The Rules: Official Discussion & Debate

[Joyrex]

UPDATE: I created this topic from the off-topic discussion happening in the WATMM memes topic, so that thread can continue as it was before all this blew up.

 

 

I just had to remove 47 posts regarding Fred's banning - the rules clearly state that if you have a question about someone's banning or suspension, to contact me regarding it, and not to create a thread or pollute other threads with off-topic discussion. If it continues, then the epic hilarity of this thread will come to an unfortunate close.

 

I've said it before, I will say it again - if you cannot operate within the rules of the forum, then you have no business here - I don't think it's too much to ask for anyone to control themselves and actually, you know, talk about music on a music forum, and keep the non-music discussion civil and not delve into weird fetishes or pornography or whatever there's already plenty of on the internet elsewhere.

 

I'm not a purist, I'm not some religious zealot, and I haven't "found" Jesus or any of that crap - I am simply tired of this forum being looked at by professionals and others as some cesspool where the greasy little IDM prepubescent nerds hang out and share their immature fantasies and giggle at poop jokes.

 

It was my fault for letting the forum slide down that slippery slope to begin with, and I had hoped by now everyone would have gotten the message. Apparently the only ones who still have difficulty in accepting this are the members who became accustomed to this kind of behaviour in the past, and now see it as the party being over.

 

If you want to respond to this, please PM me. Thanks.

[goDel]

?

 

Fred basically is a watmm meme and therefore very much on topic whether you like it or not.

 

Here's a simple proposition: we discuss what we like. And you delete what you think needs to be deleted. And somewhere down the line we have some balance between you deleting posts/threads and us accepting what you think belongs here or doesn't.

 

Let's call it the collective normative process of watmm.

 

Also, I don't think these discussions should be restricted to pm's. Things like this should be talked about in the open. Freedom of speech and all. You have a right to have your opinion. We have ours. So lets talk about it openly.

 

Also2, complaining about papa J's policies and personal preferences is a meme of itself. So there, this is still on topic.

[Guest zaphod]

I just had to remove 47 posts regarding Fred's banning - the rules clearly state that if you have a question about someone's banning or suspension, to contact me regarding it, and not to create a thread or pollute other threads with off-topic discussion. If it continues, then the epic hilarity of this thread will come to an unfortunate close.

 

I've said it before, I will say it again - if you cannot operate within the rules of the forum, then you have no business here - I don't think it's too much to ask for anyone to control themselves and actually, you know, talk about music on a music forum, and keep the non-music discussion civil and not delve into weird fetishes or pornography or whatever there's already plenty of on the internet elsewhere.

 

I'm not a purist, I'm not some religious zealot, and I haven't "found" Jesus or any of that crap - I am simply tired of this forum being looked at by professionals and others as some cesspool where the greasy little IDM prepubescent nerds hang out and share their immature fantasies and giggle at poop jokes.

 

It was my fault for letting the forum slide down that slippery slope to begin with, and I had hoped by now everyone would have gotten the message. Apparently the only ones who still have difficulty in accepting this are the members who became accustomed to this kind of behaviour in the past, and now see it as the party being over.

 

If you want to respond to this, please PM me. Thanks.

 

this is general banter, not a music forum. if you don't want gb to exist, why not just make the whole place music discussion?

[Joyrex]

?

 

Fred basically is a watmm meme and therefore very much on topic whether you like it or not.

 

Here's a simple proposition: we discuss what we like. And you delete what you think needs to be deleted. And somewhere down the line we have some balance between you deleting posts/threads and us accepting what you think belongs here or doesn't.

 

Let's call it the collective normative process of watmm.

 

Also, I don't think these discussions should be restricted to pm's. Things like this should be talked about in the open. Freedom of speech and all. You have a right to have your opinion. We have ours. So lets talk about it openly.

 

Also2, complaining about papa J's policies and personal preferences is a meme of itself. So there, this is still on topic.

You can discuss Fred "the meme" as much as you want - his banning, why, etc. are NOT a meme (yet), and against the forum rules.

 

 

I just had to remove 47 posts regarding Fred's banning - the rules clearly state that if you have a question about someone's banning or suspension, to contact me regarding it, and not to create a thread or pollute other threads with off-topic discussion. If it continues, then the epic hilarity of this thread will come to an unfortunate close.

 

I've said it before, I will say it again - if you cannot operate within the rules of the forum, then you have no business here - I don't think it's too much to ask for anyone to control themselves and actually, you know, talk about music on a music forum, and keep the non-music discussion civil and not delve into weird fetishes or pornography or whatever there's already plenty of on the internet elsewhere.

