Forum Decorum

[Charlie]

Borrowing Adam's great phrase (*), I'm proposing to open a new heading for a thread that will go down near the bottom of the front page of the forum: Forum Decorum.

Rather than declaring a set of rules and acceptable modes, it will be open to anybody to lead to a discussion based on particular cases. Mainly, it will function to draw attention to personal attacks and insults, and seek to calm down the little storms that occasionally arise.

Although I am a fairly avid reader of most threads, I don't see all of all of them, and at times have needed private messages to draw my attention to unacceptable posts. This proposed thread would serve that function.

So, for instance, the two posts by Jonathan regarding Des could be posted here, and if further comments and replies followed, a more general consensus could emerge. I don't think it is appropriate for one player unilaterally to wave a yellow or red card at another player and tell them to leave the pitch. Only if it turned out that almost everybody active on the forum felt the same way, would that be the outcome.

Personally, I feel Des should be encouraged to stay, and have voted for the middle option on the poll he has instigated himself on the subject. At this moment, the vote is ten to one for him to stay, which reassures me that I am in tune with the majority.

What do you all think of this proposal, for a new section to be opened called Forum Decorum?

----------------------------

(*) oops - see Nigel's reply below

[Nigel w]

Yes, Charlie - especially as it was me who suggested and came up with the description 'forum decourm' : glad you think it's such a great phrase but hey, we're not proud, you can credit it to whoever you like!

Of course Des should stay. Everybody should stay and the forum should be as inclusive as possible. But I'm not going to participate in a poll. It's unecessary and just protracts past events we should put behind us. Des, you don't need a ruddy opinion poll to tell you how to behave because you're an intelligent man and you know the score. Just get on with it, post something interesting and challenging about music, art, culture, life like you used to and let the (robust but polite) debate begin...

[Des]

Much appreciated. Thanks guys.

[Ian M]

What I don't understand is does voting Des back in, mean the others say out, which would cast the poll in a rather different light?

[Des]

What I don't understand is does voting Des back in, mean the others say out, which would cast the poll in a rather different light?

Good point. Better vote me out just to be on the safe side.

[Rob Hall]

So Charlie, does this mean that you have withdrawn the request you made that Des post no more until he has apologised to Nikki, or has an apology been made?

[CantSleepClownsWillGetMe]

Quote

So, for instance, the two posts by Jonathan regarding Des could be posted here

Not wishing to be pedantic, but Jonathan has made 3 similar posts regarding Des: 1 in YouTube, another in Looking for an Echo, and a third in the general SoTW forum section. An easy mistake to make I imagine, as they were all, more or less, the same! ;)

June

[That Was Jonathan E. Then]

I'm still on my own three-day fast from posting publicly on this matter. As I said in a PM to Charlie

As a gesture of good faith, I will make no further public postings on this subject for the next three days, until after the weekend, to allow the coolest heads to prevail.

so I will make no substantive comment for now beyond noting that polls are easy to manipulate and hard to take seriously.

[joel]

I certainly want Des to stay and voted with Charlie on this. I have to say though that it's very hard -if not impossible - for me to enter into direct discussion with Des while there's a suspicion that he hasn't apologised fully and humbly to Nikki.

[Dayna]

I wish everyone that was offensive to anyone here would just apologize to each other, so we can get back to normal again.

[Charlie]

I'm proposing to open a new heading for a thread that will go down near the bottom of the front page of the forum: Forum Decorum.

Following up on this idea but loathe to add yet another topic, I've renamed one near the bottom of the list, Forum Decorum (who are we are why are were here?), while moving several threads into the very last 'website' topic.

So Charlie, does this mean that you have withdrawn the request you made that Des post no more until he has apologised to Nikki, or has an apology been made?

I did mention what a bad referee I made, and it must look as if I have let Des back onto the pitch while my back was turned, despite having waved a red card at him.

The explanation is that I have had private message discussions with both Nikki and Des and we have mutually agreed that it should be possible for them once again to co-exist on the forum.

I don't think it would be proper for me to repeat in public what we said to each other in private.

Which brings me to another point. I've been told that some of my private messages have been passed around between members, and I hope we can all agree that this is not how private messages should work. It's like we're being unwittingly wire-tapped. I have taken each communication is being personal to the particular recipient.

So in future, can we agree: No private message may be passed to another without the sender's prior agreement?

In case it is pointed out that I quoted from a couple of private messages from people who told me they were leaving the forum, I did keep them anonymous. But perhaps I should not even do that again in future.

I will take this whole thread down to its new topic heading in due course, but for the moment will leave it up here while you absorb its implications and make any further comments for improvements or amendments.

The particular point I am hoping to get across is that if anybody feels that somebody else is out of order in their language or attitude, the complaint should be registered in the Forum Decorum section, rather than as an angry and probably inflamatory 'reply' to the offending post.

This is the main idea I'm proposing, and looking for a response to.

It should enable a more general and calm discussion of the problem without (a) raising the temperature or (b) assuming I should be sorting it out immediately and unilaterally.

[Gordon Neill]

It would have been good to have known yesterday that there had been some agreement between Nikki and Des. I pondered long and hard before casting my vote. But, with total faith in the common sense of Charlie (who art in Clapham) I eventually deduced that there must have been some agreement.

Charlie asked:

The particular point I am hoping to get across is that if anybody feels that somebody else is out of order in their language or attitude, the complaint should be registered in the Forum Decorum section, rather than as an angry and probably inflamatory 'reply' to the offending post.

This is the main idea I'm proposing, and looking for a response to.

I think this is worth trying. I'm not convinced that, when the red mist descends, the relevant combatants will be able to exercise enough self-restraint to disengage. It can be difficult not to try and have the last word. But definitely worth a try.

[Charlie]

I think this is worth trying. I'm not convinced that, when the red mist descends, the combatants will be able to exercise enough self-restraint to disengage. It can be difficult not to try and have the last word. But definitely worth a try.

Maybe what I should be asking is, should I be allowed to move down to 'Forum Decorum' those responses that I feel are simply personal attacks and not contributions to the discussion?

There may be borderline cases that I misjudge, which will doubtless be pointed out to me...

[Gordon Neill]

Yes. Show them the red card and move them off the main field of play.

[CantSleepClownsWillGetMe]

Dayna, rather sensibly, said -

I wish everyone that was offensive to anyone here would just apologize to each other, so we can get back to normal again.

These were my thoughts exactly. A number of insults were hurled, not just Des' swear word. Quite why people would choose to ignore the others and focus only on Des comment, was, and remains, completely beyond me.

Thank goodness common sense has prevailed.

Also, I don't think that this 'Venom' Corner' is a good idea. As has been proven over the past few days, public outrage, or pointing the finger at one individual, can make it extremely difficult for that person (or persons) to retract, or apologise for, what they've said. Or to reach a mutual agreement, as Des and Nikki have sensibly done (in private!).

I would suggest, rather than doing the online equivalent of sending someone 'into the corner', like unruly schoolchildren, that a brief PM be sent to them instead. After all, the last thing we want to see on here is anyone being publicly humiliated.

June