Old lady dies (see other post)

[Serial_Apologist]

I imagine that on balance you are right. But surely the 'problem' is confined to non-musical/R3 threads. The musical/R3 threads go very well.

Isn't it about ignoring threads and/or people that you know will be toxic? And perhaps cosmetically splitting the site so that such discrimination is made easier.

Well 20 of the 32 threads from all boards currently under discussion are on musical issues, and as someone who in life generally is all-too easily intimidated, nobody is actually being directly threatened, only their ideas, and threads potentially too offputting for bystanders to engage with are pretty obvious by one quick glance at their subject matter.

[Beef Oven]

Well 20 of the 32 threads from all boards currently under discussion are on musical issues, and as someone who in life generally is all-too easily intimidated, nobody is actually being directly threatened, only their ideas, and threads potentially too offputting for bystanders to engage with are pretty obvious by one quick glance at their subject matter.

Yes but it doesn't mean people need to avoid the threads that are not off-putting. I find the 'alphabet associations' thread too challenging. After 2 minutes on there I feel stupid, so I avoid it.

[Serial_Apologist]

Yes but it doesn't mean people need to avoid the threads that are not off-putting. I find the 'alphabet associations' thread too challenging. After 2 minutes on there I feel stupid, so I avoid it.

Exactly! It would be the equivalent of avoiding reading The Times because one found the crossword too difficult!

[Beef Oven]

Exactly! It would be the equivalent of avoiding reading The Times because one found the crossword too difficult!

Exactly

[DavidP]

First let me say I'm one of those people put off contributing more frequently to these boards due to the aggressiveness of some of the postings (not just on political issues but on musical ones too).

I'm not sure if simply closing the thread would have been sufficient - deleting it seems to be overly censorious and against the spirit of free speech. Having said that I haven't looked at the relevant thread since about 2.00 pm today and I'm guessing something more serious than pure knockabout took place after then?

My own view for what it's worth is I find some of the triumphalism I have heard from pro-Thatcherites to be just as offensive as those delighting in her death. Not to mention the hectoring tone of those demanding "commemoration" on their terms. It's almost as if they have set themselves up as the "grief police." Something for people on the left to remember the next time those on the right start banging on about "political correctness gone mad"!

[french frank]

I'm grateful for the consideration at (here the Old Soldier card being played) what has been/is a bit of a difficult time for me.

I liked the old BBC Platform 3 for the trivial reason that I appreciated Radio 3's nod towards the rail fans but, as far as political discussions are concerned, I know more about practical politics (not theory) than about music. My musical education was cut short by the irritating infantilisation of so much of Radio 3's output and I have learned a lot more from contributors here than I currently get from R3 itself, and much more than I'm able to contribute. But I do feel a responsibility for not being able to keep controversial discussions on an even keel, and my grovelling apology elsewhere today was partly necessitated by my shortcoming. In that sense, the fact that those who let us (FoR3) down are not actually FoR3 supporters (as most here are not, in the official sense), is irrelevant: the responsibility is mine and therefore FoR3's.

I think it worthwhile to have a forum for ideas and discussion, much of which fits with R3's remit anyway. But perhaps the Arts/Speech section can fulfil that function? As regards the social aspects of Platform 3, I come closer to finding this an illusion. We aren't a small cosy band of friends: we are bitterly divided in our views. One minute we're discussing favourite recipes, the next belittling and attacking others for their opinions. We have to face up to this and work out how best the forum can benefit us all.

[As a rider, I could mention here that for a short experimental period we may have to close the forum overnight in the hope that it will help towards the bandwidth problem - but we'll consult on that in due time.]

[MrGongGong]

But I do feel a responsibility for not being able to keep controversial discussions on an even keel, and my grovelling apology elsewhere today was partly necessitated by my shortcoming.

I really don't think you have anything to apologise for at all
You are not the parent of the people who write things on the internet
There is no need to apologise for things you are NOT responsible for

(but i'm not sure anyone will read this anyway as it seems that some folk find cartoons of squirrels to be grossly offensive so I'm having my posts "examined" for traces of subversive small mammal activity ............. ........)


That is NOT meant to be SERIOUS

[french frank]

First let me say I'm one of those people put off contributing more frequently to these boards due to the aggressiveness of some of the postings (not just on political issues but on musical ones too)!

I was too long writing my own screed to acknowledge this. Forums do gain their individual ethos or genius , and I don't like to be thought to be running such an off-putting one.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Can it be a co-incidence that so few people are contributing to the forum today, possibly having been deterred by the infantile squabbles.

[ahinton]

In view of at least one member's angry resignation resulting from vigorous disagreements on the now deleted Thatcher Dies thread, one learns, do posters now feel that political discussion should be excluded from the forum?

