Inkanta
Group: Admins
Posts: 1453
Joined: Feb. 2000 |
 |
Posted: Nov. 09 2005, 18:48 |
 |
| Quote (Johnny Owl @ Nov. 09 2005, 08:13) | | That's what probably made him close my topic. He felt that he was being challenged too hard. He could have left the topic to its course, instead he chose to close it unilaterally. |
J. Owl, you are way off-base with that remark. You are making assumptions, just like in other areas. Why did you assume it was a unilateral decision to close the topic? Well, now you know that it wasn’t—that there are several administrators wandering around here, including the owner. There are ways to challenge people and ways not to. You’ve attacked one of the most collaborative (and fun to collaborate with), brilliant, thinking persons here, and worse yet, you’ve once again attacked an administrator. You restart the topic and immediately slam an administrator. Owl stew is sounding quite good…..and….we have a chef around here someplace who could probably do quite a bit with it…… now what spices would be good….
I have now sat on this post for a few hours. I flew off the (broom)handle a bit, have now toned it down--you should have seen it before--which is why sometimes it’s good to wait awhile before posting.
Korgscrew and I have been chatting about this, and what he says (because he has shared it with me) is actually much more contained and rational than where I was heading, though we made some of the exact same points and our comments may overlap. I don’t have time to take out all of the redundancy.
When it comes down to it, this is a private Board—there is an owner, and there are administrators. Over the years, the admins have been amazingly consistent and level-headed, and that is not changing—it is one reason that this place has worked well for a long time, as opposed to a certain musician’s Board, which soon found itself flung into a cyber black hole, out of exasperation.
Korg is spot on about why we close or delete topics or posts. Various reasons indeed, e.g., redundancy, inappropriateness, arguing, etc. Administrators do not have to conduct a public opinion poll before doing such things. If you do not like it, go someplace else and start your own Mike Oldfield Board. Start your own Johnny Owl WTF Research Institute, whatever. We try our best to be consistent and fair.
From my POV, I have seen primarily 2,000-word posts from you. I don’t think you’ve ever posted in any forum topic other than the one you created. Not that it is required to post anyplace if you visit tubular.net, or necessarily a bad thing if you don’t, but generally people who are inspired to contribute 2,000 word posts say a word or two in other topics. It made me question your motive for being here, and I never figured out an answer. True, some of the musicians pretty-much stay to the fan track etc. section, and that’s fine—they are making incredible contributions for the listening enjoyment of the community. This is a bit different.
Reading your posts generally takes a lot of effort because of their size and sometimes absurdity. As I mentioned, I found your entire contention surrounding the WTF factor bad science and inaccurate (e.g., generations turns for one of several). Maybe it was the way that it was presented—underneath it all, you might actually have a point—I don’t know—I left my archaeological tools in New York. If I am going to read 2,000 word anythings, it’s generally not going to be in this arena, unless I can quickly establish the content, authority, accuracy, bias, and currency (if appropriate). This is not a scholarly Board—that’s not to say that it couldn’t lead to collaboration between members on some type of scholarly effort. I am also not implying that intellectual/philosophical discussions do not populate this Board, because they do—and generally, they’re very good and sometimes spirited (in a positive sense) exchanges.
If you are going to be here on tubular.net, please don’t beat everyone over the head with 2,000 posts, definitions, and Latin. Believe it or not, the folks that hang out here are a pretty astute bunch and generally do not need you to define words or terms for them. You might also try to write more concisely—it truly is an art, but it might lead to greater understanding and positive communication. So…size may indeed matter (at least in that capacity).
Regarding the post that I deleted, I still think it was probably a good thing to do, because it was racially and ethnically charged. The other night you stereotyped another group of people, and I probably should have deleted that one too, but one of the other member’s response was so appropriate that it seemed better to leave it. It is entirely possible to make points without such remarks, and if you really feel that way about different cultures and ethnic groups, please take a course in anthropology.
Finally, a lot of these things I’d rather be saying to you in a PM, but I know that you don’t really give a “rat’s a,” and in that you are an owl, that rather surprises me.
--------------
"No such thing as destiny; only choices exist." From: Moongarden's "Solaris."
|
using his mod powers to have the last word... oh and yes his IS definitely bigger
). I think it's important to remember that everyone is going to show some of the assessed personality traits to a certain degree. We could say that in posting this, you are showing "Preoccupation with the dominance-submission, strong-weak, leader-follower dimension;" and "Destructiveness and Cynicism: Generalized hostility, vilification of the human." (I'd call your declaring human experience 'bullshit' vilification of the human, for example, and it seems to us like you're trying to act as a destructive force here. You're also rather cynical about my personality, it seems). Does this make you a fascist? Under your criteria, it may well do...