 

I'm not a purist, I'm not some religious zealot, and I haven't "found" Jesus or any of that crap - I am simply tired of this forum being looked at by professionals and others as some cesspool where the greasy little IDM prepubescent nerds hang out and share their immature fantasies and giggle at poop jokes.

 

It was my fault for letting the forum slide down that slippery slope to begin with, and I had hoped by now everyone would have gotten the message. Apparently the only ones who still have difficulty in accepting this are the members who became accustomed to this kind of behaviour in the past, and now see it as the party being over.

 

If you want to respond to this, please PM me. Thanks.

 

this is general banter, not a music forum. if you don't want gb to exist, why not just make the whole place music discussion?

 

It's not that I don't want General Banter to exist - the whole point of it is to allow non-music discussion - I don't see why politics, news, games, books, television, film and other shared interests are not enough without having to resort to discussing porn, scat, or any other subject not suitable for public discussion. I mean, really - are you going to go to a public place and talk openly within earshot about tits, porn, poop, etc. Of course not. I don't see why General Banter need be any different.

[gaarg]

When I was around 10 years old I was at my friend's place playing Street fighter2. Then his mother comes in asking why can't we play a nicer game like the Simpsons one.

 

He was later prohibited form playing Street fighter 2.

 

We played it because it was more fun.

[Guest A/D]

Joyrex, I certainly do talk about sex in public, and I'm not being sarcastic. I think sex and nonstandard sexual preferences are integral to the human experience, and it's important to me that I can be open about those things with the people I'm close with. WATMM does our share of leering over the female anatomy, which I can understand trying to prohibit. But I think disallowing all forms of sexual discourse is too extreme.

 

Is the idea of someone enjoying licking a foot so abhorrent to you? Or rather, do you think it's abhorrent to enough people that it will cause WATMM to be looked at as a cesspool?

 

Speaking of which, can I ask what makes you feel like WATMM is "looked at by professionals and others as some cesspool where the greasy little IDM prepubescent nerds hang out and share their immature fantasies"? There's nothing immature about being sexually active or being interested in sex well beyond teenage years. I think ideally sex is really fun or an expression of love or both. I think open discussion about sex is important to a society looking to move forward.

 

I understand that you have no call to respond to this or explain yourself, but it's an issue dear to my heart, so I thought I'd at least ask. Thanks for any insights.

[luke viia]

I was at a restaurant on Sunday enjoying a nice meal with friends, we discussed various aspects of both pornography and pooping, in-between meaningful discussions about local politics, recent movies we'd seen, and how our jobs were going.

 

And I just gotta say, since I've actually looked at this before: the rules just say not to create multiple threads about banned members, but discussing banned members/why it happened is not against the rules (citing the rules themselves here)...

 

When someone is banned, it's natural to start a "Why was [insert banned member's name here] banned?" thread - while this is not a violation of the rules, multiple threads of this nature (especially when either there is an existing thread already addressing the matter or an official thread from a Mod or Admin regarding the matter) are considered inflammatory and counterproductive, and will be removed.

 

Though I did notice that the "we do not encourage mass deletion of posts" bit is gone now.

[goDel]

 

?

 

...

Also2, complaining about papa J's policies and personal preferences is a meme of itself. So there, this is still on topic.

You can discuss Fred "the meme" as much as you want - his banning, why, etc. are NOT a meme (yet), and against the forum rules.

 

 

That's just odd. If we can talk about "Fred the meme", it's pretty natural to talk about "Fred the b7".

 

You don't have anything against natural conversations, do you? Or are you one of those people who shouts "off topic!" whenever the conversation takes some unexpected turn? This is WATMM, right? This place is basically about experimentation and unexpected turns. This policy is uncharacteristic of what this community is about, imo. I understand the need for certain limits, but please use limits in a way which support what this forum is (should be?) about.

 

Anyways: this discussion has been made many times. If discussions like this wouldn't be deleted, we could (re)read all the various arguments and actually learn something (instead of following some rules like a dog).

[Alcofribas]

i get that any discussion about licking feet is pretty embarrassing on a forum named after a song by the guy who sang about sneaking into some one's room, fucking them in the ass, cutting off their cock and eating it.

 

or rather, i don't get that.

[Joyrex]

I was at a restaurant on Sunday enjoying a nice meal with friends, we discussed various aspects of both pornography and pooping, in-between meaningful discussions about local politics, recent movies we'd seen, and how our jobs were going.

