Absent Friends & Missing Persons

[Ein Heldenleben]

If I may make a suggestion? - perhaps in future posts containing potentially offensive words could have a different coloured header or even be collapsed and then need active expansion by a click. This is what broadcasters do because they have learnt from experience that a significant section of the audience find such words completely unacceptable and it is unbelievably time-consumng dealing with the many complaints when one of these words slips out with no warning. It's impossible to run a culture based forum without the use of these words - they are in the works of D.H. Lawrence. Joyce and Henry Miller, and .it appears . Prince. I should add that I have personally no problem with these words.

[french frank]

I should probably characterise myself as of the "Joe Biden" generation which sometimes has to keep up with the way things are, but this isn't referring to the use of language or individual words. In my innocence, I have had to research the various dictionary definitions of 'soft porn' and 'soft-core pornography' and the subject of this lyric seems to me to fit that description. I have also been investigating recent research papers on the subject. My opinion remains that considering it all generally, this isn't a direction the forum should go in.

Nor do I really favour creating 'no-go' areas. It doesn't really create a friendly community feel when the shared interests should be those for which the forum was set up.

[Quarky]

If I may make a suggestion? - perhaps in future posts containing potentially offensive words could have a different coloured header or even be collapsed and then need active expansion by a click. This is what broadcasters do because they have learnt from experience that a significant section of the audience find such words completely unacceptable and it is unbelievably time-consumng dealing with the many complaints when one of these words slips out with no warning. It's impossible to run a culture based forum without the use of these words - they are in the works of D.H. Lawrence. Joyce and Henry Miller, and .it appears . Prince. I should add that I have personally no problem with these words.

OK, but how much time and effort should we expect from the moderators / hosts, whose work I guess is entirely voluntary? I'm assuming they would prefer to work in a reactive rather than a pro-active mode.

The House Rules are clearly posted:
House Rules

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. Respect the privacy of other members: do not disclose personal information about them on the message boards without their consent.

Members are allowed one account only. If members are found to be using more than one account, the first one registered will be allowed and all subsequent ones deleted.

[Barbirollians]

Might I suggest an amendment of the House Rules for clarification

" Do not use offensive language ( even if quoting artistic works or lyrics ) "

The current wording appears in context to be directed at prevented offensive language being used in an attack on or in reply to another member .

[Dave2002]

Dave2002, you put it correctly. She has gone off in disgust at the way she feels she has been treated. Opinions are sharply divided on 'the way she has been treated'. But the reality is that if you post material which other members find objectionable, and the moderator agrees, it will be deleted. Four members openly objected to the complete lyric of a Prince song which, in its day, was notorious and led to demands that Parental Advice notices should be placed on any such material.

The fact that "We are all grown-ups" does not mean that all grown-ups want to be unexpectedly confronted with such material. The deletion of the post stands. Jayne's return is her own choice.

That seems fair enough, and personally I hope that eventually she will return. I don't know the words of the particular song, nor would I have had any particular interest, though I suppose that now my curiosity has been aroused I might look into it further.

I agree about posting offensive material, even if "legal", but surely there should be a system for warning the poster, and also it should be the right of the moderators to immediately take it down, at least while things are considered further. Maybe there is, and that was invoked, but as (in this instance) I'm a more or less complete outsider regarding what happened, something rather sad seems to have taken place. Some material would be absolutely illegal in the UK and the moderators/owners would have a definite right, nay duty, to take such material down, and take any other action which might be appropriate.

[oddoneout]

As a matter of interest did the contentious material have to appear in full on the forum - was it not possible to have a link? I ask because if, as seems to be the case here, the problem is suddenly encountering something one wasn't expecting nor wished to view then the solution is to provide a way for those who wish to pursue the full text the option to do so rather than having it all on view. It then becomes a matter for the individual, rather than being thrust on all and sundry, which in any case isn't necessarily the best way to get a point of view across - in fact it can be counter-productive.
However, offensive language/behaviour directed at another person is a different matter and, I would hope, something that could be robustly dealt with by moderators etc without causing major upset.

[Ein Heldenleben]

As a matter of interest did the contentious material have to appear in full on the forum - was it not possible to have a link? I ask because if, as seems to be the case here, the problem is suddenly encountering something one wasn't expecting nor wished to view then the solution is to provide a way for those who wish to pursue the full text the option to do so rather than having it all on view. It then becomes a matter for the individual, rather than being thrust on all and sundry, which in any case isn't necessarily the best way to get a point of view across - in fact it can be counter-productive.
However, offensive language/behaviour directed at another person is a different matter and, I would hope, something that could be robustly dealt with by moderators etc without causing major upset.

good point and a neat solution

[french frank]

As a matter of interest did the contentious material have to appear in full on the forum - was it not possible to have a link?

That would have been prefectly possible, since i discovered it on the internet. Together with the publicity about the original release. Whether the poster would have added a "Parental Advisory" note, (I use the phrase tongue-in-cheek, of course), I don't know. Had any member, nevertheless, followed the link, I think they would have had no reason to object to a link. However, in some cases, there is enhanced enjoyment in "shocking" the audience, some of whom may walk out while others enjoy the "joke".

