Musical Homophobia - or The Homophobia Histories

[french frank]

Ams,
Why do you go on replying to Mr Pee and his ilk ? It's really not worth our time. Quite honestly, I'm seriously considering leaving these boards because of the sheer nastiness of so much content and the relentless facetiousness of the in crowd, but then I see good contributions from you and others and change my mind.

Let me be clear, it isn't the difference of opinion that I object to, in a sense that's why we are here, but continual insults from some contributors hiding behind their anonymity.

Ferret, I had an email from someone yesterday who has blocked the entire forum on the grounds of what you might call the 'sheer nastiness' and 'bullying' - and from someone who you seem to think of as one of the 'in crowd'.

Both sides are capable of facetiousness and nastiness, depending on the topic. That's why the board was removed from the general forum.

Your question, 'Why do you go on replying' could be addressed to both sides.

[amateur51]

Ferret, I had an email from someone yesterday who has blocked the entire forum on the grounds of what you might call the 'sheer nastiness' and 'bullying' - and from someone who you seem to think of as one of the 'in crowd'.

Both sides are capable of facetiousness and nastiness, depending on the topic. That's why the board was removed from the general forum.

Your question, 'Why do you go on replying' could be addressed to both sides.

My reason for replying is that the views expressed so often need to be challenged, otherwise they could stand as the view of the Board.

[MrGongGong]

My reason for replying is that the views expressed so often need to be challenged, otherwise they could stand as the view of the Board.

Absolutely ...................

[Beef Oven!]

Absolutely ...................

................... Fabulous!

[Ferretfancy]

My reason for replying is that the views expressed so often need to be challenged, otherwise they could stand as the view of the Board.

I accept that, and respect you for it. I just wish that the views that I find unpalatable could be expressed in less crude and insulting terms.

[french frank]

My reason for replying is that the views expressed so often need to be challenged, otherwise they could stand as the view of the Board.

I don't really accept that views that receive no reply will be taken as 'the view of the Board'. That's simply an argument for tit for tat. Your #927 could have limited itself to the second sentence and MrGongGong's was unnecessary. One is free to interpret Mr Pee's last in various ways, none of which is likely to do him much credit.

[amateur51]

I don't really accept that views that receive no reply will be taken as 'the view of the Board'. That's simply an argument for tit for tat. Your #927 could have limited itself to the second sentence and MrGongGong's was unnecessary. One is free to interpret Mr Pee's last in various ways, none of which is likely to do him much credit.

Ah well I am far from perfect, you'll be surprised to learn.

I'm not going to rely on the somewhat "I see no ships" style of moderation on this Board to protect my interests.

[french frank]

I'm not going to rely on the somewhat "I see no ships" style of moderation on this Board to protect my interests.

Well, I could abandon the 'I see no ships' style of moderation in which case I would have both sides pretty soon turning on me and crying 'censorship'. I'm simply saying that no one is responsible for what other members say: they are responsible for what they say themselves. Being able to ignore some comments as worthless and not deserving a reply would help.

[amateur51]

Well, I could abandon the 'I see no ships' style of moderation in which case I would have both sides pretty soon turning on me and crying 'censorship'. I'm simply saying that no one is responsible for what other members say: they are responsible for what they say themselves. Being able to ignore some comments as worthless and not deserving a reply would help.

So in future you don't want anyone to alert you to some seriously defamatory post from someone else because they're not responsible for it?

I understand your point about censorship and in the past you have quite reasonably said that you cannot be expected to 'police' every thread. I have personal experience of reporting what I thought was a very dodgy post only to find that no action is taken. I have therefore decided that I have no option but to police things that affect me myself.

[MrGongGong]

................... Fabulous!

Paris

http://www.digital-music-archives.com/webdb2/application/Application.php?fwServerClass=ProductDetail&ProductCode=CDE0084

[french frank]

So in future you don't want anyone to alert you to some seriously defamatory post from someone else because they're not responsible for it?

A 'seriously defamatory' post is not the same as a niggling, provocative post, clearly designed to wind someone up.

I understand your point about censorship and in the past you have quite reasonably said that you cannot be expected to 'police' every thread. I have personal experience of reporting what I thought was a very dodgy post only to find that no action is taken. I have therefore decided that I have no option but to police things that affect me myself.

Well, it may be that I didn't agree that it was 'very dodgy' in a way that required moderation, simply that you didn't like it.

The key point is that both sides think the other side is guilty of provocative, snide comments (and that they themselves aren't). And I think both sides are half right. I always have hopes of a sensible debate on this board ...

[amateur51]

A 'seriously defamatory' post is not the same as a niggling, provocative post, clearly designed to wind someone up.

Well, it may be that I didn't agree that it was 'very dodgy' in a way that required moderation, simply that you didn't like it.

The key point is that both sides think the other side is guilty of provocative, snide comments (and that they themselves aren't). And I think both sides are half right. I always have hopes of a sensible debate on this board ...

Well now we're all down here in the basement, where no-one can hear your screams ...

I think we're getting some sensible debating here, it's all a matter of standards, as the Garter King of Arms might say.

[Beef Oven!]

Paris

http://www.digital-music-archives.co...ctCode=CDE0084

Part 2 is superb (thumbs up thingy)

Btw, I've got that Pierre Schaeffer 3 CD set that's advertised in the left hand pane. Know it?

[Mr Pee]

So in future you don't want anyone to alert you to some seriously defamatory post from someone else because they're not responsible for it?

I understand your point about censorship and in the past you have quite reasonably said that you cannot be expected to 'police' every thread. I have personal experience of reporting what I thought was a very dodgy post only to find that no action is taken. I have therefore decided that I have no option but to police things that affect me myself.

Oh grow up.

[Beef Oven!]

Some good stuff here ...

http://www.petertatchellfoundation.o...ate-homophobia

Well Tatchell is an admiral politician and I respect him highly, although I don't agree with everything he says. He does normally make a lot of sense. I have read all the information, including the sub-sections of the link.

I'm afraid I have a fundamental disagreement. I simply do not think that it is for homosexualists to tell Putin, the Russian government and the Russian people what to think and what domestic policies they should adopt. The arrogance of the homosexualists comes from the fact that they constitute a very powerful lobby. Harassing Gergiev is totally disrespectful and will achieve nothing other than to alienate him - our loss, because I don't suppose he gives a flying fuck what the protesters think. Homosexualists do not care what they destroy, so long as they get their way and force people to view the world the way they do. This approach is very destructive and is doomed to failure, if not now, then in the long run. We will all be losers.