Suggestion to whistlemakers re: this forum.

Whistle
21

On 2002-12-22 12:58, sturob wrote:
If a question arises that is directed to the maker, then by all means you should respond, in my opinion.

Stuart

I’ll try to be less cryptic.
Disclaimer : excuse me folks; this is definitely not my mother’s language, so I sometimes “talk funny”–i.e. peculiar.

So, to Stuart: what I meant was that there can be a very thin line between a question or comment directly addressed to a maker (*1) and a question apparently sent to the forum (*2).

*1 : “Gargle, your whistles suck”
*2 : “Folks, Garglophones suck”

To Dale : is it more clear this way ?

My modest opinion is :

  1. I understand Dale’s wish, right and duty to moderate this forum. I appreciate he’s putting it a level of self-restraint.
  2. However, I’m not sure what can have irritated Dale lately. This just a question.
  3. One of the things I appreciate here is the direct contact with whistlesmiths. In several instances I’ve actually regretted they did non intervene in a thread.

Now, a question. Some critics I’ve read (not lately, though) were on the brink of slander. Or over it. Now, how is the maker supposed to answer this ? Privately, to explain his point of view to one who exposed him publicly with slander ? Then, even supposing the maker manages to convince the original poster, who earnestly corrects his original thread or intervention, what’s left? The hundreds of people who read the original post and were left with an unremovable bad impression.

As Beaumarchais wrote :
"Calomniez, calomniez! Il en restera toujours quelque chose…
Or : “Slander, slander. Something will always remain of it” (and please excuse this very approx. word to word translation. Tradutore, traditore…)

Lastly : one may read and wonder why I seem here to take cause for the makers. Just to make it clear, I’m not one; I doubt I’ll ever will and become one. But I do have a tendency to defend the makers (i.e. smiths, composers, gen. creators of all kinds) against critics, backseat drivers and all kinds of… wind-mills.

Sorry if I write to lenghtly: I don’t have the time to write shorter. And when I do, I tend to be cryptic :wink:

[ This Message was edited by: Zubivka on 2002-12-23 06:22 ]

22

Y’know, I was staying silent because I didn’t think I had anything to say - but I think perhaps I do. When does open exchange of information become self-promotion? Some may think Bill Whedon has crossed that line, but I’m not all that sure. I think he’s just a garrulous guy.

Newbies (and perhaps others) WILL ask about different brands. What better place? Should we not recommend whistles/makers? And if we dislike a particular brand, should we refrain from saying so and let someone make the same mistake we think we did? Would it be better if this were done in e-mail where the maker can’t see what is being said about his prodct and can’t be aware of either a problem or the perception of one?

Members WILL criticize what they see as a poor individual whistle or bad service, although I think they should at least first do so privately with the maker and not dump it here. Still, when someone does slam a maker here, should not the maker have the chance to present his side in a civil manner? His reputation has been potentially damaged - and while I think it shoule be civil, he should at least have a chance to fix some of the damage.

The real onus should be shared here. It’s incumbent (or should be) on us non-makers to be fair to the folks who make our whistles, and resolve disputes in a way that should not force them to defend their reputation publicly (i.e. e-mail). When a maker is criticised publicly, I don’t think it unreasonable to make ONE civil response stating his side if there is one or publicly acknowledging a problem and the intent to fix it. Without public interchange we wouldn’t have the full knowledge we need to make good desicions - just keep in mind the golden rule - threat others like you think you should be treated.

23

Zubiv, thanks for your reply explaining yourself. Je comprends et je te remercie.

As for the rest of us, maybe we should just stop. I apologize for responding to what Dale had initially posted. It’s turning into a free-for-all that’s losing sight of his intent.

Stuart

24

Garrulous? Moi? :smiley: Oh, what the heck. fagiddabowdit!
Happy Holidays, all! :laughing:
Serpent The Verbose One ™
AKA “Serpie-Pie” :smiley: by those who know…

25

Sandy’s declaration that he wishes
to exercise caution and respect
in getting involved in threads
about his product is precisely
in the ballpark. There is no
issue here.

This isn’t about rights–even if
something is my right, that doesn’t mean
that doing it is a good idea.
Suggesting that something not
be done isn’t attacking anybody’s
rights.

