closed, but someone who maybe hasn't followed it that closely may not realize that a 20-page thread is being closed because of an argument that happened on pages 3-5.

If a thread is closed, I certainly don't feel confident that mods won't mind if I resume the topic in another. On most forums, that's a big no-no. And besides, I don't think I could tell whether it was closed in order to cut off the off-topic posts, or out of concern that it might get "back on topic" and rekindle the argument.

A bit more to go on when a thread is closed would do a lot to clear up the uncertainty.

So, um... yeah. Give and take. We'll try to communicate clearly, and you guys cut us enough slack to realize we aren't made of patience and free time.

Deal!

[tabacco]

No offense, but if you can't be bothered to follow a thread you shouldn't really be complaining if it's closed.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Snarky

While maybe there's no reason to get upset, I can certainly understand why someone might bridle at an apparently gratuitous exercise of authority.

Oh, I understand it, and I'm not saying I'd feel differently from the other perspective. But then we circle back to all the other issues mentioned already, like the more we explain, the more people tend to argue. When the day comes that we make a "controversial" move and people simply thank us for our explanation, I'll concede this point. Until then, I'll just reiterate that a difference of perspective means that something has to give. At times it'll be us, at times it may be forumites.

To make another unfortunate police analogy, let's say you and some friends are sitting in a park. A cop comes by and tells you to "move along". You might have been getting ready to leave anyway, and it's not like this part of the park is nicer than any other part, but why should the cop be telling you what to do?

Very exaggerated. If that cop had been CALLED there because my friends and I had caused a disturbance earlier, then I could hardly complain, even if we'd since settled down. And if recent passersby at that point hadn't seen the commotion, I hardly think that hassling the cop for his reasoning is being a helpful citizen.

Anyway, the reasoning may be flawed, but there's no perfect system. But that's all the time I have for debating.