Don't scare the Horses!

[Kalee20]

Jez...

Many of your posts here (and the handful of yours that I've seen on UKVRRR) are informative and entertaining. And welcome.

I'd echo that! And someone informed and active at the design level in the valve hi-fi world is a useful source of knowledge (I'm interested in high-quality sound reproduction too).

I'd hope that if anything happens 'behind the scenes' that it doesn't result in the loss of access to Jez's expertise.

Onwards and upwards

Let's hope so!

[Jez]

I would say laws tend to be made by the rich and powerful to protect the interests of the rich and powerful more often than not!

From comments above it seems my addressing a few home truths, and particularly my pointing at the elephant in the room over the nature of forums in general, has indeed scared the horses.
Obviously without forum owners putting the effort into starting and running forums our worlds would be a little  darker and sadder a place. Maybe the way they tend to be run and moderated is the only practical one at the end of the day... I just don't like the way owners and mods have "absolute power" over the free speech of others and with no means of comeback, complaint or redress.

I can't be the only one to (for example) have spent over an hour composing a long technical reply to a thread, time spent attaching schematics and photos, time spent checking facts etc, only to find the post, which certainly complied with AUP, deleted within 5 mins with no explanation. It's certainly happened to me before and it has made me apoplectically angry.
It's no different to if you'd been bent over an A4 page writing a letter/essay for an hour and someone had walked in and grabbed the paper, scrunched it up and thrown it in the bin. That's how it feels to me anyway.  Complain about it and you're likely to find yourself banned.  You scratch your head trying to think of why it was deleted and it dawns on you that the previous day you strongly disagreed with the site owner or a mod over eg which was better the "Acme MkI" or the "MkII" ... You are left with the only conclusion that fits being that the post was deleted in "payback" for disagreeing  with them! It was personal.... and there's nothing you can do about it as AUP will usually have a clause of "all moderation decisions are final and are not open for discussion".

I do tend to address subjects which many others seem to find too controversial for discussion, in real life as well as on line, so if using a forum to point out some of the injustices and idiosyncrasy's common in forums in general is considered as having overstepped the line then no offence intended, and I'm sure my posts will moderated as this forum owner feels appropriate

[Sinewave]

I think it's easy to get over heated, which is why I understand fully why politics is a no no in many places, online or offline. It's just a shame that before it was just halted or discussed properly, that some are branded as daily mail/sun reading pub bores just for having a differing opinion - which does appear to be a theme in many political discussions.

Onwards and upwards yes, to a degree, but I'm not sure how I feel about being branded a daily mail/sun reading pub bores. It doesn't matter who reads what, or if they go to a pub or not.

But onwards and upwards, I suppose.

[Murphyv310]

Hi.
I think Mark's comments and explanation is appropriate and balanced.
My gripe indeed is the post about "riding" a motorcycle and that type of behaviour I deplore, as someone who has been ROSPA instructed and done other driving courses that type of attitude is totally wrong, the poster doesn't even have the decency to reply to any of my comments.

I'm prepared to go along with Mark 100% and right now am going to hope that no more content like that reappears.

[PerdioPal]

I have a maxim, "If you want to cheat, know all the rules first".

[Mark Hennessy]

I think it's easy to get over heated, which is why I understand fully why politics is a no no in many places, online or offline. It's just a shame that before it was just halted or discussed properly, that some are branded as daily mail/sun reading pub bores just for having a differing opinion - which does appear to be a theme in many political discussions.

Onwards and upwards yes, to a degree, but I'm not sure how I feel about being branded a daily mail/sun reading pub bores. It doesn't matter who reads what, or if they go to a pub or not.

But onwards and upwards, I suppose.

Well look, I did explain in post #47 that I was simply responding in kind. I'm sorry to say it, but that is exactly how you came across in your original comments. And the fact you've brought it up again suggests to me that it touched a nerve. Certainly, if the same accusation was levelled at me, I would feel the same, but once the initial shock passed, I would reflect on what I wrote to cause someone who is normally very level-headed to say that. Perhaps you haven't reached that point yet?

However, I did explain in my long post this lunchtime (#60) that I was uncharacteristically (albeit only slightly) blunt yesterday because of the bad feelings this thread was creating. Post #60 was to address this issues with Jez's contributions to this thread - I wasn't sure until you made your most recent post if I needed to do the same for you (your use of humour in #54 suggested all was well). But I did close off my post with a general apology for my grumpiness yesterday. Do I need to apologise to you specifically for saying your comments sounded like the sort of thing I'd expect to hear from a pub bore?