[Indeed, if I may take
the matter to its logical conclusion,
people sometimes have the right
to do immoral things–so I have
the constitutional right to
advocate that minorities be
liquidated. It’s wrong to
advocate such things, even
though we have the right to
do so. In pointing out that
such advocacy is immoral,
I’m not attacking anybody’s
rights.] Best

26

On 2002-12-23 16:43, jim stone wrote:

This isn’t about rights–even if
something is my right, that doesn’t mean
that doing it is a good idea.
Suggesting that something not
be done isn’t attacking anybody’s
rights.

It’s not about rights, certainly, but I think it’s really over-the-top to tell someone they shouldn’t even say “thanks for the kind words.” And for that matter, I think Sandy (who is a she, not a he) has been a class act in all regards. To tell her to not post in any thread where her whistles are discussed, even to say thanks, is really, really odd, to say it as kindly as I can. Btw, Sandy, since you aren’t allowed to post here, let me just say you make truly wonderful whistles. For that matter, if you continue to be asked not to post on threads where your whistles are discussed, I will now go way out of my way in any of those threads to tell everyone just how great your whistles are.

[ This Message was edited by: blackhawk on 2002-12-23 16:57 ]

27

Sandy is a woman.

:slight_smile:

28

Sorry, Sandy! I agree with Blackhawk
that it’s ‘over the top to tell
somebody they shouldn’t ever say thankyou’
in a thread for kind words said about their whistles. Also I agree that it’s at least a little odd ‘to tell her not to post in any
thread’ involving her whistles.

But nobody’s done that. Best

29

Sandy is, indeed, a woman, and a bang-up great whistlesmith, as well! :smiley:

I don’t believe Dale’s intent is to censor whistlesmiths, except for me. :smiley:

BSF, I’m not 100% certain exactly what he was getting at, and he hasn’t come back to elucidate, so I think I’ll chalk it up to a bit of sour oatmeal, or perhaps insufficient sleep. God knows I get liverish enough once in a while!

Dale!! Dude!! All is forgiven!! Come back, lad!!

Just me garrulousness and verbosity taking the forefront for a bit! :roll: Yep, I got me knickers in a knot earlier on, but then I remembered that it’s not my style to do so, aside from the fact that washing knotted knickers is somewhat onerous.

Dale, you’re spending too much time reading the writings of The Zoobster – you’re beginning to sound like him! Be careful - the next step, you have to move to France! :laughing:

Happy Holidays everyone! :slight_smile:
An Unabashedly Chatty Serpent!

P.S. (should I add a P.S.? haven’t I bored enought people with the original S.? It’s a big decision! Wait! Energy! Get away from me with that trout! SPLAT!!..)

30

I do not believe Dales comments to be a personal affront to whistle makers, just an attempt to tone some stuff down. I just felt the need to keep the door open to posting when appropriate by whistle makers as what often starts as a suggestion can be taken up by the lynch mobs as gospel!!!

In the spirit of Christmas, let us all enjoy peace and good will towards all men,women and elves,

Merry Christmas all,

Sandy,
Elfin queen of Olympus,
(whom is indeed of the female persuasion!!)

31

Kids, Dale said what he did for your own benefit, because he has seen (as have I), time and time again, that when whistle makers or sellers become too vocal or active on the board they end up running into trouble.
Dale is just trying to help you avoid that end. You really ought to thank him instead of criticising him.

Chris

[ This Message was edited by: ChrisLaughlin on 2002-12-23 18:28 ]

32

In addition to responses here, I’ve had some by email. I felt confident that by laboriously pointing out that I was making a suggestion, and not a proscription, would mean people wouldn’t be offended.

I really am not responding to anyone in particular or to any one thread in particular. If I had a problem with anyone in particular, I would follow my own advice and try to work something out via email.

The reason that I offered this suggestion to whistlesmiths as a suggestion is that I don’t think it’s a big problem at all, nor do I feel particularly strongly about it. Also, what I am responding to is a matter of taste and it’s pretty subtle stuff. As we all know, there are lots of sensitivities on the board about commercial use. By & large, I have been thrilled at the extent to which people have been respectful and courteous and restrained about this issue. It just hasn’t been a big problem, in my opinion. I just think that when whistlesmiths engage in a lot of give and take here about their products—they do run some risk of taking advantage of the forum.

