Please provide feedback on why a thread is closed.

Handsome_Chris

octatonic said:

I thought Emp was a comic creation, like Karl Pilkington or Nigel Farage.

Based on recent posting actually a fusion of both those characters.

I thought that him and Drew were the same person.  Have you ever seen them in the same place at the same time?

PolarityMan

Deijavoo said:

Bring back facepalms. 

yes!

Handsome_Chris

PolarityMan said:

Deijavoo said:

Bring back facepalms. 

yes!

No!  Trolls only use them to boost their fret score.

poopot

Gilly said:

That was prior to the rules update. And I seem to recall you being just as abusive, just like you’ve subsequently been with other people, seemingly without any consequences.

You couldn’t be wider of the mark… I’ve spent my fair share of time in the cooler after getting my wrist slapped… I really don’t get any special treatment from the mods!… I think the difference could be that when I’ve been in the wrong and called out over it, I put my hands up and admit I’ve been a tool and subsequently apologise to all involved… even apologised to emp before… that was met with him deleting himself from the message thread without responding!… 

but… you are free to think what you want… regardless of how very wrong you are about it all!…

guitartango

poopot said:

Gilly said:

That was prior to the rules update. And I seem to recall you being just as abusive, just like you’ve subsequently been with other people, seemingly without any consequences.

You couldn’t be wider of the mark… I’ve spent my fair share of time in the cooler after getting my wrist slapped… I really don’t get any special treatment from the mods!… I think the difference could be that when I’ve been in the wrong and called out over it, I put my hands up and admit I’ve been a tool and subsequently apologise to all involved… even apologised to emp before… that was met with him deleting himself from the message thread without responding!… 

but… you are free to think what you want… regardless of how very wrong you are about it all!…

@Gilly ;

 To be fair to @poopot he has been in the clink three times.... 

November 2018

August 2019

March 2020

Not that I am stalking his "cooler episodes"

poopot

.

professorben

Bridgehouse said:

professorben said:

@Strangefan In reality I needed to sell a pedal, clicked on a thread while I was here, realised the poster was wrong about something and well…
you know how it goes. 

Im only here long enough to execute an effective flounce. 

You don't enjoy any level of modmin protection, so I'll probably can you before you can get an effective flounce in anyway.

I think I’m actually running at minus figures of Modmin protection. 

Anyway leave me alone or I’ll tag you in that buss pass thread again. 

Bridgehouse

professorben said:

Bridgehouse said:

professorben said:

@Strangefan In reality I needed to sell a pedal, clicked on a thread while I was here, realised the poster was wrong about something and well…
you know how it goes. 

Im only here long enough to execute an effective flounce. 

You don't enjoy any level of modmin protection, so I'll probably can you before you can get an effective flounce in anyway.

I think I’m actually running at minus figures of Modmin protection. 

Anyway leave me alone or I’ll tag you in that buss pass thread again. 

Nah. We haven’t even got any figures for you. It’s almost like you don’t exist as far as we are concerned. 

I wish I could get a free bus pass now - but sadly I’m years away from that. Or a blue badge. That’d be good, but sadly, nope.

Emp_Fab

boogieman said:

monquixote said:

Emp_Fab said:

I'm 57.  I come from a family where open discussions were the norm - anything and everything could be talked about, viewpoints aired, explanations offered for those viewpoints and sometimes opinions would be changed as a result - sometimes not.  All of this would be without animosity and without feeling attacked or offended when your own viewpoint was queried.  I've always found it very educational and fascinating to try to understand others' views - and the more they differ from mine, the 

Essentially you are saying "I'm sorry that you people are all incapable of discussing controversial topics".

That's clearly nonsense . The thread on "open relationships" is clearly extremely controversial and yet it's gone relatively smoothly.
The problem is partially the subjects you choose and mostly the way you post about them. It's clear you struggle to recognise when you are doing this so lay off the controversial subjects. 

Coming to the conclusion "Everyone else has a problem and not me" is not going to result in a positive outcome.

I agree with @monquixote ;;We are (mostly) more than capable of discussing controversial things on here, the open marriage thing being a good example.

I don't think that's evidence of an ability to discuss controversial topics.  Open marriage isn't remotely controversial - it's either something you think is fine or it's not for you.  It's not going to result in a heated debate is it?  You can hardly proffer that as evidence!

...and I do think that we, as a collective are largely incapable of debating controversial topics.  There are many here who can consider a reasoned critique of their beliefs and evaluate whether the criticisms are valid and if so, factor that into their viewpoint.  Equally, there are many here that can only respond with "YOU ****”.

Unfortunately, the ones who respond only with abuse drown out the ones trying to have a grown-up discussion and often manage to drag half the room into the bar-brawl.

The internet is an unusual place in that it brings together people who may otherwise be unlikely to converse.  The only thing most of us have in common is what we all play the guitar.  But, we have a wide cross-section of people here... Guitar playing professors, guitar playing unemployed, builders, doctors, alcoholics, teachers, drug addicts, homophobes, racists, surgeons, pro and anti Brexit supporters, religious folk, atheists etc etc.  Imagine putting that lot together in a pub and making "immigration" the subject of discussion.