 

And I just gotta say, since I've actually looked at this before: the rules just say not to create multiple threads about banned members, but discussing banned members/why it happened is not against the rules (citing the rules themselves here)...

 

When someone is banned, it's natural to start a "Why was [insert banned member's name here] banned?" thread - while this is not a violation of the rules, multiple threads of this nature (especially when either there is an existing thread already addressing the matter or an official thread from a Mod or Admin regarding the matter) are considered inflammatory and counterproductive, and will be removed.

 

Though I did notice that the "we do not encourage mass deletion of posts" bit is gone now.

 

 

I think you're putting two and two together and getting five - I haven't edited the rules for some time now, and if I remember correctly, the "mass deletion" aspect was in someone wanting to leave the site and have their posts removed (which was common in the past, considering some of the embarrassing things people have said and did on this forum, and then when real life comes along and they need to get a job or are worried about background checks, they plead with me to delete their posts or change their username.

 

Thanks for pointing that out though; I'll revise the rules so it's clear that open discussion about banned members should be directed to an Administrator as to avoid any of these counterproductive threads from rearing their ugly heads. It's like a public hanging - everyone wants the gory details to gossip over.

 

 

 

?

 

...

Also2, complaining about papa J's policies and personal preferences is a meme of itself. So there, this is still on topic.

You can discuss Fred "the meme" as much as you want - his banning, why, etc. are NOT a meme (yet), and against the forum rules.

 

 

That's just odd. If we can talk about "Fred the meme", it's pretty natural to talk about "Fred the b7".

 

You don't have anything against natural conversations, do you? Or are you one of those people who shouts "off topic!" whenever the conversation takes some unexpected turn? This is WATMM, right? This place is basically about experimentation and unexpected turns. This policy is uncharacteristic of what this community is about, imo. I understand the need for certain limits, but please use limits in a way which support what this forum is (should be?) about.

 

Anyways: this discussion has been made many times. If discussions like this wouldn't be deleted, we could (re)read all the various arguments and actually learn something (instead of following some rules like a dog).

 

The only "keep on topic" moderation I've ever done is in threads about a new artist releasing an album or EP, when somebody thinks it will be hilarious to divert the conversation into multiple pages of 'lol' or some such nonsense, when others are trying to keep up with the thread to actually read something of substance or contribute meaningfully to it.

 

The problem is with discussions like this (and this is quickly becoming one of them) is they drag on and on, and aren't constructive whatsoever - banned member stays banned, angry forum members stay angry, and my username gets spat out on the ground like some flavourless bit of gum.

 

[Joyrex]

i get that any discussion about licking feet is pretty embarrassing on a forum named after a song by the guy who sang about sneaking into some one's room, fucking them in the ass, cutting off their cock and eating it.

 

or rather, i don't get that.

We're not discussing Richard's warped sense of humour in his music though, are we? Nor is the forum named after that song, or Aphex Twin for that matter. Nice try though, troll.

[goDel]

The problem is with discussions like this (and this is quickly becoming one of them) is they drag on and on, and aren't constructive whatsoever - banned member stays banned, angry forum members stay angry, and my username gets spat out on the ground like some flavourless bit of gum.

 

 

Nothing wrong with a respectful discussion, imo. If your username has been spit out like flavourless gum you have every right to act on that.

 

Sorry for the discussion. And thanks for the warning. ...

[Alcofribas]

 

i get that any discussion about licking feet is pretty embarrassing on a forum named after a song by the guy who sang about sneaking into some one's room, fucking them in the ass, cutting off their cock and eating it.

 

or rather, i don't get that.

We're not discussing Richard's warped sense of humour in his music though, are we? Nor is the forum named after that song, or Aphex Twin for that matter. Nice try though, troll.

 

lol pwn

[ambermonk]

I was initially gonna refrain from participating in this discussion, but I'd have to agree with Joyrex as far as discussing sex and erotica openly is concerned. To me it's the verbal equivalent of waving one's genitals around in public, and makes me personally uncomfortable.

Don't get me wrong, I understand the subtle humour in innuendo, but something outright such as posting dick pics is just off-putting to me. Seems like common sense to me to keep discussions relatively clean, but we all have different standards.

I'm not trying to be a nanny, but I am trying to state that not every WATMM member is into extremities. And I know IDM can be extreme, but more so in the sense of weirdness than obscenities. And yeah, I'd say foot-licking kind of borders that, unless you're a dog.