However, offensive language/behaviour directed at another person is a different matter and, I would hope, something that could be robustly dealt with by moderators etc without causing major upset.

That would seem clear-cut, though we have had two quiet resignations over the past few days, after another member's quick one-line response gave the impression that their contribution was not appreciated. Resignation might have been considered an exaggerated response, but people remain here if they feel that they can 'fit in' and don't annoy people and can contribute (and learn). That means an easy-going, friendly atmosphere where members are sensitive to the 'ethos' or 'spirit of the place'. That's my view.

[gurnemanz]

Alas, nothing good comes out of all the above stuff:

Posts which most us did not get to read because we needed to be protected from them were deleted. I gather it was "offensive" language rather unacceptable views, which would be another matter.

One of our most committed, diligent, eloquent and incisive contributors has seen fit to leave us as a result of being censored. That might make me leave. Bad language wouldn't.

Worst of all, some people above seem to want fewer Lieder recitals. I want more.

[teamsaint]

Alas, nothing good comes out of all the above stuff:

Posts which most us did not get to read because we needed to be protected from them were deleted. I gather it was "offensive" language rather unacceptable views, which would be another matter.

One of our most committed, diligent, eloquent and incisive contributors has seen fit to leave us as a result of being censored. That might make me leave. Bad language wouldn't.

Worst of all, some people above seem to want fewer Lieder recitals. I want more.

Self censor, or be censored. It is a shared space, not our own personal space. Sometimes we make misudgements.

Many of us have had stuff deleted at some point , sometimes because of being caught in the crossfire.

There is more than one way of being " Grown Up". If people want to read or hear Prince lyrics, they aren't hard to find.

[Serial_Apologist]

That seems fair enough, and personally I hope that eventually she will return. I don't know the words of the particular song, nor would I have had any particular interest, though I suppose that now my curiosity has been aroused I might look into it further.

From my quick perusal of the contended post in question, it was not so much the actual words but what they described or stood for that seems to have provided the main contention. Jayne's absence would leave as disproportionate a gap in the forum as would cancellation of any one of the Bruckner symphonies she so enthusiastically championed from a concert programme.

[oddoneout]

Alas, nothing good comes out of all the above stuff:

Posts which most us did not get to read because we needed to be protected from them were deleted. I gather it was "offensive" language rather unacceptable views, which would be another matter.

One of our most committed, diligent, eloquent and incisive contributors has seen fit to leave us as a result of being censored. That might make me leave. Bad language wouldn't.

Worst of all, some people above seem to want fewer Lieder recitals. I want more.

But was it essential to Jayne's contribution that the words appear in full in the thread rather than as a link? Would that have prevented or shut down discussion? I accept that she could well feel that an unsatisfactory approach, but I can't see that what has subsequently happened is satisfactory either, and has stopped what, if presented differently, might have still got a point across but without alienating others.


re Lieder recitals - not my bag but that's not a reason to demand fewer...

[french frank]

I gather it was "offensive" language rather unacceptable views

As I have already said in a recent post, it was NOT "offensive language". It was a long text describing sexual activity which stopped some way short of being hard-core porn.

I have now spent the best part of four days on this. Jayne is not banned, she left. Her account is not deleted and she can return when she likes - but not on her terms, but on the terms that the forum sets and which all members are deemed to have accepted when they post here. She was treated no differently from any other member whose post received an official complaint. And no other member has ever left on that account.

I sense that most members want to move on from this. I would be grateful if they would now do so.

Barbirollians' suggestion

Might I suggest an amendment of the House Rules for clarification

" Do not use offensive language ( even if quoting artistic works or lyrics ) "

The current wording appears in context to be directed at prevented offensive language being used in an attack on or in reply to another member .

I think there are so many different subjects that can 'cause offence' and trigger complaints. The catch-all is "The moderator reserves the right to take any action deemed appropriate to ensure that this forum is not disrupted or abused. Threads may be closed or posts removed at the discretion of the moderator and without notice. ... Any post considered offensive should be reported to the moderators to deal with by using the Report button or by sending a Private Message. On all such complaints, the moderators' decision is final."

[Padraig]

Self censor, or be censored. It is a shared space, not our own personal space. Sometimes we make misjudgements.

I made a misjudgement recently when I fell for the invitation to write 'the bad f word' in a post about 'the bad f word'. As soon as I wrote it I regretted it. I would suggest that there is a place for apologies. If one becomes aware that they have crossed a line and could have caused offence, an apology should be offered. It is better than doubling down and causing further offence by calling names at the offended. I don't know if I offended anyone in the instance above, but I apologise because, as ts points out, I know that I made a misjudgement, and I hope it is accepted.

[Nick Armstrong]

I think there are so many different subjects that can 'cause offence' and trigger complaints. The catch-all is "The moderator reserves the right to take any action deemed appropriate to ensure that this forum is not disrupted or abused. Threads may be closed or posts removed at the discretion of the moderator and without notice. ... Any post considered offensive should be reported to the moderators to deal with by using the Report button or by sending a Private Message. On all such complaints, the moderators' decision is final."

Agreed.