Actually.....  I think I'll stop here as I've just answered my own question.  That's why it never works out. [/epiphany]

Bowks

There was a wise forumite many moons ago, who had 3 words of advice regarding those folk that wished to share contentiuos views in off topic sections of ye olde guitar forum:

GET A BLOG

Yup, we don't care for it, so go farting into thunder in your own little corner of the internet.

monquixote

Emp_Fab said:

boogieman said:

monquixote said:

Emp_Fab said:

I'm 57.  I come from a family where open discussions were the norm - anything and everything could be talked about, viewpoints aired, explanations offered for those viewpoints and sometimes opinions would be changed as a result - sometimes not.  All of this would be without animosity and without feeling attacked or offended when your own viewpoint was queried.  I've always found it very educational and fascinating to try to understand others' views - and the more they differ from mine, the 

Essentially you are saying "I'm sorry that you people are all incapable of discussing controversial topics".

That's clearly nonsense . The thread on "open relationships" is clearly extremely controversial and yet it's gone relatively smoothly.
The problem is partially the subjects you choose and mostly the way you post about them. It's clear you struggle to recognise when you are doing this so lay off the controversial subjects. 

Coming to the conclusion "Everyone else has a problem and not me" is not going to result in a positive outcome.

I agree with @monquixote ;;We are (mostly) more than capable of discussing controversial things on here, the open marriage thing being a good example.

I don't think that's evidence of an ability to discuss controversial topics.  Open marriage isn't remotely controversial - it's either something you think is fine or it's not for you.  It's not going to result in a heated debate is it?  You can hardly proffer that as evidence!

It doesn't seem controversial because it's been presented respectfully, but if you look at the substance of the debate there are questions about if open relationships always result in a power imbalance, if having them / refusing them is a form of coercive control, the ethics around sex and disability. Hardly "What's your favorite flavour of crisp?". 

Part of the reason I think the debate has gone well is because Gassage set the scene correctly without pushing a tabloid agenda. If he'd started with "What's wrong with all you hetro squares being so uptight about a bit of fun", or "What's with all these bloody polyamorous snowflakes" it would have probably descended into a slanging match by page two. 

Regarding your thread.
I've just read a book on behaviour which has a big section on unconscious bias how for example a lot of us have different reaction times when considering positive and negative characteristics of the same / other races. I would have really liked to contribute, but I read the OP and thought "That's going to be a shit show" based on how you set the scene and decided to steer clear. I'm sure I'm not the only one who was put off. Words have power, use them carefully, try to use neutral language.

If I'm going to create a controversial thread I'll often try and write the OP in neutral language and then let a few people post before I wade in if I have a more extreme opinion.

Reverend

professorben said:

Strangefan said:

@professorben ; Where the hell have you been hiding ?? :D

I’ve actually been posting every single day in the making music section. 

That's like wrapping your self in camouflaged lead and living n a submarine, only less visible,.

Handsome_Chris

"Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don’t."

Jordan Peterson PhD (2018)

@Emp_Fab, I was having a chat with an health care professional and fellow tFBer, someone way more academically qualified than me, about reasoning with people.  We agreed that emotion can not be argued with logic, which is what can lead to conflict.  We also agreed that there are those that believe an argument is an opportunity to learn, share knowledge, develop understanding and possibly develop personally. The flip side of that is that there are people who look at an argument as a thing to win no matter what logic or evidence is laid before them: it does not matter that quality of the evidence or that the other party's expertise is of a high standard, because it disagrees with their initial statement, they refuse to accept that there may be someone in the world who knows more than them.

Which camp do you believe that you fall in to?

crunchman

I do think Emp gets a bit of license as he was intrumental in setting up the forum in the early days.  His car threads are comic gold as well.  I'm still waiting for the laminate flooring in a car thread.

I do miss Drew at times.  At least he wasn't part of the usual groupthink on here.  I know there was no alternative with him given how it ended, but he did contribute some useful stuff when he wasn't going off on one.

Jalapeno

professorben said:

Strangefan said:

@professorben ; Where the hell have you been hiding ?? :D

I’ve actually been posting every single day in the making music section. 

Good place to hide on here !

poopot

Jalapeno said:

professorben said:

Strangefan said:

@professorben ; Where the hell have you been hiding ?? :D

I’ve actually been posting every single day in the making music section. 

Good place to hide on here !

Most folk tend to stick to the “guitars as wall art” section

DefaultM

You're a 57 year old man who doesn't play guitar, who spends a significant amount of his time on a guitar forum, posting controversial off topic threads looking for detailed discussions which enhance your own ability to understand the opinions of others and challenge your own viewpoints. 

Riiiight...

I'm just trying to think which hobbies I've no longer any interest in. Maybe I should log back in to that running forum I joined in 2010.