Long story short, I like weird, but I don't like obscene.


_{(I'll probably get labeled Disney n00b from now on)}

[Guest zaphod]

I know IDM can be extreme

 

made me lol hard

[goDel]

 

woah!

[Guest umop_apisdn]

Alright, I know that it's a sore subject that's rapidly degrading into a dead horse beaten to a bloody pulp, but I'll make two arguments: 1) banned users are a meme and 2) anything about Fred is a meme. Shit, I'll add a third. Reading the rules is a meme (by the way, for any of those who really take "read the rules" as a joke, there is actually a link at the bottom right of the page...it's apparently a big deal). Unfortunately, it's all worked itself into a hybrid heap of "you can't say that here," ambiguously covered somewhere in the rules in this particular thread.

 

I really had something long-winded I just wrote out about a community and the loss of highly regarded members of that community, but I started realizing I would find it deleted or possibly suffer some other consequence. I realized I would be running off-topic. If I were to create a thread about it, since it relates to a banned user, I don't know if the consequences would be more severe. There's a black hole that leads the user's self-preservation mechanism to kick in and say, "well, if I want to see what quality users like Gaarg have going on, I just can't talk about 'that one guy' because I might be towing the line." So we're stuck with the virtual death of those we admire with no ability to collectively mourn. I don't have any other medium on which to discuss the topic because this is the one place where what I would like to say and the people I would say it to exist. But I guess it just sucks for anyone in that frame of mind, because...you know, democracy is bullshit and we're more than welcome to add ourselves to that pit of corpses out back no one is allowed to discuss.

[ambermonk]

 

woah!

That's actually pretty cool

[Joyrex]

I was initially gonna refrain from participating in this discussion, but I'd have to agree with Joyrex as far as discussing sex and erotica openly is concerned. To me it's the verbal equivalent of waving one's genitals around in public, and makes me personally uncomfortable.

 

Don't get me wrong, I understand the subtle humour in innuendo, but something outright such as posting dick pics is just off-putting to me. Seems like common sense to me to keep discussions relatively clean, but we all have different standards.

 

I'm not trying to be a nanny, but I am trying to state that not every WATMM member is into extremities. And I know IDM can be extreme, but more so in the sense of weirdness than obscenities. And yeah, I'd say foot-licking kind of borders that, unless you're a dog.

 

Long story short, I like weird, but I don't like obscene.

 

 

_{(I'll probably get labeled Disney n00b from now on)}

There - he's said it better than I have all this time - nothing wrong with the subject matter itself, just no need to go to extremes (and I know that will now lead into what one considers 'extreme' is 'tame' for another, etc., blah blah blah...

 

Alright, I know that it's a sore subject that's rapidly degrading into a dead horse beaten to a bloody pulp, but I'll make two arguments: 1) banned users are a meme and 2) anything about Fred is a meme. Shit, I'll add a third. Reading the rules is a meme (by the way, for any of those who really take "read the rules" as a joke, there is actually a link at the bottom right of the page...it's apparently a big deal). Unfortunately, it's all worked itself into a hybrid heap of "you can't say that here," ambiguously covered somewhere in the rules in this particular thread.

 

I really had something long-winded I just wrote out about a community and the loss of highly regarded members of that community, but I started realizing I would find it deleted or possibly suffer some other consequence. I realized I would be running off-topic. If I were to create a thread about it, since it relates to a banned user, I don't know if the consequences would be more severe. There's a black hole that leads the user's self-preservation mechanism to kick in and say, "well, if I want to see what quality users like Gaarg have going on, I just can't talk about 'that one guy' because I might be towing the line." So we're stuck with the virtual death of those we admire with no ability to collectively mourn. I don't have any other medium on which to discuss the topic because this is the one place where what I would like to say and the people I would say it to exist. But I guess it just sucks for anyone in that frame of mind, because...you know, democracy is bullshit and we're more than welcome to add ourselves to that pit of corpses out back no one is allowed to discuss.

Look, to be clear, I tend to not like discussions about banned members because most do not understand the full story behind why someone's banned (frankly because it's none of their business to begin with), and it creates a 'mob mentality' where everyone thinks that I'm some dictator or power-mad admin (haha) hell-bent on controlling everyone without understanding the full picture or the reasons behind one of my decisions to ban someone. All I want is people to behave themselves accordingly, to what I would consider normal and acceptable behaviour you'd use in public places, and keep things within reasonable limits.