Please note that I did not, to use your word, "brand" you as a pub bore. I simply said that your comments were the sort of thing that I'd expect to hear from a pub bore. I believe there is quite a difference, but fully accept that what you believe could well be different. Please note that I stated right at the end of post #60 that no offence was intended.

The conversation about ULEZ was not halted. But I do believe it would have been impossible to continue without straying even further into politics. If you wish to continue it, please feel free, providing you argue your points in a very balanced fashion, and bring lots of references to support your viewpoint, and do it in a way that avoids hyperbole and offence. And absolutely no politics (which I still think makes it impossible). I promise to consider your arguments if well made and well supported, and also promise to be more measured in my responses going forward.

Just as a general point to all, you'll note that I've dealt with all of this in the open rather than via PM. That was something that I agonised over this morning. A lot. In the past, we've tended to do things via PM, but we've found that often, it just doesn't help. At least this way, everyone can see my attempts to be fair and balanced. I haven't changed anything that I would have said via PM, and the tone would be exactly the same - I always want to work constructively with people, rather than take the easy way out of sanctioning or banning them. But people don't always see it that way - I understand that. But in this case, you're free to take soundings from impartial bystanders, who will hopefully agree that I'm being reasonable here.

All the best,

Mark

[Sinewave]

Well, that's akin to me then saying you're coming across as a Guardian reading paint throwing protestor then, in that case - it's just bitter name calling, which such kind does when they can't support their narrative. I am right in what I said, if people carry on doing what they do, but pay to do it, it changes nothing apart from extorts people. If not being able to see the bloody obvious means you use bitter hate comments towards others, then that also changes nothing, that is a very Guardian reading paint throwing protestors thing to do.....

[Mark Hennessy]

OK, we shall have to agree to disagree.

Best regards,

Mark

[Jez]

Just seen Marks post after making mine above.... It was so close to what I was expecting I could almost have written it, and I don't mean that pejoratively! What would one expect a forum owner, sticking up generically for other forum owners, to say? I'd probably say the same myself if roles were reversed.

I must point out that other than a post way up thread I have been careful that my comments apply generically to forums and I was not talking about any specific forum.

They say you can't please all the people all the time.... but it seems in my case I can all too easily upset most of the people most of the time!  I'm rather good at that apparently.  We have one who posted earlier to strongly agree with me over forums... but know hates me because I'm a petrol head and get my kicks form high performance motorbikes, the forum owner who allows discussion of automotive matters but not if high performance vehicles is your thing, several who disagree with me over ULEZ and one who passionately agrees with me over ULEZ and has just PM'ed me to say so...

I find it all interesting in philosophical and epistemological terms. "Sheeple"ism, trends, fads, cancel culture, echo chambers... it's all this thread somewhere. My mind doesn't work like that so I always seem to be out on a limb somewhat

Trying to read between the lines a little here re the entire thread and posts it seems the message is "you're entitled to your opinions... but only if the site owner and a majority of the (pretty conservative and middle age+) members of the site agree with you" (be part of the echo chamber or shut up!) which then gets me recursively back to "the kind of issues I have generically with forums are....." 

Certainly my attempts at addressing a few elephants in the room which never get discussed have been described variously as "unacceptable, "worrying", "controversial, "crazy", "deplorable" and "having issues".... "Rule one of fight club: Never talk about fight club" = "Rule one of forums: Never talk about forums". About right yeah people?

Your's, a "Guardian reading, paint throwing", far left socialist, ex "hells angel", ex "new age traveller", ex squatter, with dreadlocks down to his arse! (yes really to all that. But also an engineer and as much a geek as the rest of you) hence probably reading from so different a hymn book on many issues that we may as well be from different religions

Hope everyone can keep a sense of humour and perspective amongst all this and yes... Onwards and upwards

[Kalee20]

Gentlemen! Ladies, boys and girls... and hermaphrodites of all ages!

Could I respectfully suggest, let's all leave off posting anything on this, maybe for 48 hours?

And then, review whether it's really worth responding with that post we're dreaming up in indignation?

If yes, then go ahead... but I'll bet it isn't!

(From a soldering-iron wielding, overlong haired (cancelled my last appointment for haircut, too much on!), BVWS Bulletin reader and contributor... and proud of it.)

And BTW Sinewave, I did have a grin at your post #54 :D