"Anyone else still not trust every single Muslim after what they did on 9/11? What? Why you all looking at me funny?"

prowla

Emp_Fab said:

I know some of you simply aren't going to believe what I'm saying in this post, but it's the absolute truth - on my dog's life (and anyone who knows me knows how I feel about him).  I don't know what I can say to dispel the ideas of some that I'm just a troll.  I think several of you believe so passionately that my motives are malicious that nothing at all could convince you otherwise.  I'm fully expecting the first reply to this to be "...and here comes the excuses / whatever".

I'm 57.  I come from a family where open discussions were the norm - anything and everything could be talked about, viewpoints aired, explanations offered for those viewpoints and sometimes opinions would be changed as a result - sometimes not.  All of this would be without animosity and without feeling attacked or offended when your own viewpoint was queried.  I've always found it very educational and fascinating to try to understand others' views - and the more they differ from mine, the more interesting it is.

Now, I get it that not everyone feels like me and for some, having their viewpoint even questioned is seen as a personal insult.  Some see the world in black and white - 'you're either with us, or against us', some immediately put up defences, being hyper-vigilant for anything that could be taken as offensive so they can jump straight into their comfort-zone of dismissing everything counter to their beliefs outright.  That's a lot easier than any inward analysis of one's own position.  Many though are happy to stop and think and question things.

I'm also aware that this place isn't my personal playground and that many folk simply aren't comfortable discussing anything controversial and to that end, I genuinely now try to avoid subjects that definitely are divisive, no matter how interesting it may be to discuss viewpoints on the subjects.  The problem now for me though is "What constitutes a divisive topic?".  It would appear that I'm not very good at answering that question in the same way most of you would!

For example, my Germany thread...  I honestly didn't think that would produce the uproar it did.  Truthfully I didn't.  Despite the beliefs of some here, I hate it when things kick off.  Once I saw the reactions to my post weren't going to calm down I asked twice in the thread for the mods to close it.  If I relished disharmony here, that's the last thing I would have done.

Maybe I'm 'on the spectrum' as they say...  Maybe I'm lacking some basic insight as what people are happy to chat about and what is considered taboo?  It's either that or this place has descended into somewhere where we'd better restrict our off-topic discussions to "What's your favourite colour?".  Even then, I'm no longer certain that would not result in a punch-up.

I honestly don't know what is safe to chat about anymore - which opinions are considered acceptable and which will be shouted down in a tirade of ad-homs.  I have to admit that the whole idea of "acceptable opinions" is concerning.  If any of us hold opinions that might not be "acceptable", do we just keep them to ourselves for fear of abuse?  Do we only discuss 'safe' topics because there are too many here who can only respond with aggression?  Or, do we discuss things as adults, however uncomfortable the subject or the opinions of some, so we can gain insights into why these beliefs came about and hopefully learn something about each other.

Once upon a time, I thought this was possible but I don't think it is anymore - certainly not on this forum anyway.  The instant anyone expresses nonconforming beliefs, they are beaten with insults.

I don't know where to go with this now.  I'm clearly unable to make a sensible decision on what I can talk about - maybe I ought to message a mod first to check if I'm thinking of asking anything more divisive than "What's your favourite flavour of jam?".

I'm not an idiot - I can see the responses are largely critical of me and I'm genuinely sorry if my insensitivity has caused trouble.  Despite the entrenched conviction of some that I'm trolling and relish the trouble, I genuinely hate it when my threads go awry, I honestly don't want to be the spark that ignites yet another flame war.  Anyway - I'm sorry.  I clearly have more to learn about what is considered an acceptable posting style on here.

I have to say I've had @Emp_Fab on ignore before, simply because of the perceived belligerence of the posts and (ISTR) bad language.

I'm not having a go as-such, but rather responding to the claims of innocence and apparent incredulity that anybody could consider them trolling or offensive.

This is (hopefully) constructive feedback.

thecolourbox

Fwiw I didn't notice it was an Emp Fab post and just replied with my viewpoints and opinions, so apologies for any accomplice contribution in that regard. I just thought it was a ridiculous thing to allude to and that the timing of the thread coincided with me having some time to myself.

Emp_Fab

Handsome_Chris said:

"Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don’t."

Jordan Peterson PhD (2018)

@Emp_Fab, I was having a chat with an health care professional and fellow tFBer, someone way more academically qualified than me, about reasoning with people.  We agreed that emotion can not be argued with logic, which is what can lead to conflict.  We also agreed that there are those that believe an argument is an opportunity to learn, share knowledge, develop understanding and possibly develop personally. The flip side of that is that there are people who look at an argument as a thing to win no matter what logic or evidence is laid before them: it does not matter that quality of the evidence or that the other party's expertise is of a high standard, because it disagrees with their initial statement, they refuse to accept that there may be someone in the world who knows more than them.

Which camp do you believe that you fall in to?

I'm a little wary of answering this as it sounds like a trap, not least because I think I've made it clear already.  I'll bite though....  absolutely I'm in the second group.  I have no desire to 'win' an argument and every desire to understand others and, specifically, where their opinions differ from mine, how have they come to hold those opinions.

I agree you can't argue emotion with logic but only the most intransigent would continue to argue in the face of solid logic, and even then they may well be convinced by your argument but their ego will not let them publicly admit defeat.