I don't know and it's perhaps not for me to say but, in any case, I did not see the dénouement of that Thatcher thread so do not know which member angrily resigned from this board.

I ask this in all sincerity, avoiding pre-empting further views being exchanged, since sensitivities would appear to have been raised beyond the usual knockabout stuff I see as the stuff of democracy and free speech my parents' generation and their antecedents fought to secure, and I'm not sure whether starting a separate thread at this time will be interpreted as pouring oil on flames.

Again, I do not know; it will all be down to FF, methinks.

[Serial_Apologist]

Can it be a co-incidence that so few people are contributing to the forum today, possibly having been deterred by the infantile squabbles.

Well, EA, either that or people are getting their heads around the fact that spring appears to have sprung, and are out and about doing all those things which have been left undone!

In all due respects, I don't hold at all with the view that french frank is running a forum that is in any way whatsoever off-putting. One can accommodate the thin-skinned up to a certain point, beyond which it becomes a manuipulative game of dimishing returns all round, from which no one gains and what one never intended gaining in the first place is all sacrificed. I for one have rarely felt more welcomed, let alone enjoyed the opportunities afforded to, yes, chat with erudite figures. It could probably be admitted that many on here have in fact made friends that have become friends outside as well as within the province of this forum, contrary to impressions, all down to its existence and thanks to french frank.

My current feeling is not to change anything about the forum or its formats, but to insist on strict adherence to the rule covering ad hominem jibes and insults, on pain of, ahem, excommunication.

[ahinton]

But what's now to be done with this thread, given its current associative title? FF? What say you?

[french frank]

I don;t know and it';s perhaps not for me to say but, in any case, I did not see the dénouement of that Thatcher thread so do not know which member angrily resigned from this board.

1. He announced he would never be returning to the forum and resigning from FoR3. Hence I take it that he resigned from FoR3 (of which he has been a supporter) but was not actually asking me to delete his forum account. FoR3 and the forum are separate entities. I'm angry at the flak directed at FoR3 because of the behaviour of forum members

2. Although the thread is not deleted, merely hidden from public view (I mean the view of the general public) this forum has never posed a some sort of general platform for free speech, within the Justice Collins meaning ("Surprising as it may perhaps appear to some, the right of freedom of speech does extend to abuse"). We have house rules which were partially designed (unsuccessfully, it seems) to protect FoR3 from disrepute. If you want the thread URL, PM me.

[eighthobstruction]

Firstly ff, thankyou for taking away the heroin....today....

....Absolutely Calum....I'd say that as it stands at the moment (with inclusion of Platform 3) ....there is no place on the internet like R3F....other music sites have no traffic and are full of anoraks....Other Political sites are bear-gardens with no coherence and a huge amount of textual background noise(sic), people who flounce in with one shocking post then disappear....The people on this site are pretty civilised , interesting and knowledgeable without being boring....

I disagree....the 'Class' thread was a disaster in places....

DavidP....Nothing any different happened this afternoon than already had been happening....a poster who has only posted 104 replies in 3 years decided certain things said were vile and etc...., and promptly left the Forum....
But DavidP I think that your post #95 under normal circumstances might have attracted flak ( I don't mean that as a rebuke)....that is the nature of words and their stringing together....the essential in ALL drama is CONFLICT; first rule of play writing....

I am sorry (in this context ) for my absolute joy at the beginning of Ding Dong....I later deleted it you may have noticed....BUT I am extremely proud of my argument after that, and my subsequent behaviour....

....humourously( if that is allowed)....It's a shame it closed at that time, as I had just written one of my most inventive comebacks and only a couple of poster would have seen it before it went into the ether....

[Nick Armstrong]

I for one have rarely felt more welcomed, let alone enjoyed the opportunities afforded to, yes, chat with erudite figures. It could probably be admitted that many on here have in fact made friends that have become friends outside as well as within the province of this forum, contrary to impressions, all down to its existence and thanks to french frank.

My current feeling is not to change anything about the forum or its formats, but to insist on strict adherence to the rule covering ad hominem jibes and insults, on pain of, ahem, excommunication.

I agree with that. I think the spirit and the letter of the very well-drafted House Rule

Please treat other members respectfully, even/especially if you disagree with what they are saying; and please do not start topics or post messages which are designed to be provocative or which explicitly or implicitly target or disparage other members, individually or as a group. Do not use offensive language.

need to prevaii. There are a handful of members who it seems to me have habitually trampled over that rule, especially in the last few days, and that has poisoned the entire Forum. I think some people don't even know they are doing it. I am very willing to assist in any way thought useful in preserving this very worthwhile Forum from that sort of conduct. A spot of zero-tolerance might be called for. And it might not be a coincidence that the last three letters of my pseudonym spell....




PS have just seen FF's #103 since posting this