 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2014-04-15 18:31
I've had a few discussions off-line with some members recently where they seem to think that "the rules" are hard & fast. They aren't: Glenn & I use the posted rules but yes, we sometimes bend them when we think that it's worth it. We also do some editing and deleting of posts behind the scenes, trying to make things fit. However, I will clarify a few misconceptions:
---
"Real names are required"
Where did anyone get that from? On the registration form there are exactly 3 required fields:
Quote:
User Name*: (used in your posts)
Your E-mail*: Hide my email from other users
Enter this number*:
...
Fields marked with * are required.
That's it. 3 fields required, and only two are stored. Pen names are perfectly fine. Real names are nice. You can hide your email, but Glenn & I need it for administration. If you edit it and it bounces I will not be happy and I will either tell you to fix it (which becomes difficult when I don't have the email!) or disable your account.
---
Equipment reviews by non-company-affiliated posters
Reviews are fine, comments when equipment selections/recommendations are requested are fine, but please - telling everyone that they are being misled, lemmings, or just plain stupid for not completely subscribing to your new found enlightenment becomes old quickly and we will let you know. We're pretty fair about this I think - it doesn't happen often, but when it does Glenn & I tend to get personal missives from parties on both sides of the argument. Oh well, I DID sign up for this job.
---
Personal emails sent/received offline, or "why is there no chat/message feature?"
People who publish their emails are presumed to be willing to chat offline - If their email isn't published then they don't. It IS rude to email someone telling them to "shut up". Don't. It only encourages more of the same behaviour that made you write that in the first place. Glenn and I are watching.
I don't keep a message board chat or message system because I'd have to monitor that or possibly become mired in some form of lawsuit heaven (even if I am protected by law in the US, it doesn't mean I don't have to defend myself - more than one newspaper has shut down their on-line comments section because of abuse & nuisance lawsuits).
---
Personal "attacks"
OK, this one is hard. Sometimes in the passion of a discussion I can hear, as so aptly put in old Saturday Night Live skits, "Jane, you ignorant s**t". It's hard for the poster not to take the comment personally, and it's even harder not to respond in kind. Often we'll edit or delete such posts, but sometimes they're worthwhile and/or can't really be edited without losing context and we decide to leave them. We make a decision, sometimes we're wrong or missed some "slight". Bear with us. The argument will end someday.
---
LONG posts
Just because you can, don't. Better to get one point clear and discussed rationally rather than ten points in 5000 words. No matter how clearly you write, it's too long for most of our members to read through, and responding to just one point difficult.
With two very important exceptions:
If you're giving us explicit instructions on how to disassemble/repair/modify something, then a long post makes perfect sense. Better yet, a PDF attachment that can be downloaded and printed easily. Or
It's a published article you wrote that isn't easily accessible via the Internet. A link to published articles is what we really want, but we've had a few reprinted here because on-line references were either expensive or not-to-be found.
If you want to write articles or very long posts then there are appropriate places to do that, such as a personal blog. You can always post and link to your blog - that leaves readers a choice on whether or not they want to read what you're written.
---
Glenn & I don't always get it right, but we're human. Like the rest of you. We have members that think we're too strong in our editing and offline exchanges, some that think we're too lenient. We try for the more-or-less happy medium. I'm sure there's members who agree with our moderation, some that don't. That's to be expected.
And we don't take it personally 
And this post is too long ![[tongue]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie6.gif)
Mark C.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ursa
Date: 2014-04-15 19:03
Thanks for posting this, Mark.
Is it OK to "bump" this thread?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2014-04-15 20:59
If someone really doesn't want to submit to the moderation you and Glenn provide, the Klarinet list is still un-moderated, isn't it? I think there's definite value in imposing some degree of control. As far as I've ever been able to tell, not having seen (with a single exception several years ago) the ones you remove or edit, I think you and Glenn do a great job of keeping things reasonable without being authoritarian or over-controlling.
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2014-04-15 21:52
kdk wrote:
> If someone really doesn't want to submit to the moderation you
> and Glenn provide, the Klarinet list is still un-moderated,
> isn't it?
Yes, it continues to be un-moderated.
Unfortunately, it is also incredibly quiet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: gkern
Date: 2014-04-15 22:14
Mark, thank you for the post; sometimes a gentle reminder is necessary.
And thanks to you and Glenn for providing and maintaining this forum, you are doing a thankless job exceedingly well!
Gary K
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