I am having to come to terms with the fact that people on this forum differ widely on what they like to see here. Someone wrote that they really enjoy the interaction with whistlesmiths. Others are very much offended by anything that looks remotely like a commercial exploitation of the board. I have had to conclude that there is no way to please everyone and, by extension, no way to avoid making some people upset.

I’ve been exchanging email with several senior members of the forum to try to make some change in the moderation of the boards. The short version is that I’m running low on time lately and can’t moderate the boards very well. So, I’ve been talking to these people, who I admire and respect and who are veteran members, and I get diametrically opposing views on the whole issue of moderation, including whether moderation is even necessary.

In the meantime, I am told by smart people that I am the equivalent of the “publisher” of this forum and am legally liable for anything that happens here, including libel & slander.

Anyway, I digress.

Back to the original thing. I am just stating my opinion that whistlesmiths would be wise to consider restraint in posting here about their own products. That’s all I am saying. I do write as someone with a great deal of experience with this forum. I write as someone who gets a lot of email from people about this forum, sharing their private reactions.

Thanks to all of you and thanks especially for having shown a lot of restraint and courtesy on the board.

Dale


[ This Message was edited by: DaleWisely on 2002-12-23 21:08 ]

33

Dale, thanks for elaborating. Hope you have a blessed Christmastide.

34

At Dale’s request, I’m posting to all the forums a discussion we’ve had regarding the legal implications for him and Rich as board owners/operators.

Please take the time to consider Dale’s and Rich’s position in this and the potential harm that could come to them.

Hey Dale

I saw your post and it reminded me of some legal information I had read
regarding libel, slander, etc. and message boards and wanted to share with
you.

Of course, this law is still evolving and being decided in the courts almost
as we speak. But, the recent rulings and legal opinions see a message board
similarly to a publication for public consumption. As such, the
moderator/owner serves as a publisher. By allowing libelous or slanderous
statements on the board, in essence, it would be akin to publishing a
magazine or newspaper with an article saying so-and-so did, or is…
Possibly think of the National Enquirer for really blatant examples. I
think this may be the reason some boards forbid the discussion of makers,
products, etc. Another example would be a member’s outburst to a maker stating that
their whistle’s are garbage (or whatever negative description you wish). The maker could claim that was libelous and bring
suit against the outspoken member and name you and Rich as a parties to the action for distributing the post. Would they win? It would be decided by the courts, or in a settlement. But the point is, you would have to hire an attorney to protect yourself. That could be thousands of dollars.

Ugly situation all this. I can see the maker’s point, as it can negatively
impact their livelihood, I can also see the person’s belief that they have
the right to speak their mind. But, I suppose we don’t have the right to
intentionally harm. Ah, if only society was not so litigious.

Teri

35

In the meantime, I am told by smart people that I am the equivalent of the “publisher” of this forum and am legally liable for anything that happens here, including libel & slander.

Yes, they recently eliminated the forums on my second favorite web site (jrcigars.com, C&F being my #1 favorite), and their decision to do so was based largely on such legal considerations.

36

The alternative to C&F is an unmoderated newsgroup. I refer you to misc.fitness.weights for a prime example of an unmoderated newsgroup taken over by imbeciles.

Dale, I recommend that you put up heavy duty disclaimers, preferably written, or at least vetted, by your attorney, and do not allow anyone to sign up without an electronic “signature” accepting the terms of those disclaimers. I think that, with such protections, you can probably safely abandon the overseership of the board, and allow it to go where and how it will.

I think anyone who propagates a frivolous lawsuit should be sued! :wink: Actually, public humiliation in the stocks would be much more appropriate. Rotten tomatoes, anyone?

Cheers, :smiley:
serpent

37

38

Weighing in late, as I’m on the road right now, but I intend to go along with Dale’s suggestion. Unless I feel that someone has criticized my whistles based on flawed information, I will stay out of threads related to what I make. I will definitely still participate in many others though.
I will also try to thank people who compliment my whistles privately, but if their profile doesn’t have a return address, know in advance that I appreciate all kind words from people who have tried my whistles.