 

I don't want to control discussion of things, I don't want to force people to think or act a certain way, but at the same time, I do want people to be mindful of the rules here, and try and operate within those rules as much as possible. Can we cut loose and have a laugh from time to time? Of course we can, as long as nobody goes overboard with it, which is what typically happens. Fred's foot thread, while not something I'd subscribe to personally, wasn't wrong within the context of the rules, but what others in the thread did with it was very much so a violation of the rules - and frankly Fred should know with his tenure here that threads of that subject matter tend to bring out the worst in people, and not have "lit the fire" so to speak.

 

And really, "pit of corpses"? I like metaphors as much as the next person, but that's a bit dramatic - the vast majority of people who have been banned were so due to their actions, and had plenty of chances to redeem themselves before the inevitable, and I'm not sure it could be argued we're worse off without the majority of them.

[Guest umop_apisdn]

Well, I was gonna leave it at that, but since you asked, I chose "pit of corpses" because I developed a metaphor of a community around here in that post. I guess I could go out on a journey across the internet to discover who the real Fred McGriff was, track him down so I can continue taking in his highly entertaining storytelling, commentary, and general original content. So maybe I was wrong in thinking that he's gone from the one place I knew him. But in the sense that there's the occasional civilian casualty to which the community reacts and with which they disagree, there's really no recourse. Sure, we can ask what happened through the channels deemed appropriate. But right here, there was a certain dynamic with Fred which I'm sure did not exist elsewhere. I cannot bring this community to him and see things unfold the way they would here. If I were to track him down, he wouldn't have a community that understood Fred as he could only be here. What good is it to crack on watmm intricacies elsewhere? So you know what? If he's banned, he's dead. Any Fred I could manage to track down elsewhere would be a ghost. He was one of a kind. Maybe it's just me, but I've always considered myself merciful, which is a quality in people I respect. There's one person I'm aware of that has the ability to resurrect Fred. Unfortunately, there's a set of words that keeps more people from speaking up, or having a single thread in which to cohesively argue their points. So our disjunct cries echo down separate hallways where only a limited audience can take them in. Even then, they're sometimes muffled because they've diverged so far from the point of origin.

 

 

So I dunno, I just couldn't think of a more appropriate metaphor. Maybe I should have just called it "the big cesspool of perverted deviants in the sky".

[encey]

I just want to add that I wouldn't talk about funneling castor oil into a filipina tranny's pink sock in Starbucks, in my classroom, in the library, the DMV or the grocery store. But I would talk about it with my buddies at the bar, just for shits poops 'n' giggles. And that's the kind of public place I imagine WATMM to be -- just hanging out in a crowded, noisy place where people are drunk and boisterous and jovial and a bit loose-lipped. WATMMers are my bros, and I drink and talk shit with my bros, and it brings us closer as bros (don't ask how close). That's where I make connections, where I talk real and just be the piece of shit I am. Where I get away from work and all the niceties in day-to-day life to let my inner soul glow, nasty as it may be at times.

 

So the question it comes down to is, what kind of 'public place' is WATMM meant to be, anyway? Do I need to start thinking about this forum as more of a waiting room than a watering hole?

[Guest zaphod]

yes, i've always figured watmm was the equivalent of a local bar. the digressions in threads are part of the fun. i'm not even sure i have a problem with banning people if they violate rules (i do in fred's case, but let's pretend it's justified) but then deleting posts relating to them and closing threads seems extremely suspect and a bit dishonest.

is watmm like an fm morning radio show where we have to deal with fcc violations and censoring? always figured this was satellite.

[goDel]

Side note: this discussion is pretty much the "ideal son-in-law" kind of constructive. I really don't see the unconstructive part. We should be able to disagree about certain watmm policies, right?

 

I miss centurix, btw. He used to be the mother we went to, when daddy didnt do the things we wanted.

 

Talking about watmm memes...

[tec]

I am simply tired of this forum being looked at by professionals and others as some cesspool where the greasy little IDM prepubescent nerds hang out and share their immature fantasies and giggle at poop jokes.

 

Who are these people we are trying to impress? BoC didn't come here to drum up any pre-release hype, AFX clearly doesn't give a shit and Autechre don't need our support, who else can possibly count on a forum dedicated to music that reached its peak some years ago?

[gaarg]

When you are young and edgy and introverted and a bit pissed at the world and you are discovering idm music, the general banter of watmm (that used to be before the censorship) was the perfect place for you on the nets. It's becoming gray now, no contrasts, no edge. That can't be good for young upstart electronic musicians that should gather here.

 

I'm not kidding btw