In Defense Of Nassman

and the beat goes on... Sonny Bono

 

Ray has done us a great service creating this web site. It's his web site, it's his decision. I'm assured it was a difficult one and not taken likely. I have the utmost respect for Ray.

'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it'----George Santayana

 

I missed the thread between Nass and Hank.I really don't know what to say.I can say that they both have always been very nice and helpfull to me.It's sad that Nass had to go.

 

Nassman had certain people he chose to be discourteous to and others he was kind to. I think the standard is to be courteous to all.

 

What Seadog said. And in my opinion there was a little baiting from both sides. Hank was always polite. Nass was always very blunt. He did some name-calling that wasn't appropriate, but it was "his way." Both were very passionate about what they believed. The thing is to temper one's passion with courtesy.

Yep.

 

I mean no disrespect in any way towards Ray.
I am tired. This whole situation makes me sad. I apologize if I have offended with this thread.

 

burd, don't apologize. What is the point of a message board "discussion" if there is no discussion? Otherwise, we should drop the message board feature and have articles posted by pre-selected editors telling us what we "should" think and feel.

I am obviously relatively new to this forum, and not in a position to comment much about the history between certain posters. I did, however, lurk for awhile before joining, and got a general gist for the types of personalities of many posters on this board. To a large degree, I can understand where nassman's attitude about things was coming from and why he seemed to go on the attack so often. Now, that being said, some people confuse condescension and arrogance for "bluntness" and "telling it like it is." There's a not-so-fine line between the two and nassman had a tendency to cross it. However, he's not the only one guilty of it. It's just that because he was more negative in doing so, it stood out more than the people who are perceived as positive.

My general philosphy regarding message boards is that banning should really be reserved for special situations -- spammers, hateful posting (racist attacks on others, sexist attacks on others, threatening others, stalking, etc.). If Nassman and Hank want to spend the better part of their days and weeks calling each other a**holes, then so be it. Nobody is forcing other posters to read those threads or engage in the discussions. It's easy to step out of that thread, let their fight play out and start a new thread to continue the fruitful discussion. I also don't believe in the idea that a site owner should never be questioned for his decisions. Why not? Site owners can be just as wrong as anyone else. In fact, if decisions aren't questioned then how will the site owner know whether the posters are pelase with the management of the site or not. And if you're the site owner, don't you want your posters to be happy and keep posting?

If a theoretical poster consistently offers nothing of value to a site, then message board Darwinism dictates that eventually that poster will be ignored to the point where they naturally drop off when they fail to get attention.

 

You have every right to express how you feel.

 

Me too :'(

Seems like there's a lot of ... ... hurt/anger/pain/suffering/misery/pressure/strain going on lately - and not just here (on the board). A lot of my friends did a lot of crying at church last night during the 'altar call' - me included - for ourselves & for family members & friends who are in turmoil. At the risk of sound oh-so corny, I wish we could all just love more & gripe less.

 

Blam her, no wait, band her, um, bang her,,,yeah bang her. No that isn't right either. Is it?

 

Right or wrong is irrelevant. It's Ray's party ... Ray's house. If Ray gets tired of dealing with one of his guests, he has every right to kick 'em out, regardless of the opinion of the other 'guests'.

I can imagine running a board like this can be a full-time job & often probably seems a lot like running a kindergarten. Plus, he's dealing with his own issues & would probably like a little support now & then, too ... a safe place to go where he can share & learn - not just be the boss & have to make the hard decisions.

 

Couldn't have said it better Joy, I totaly agree.

 

Burd, no reason to apologize.

 

No, right or wrong is not irrelevant. I can't think of any situation in life where right and wrong are irrelevant. That Ray has the actual power -- as the site owner -- to ban or not ban people as he sees fit is beside the point. Having the power to do something is not the same thing as having the "right" to do something. Police have the power to haul your butt to jail for no real reason. That doesn't mean they have the "right" to.

And I'm not attacking Ray in this thread, but let's be clear here. Ray, like everyone else in the world, is not infallible. This goes beyond nassman, individually. I don't even know the guy, and from what I could see of his posting style I hardly think he and I would be particularly friendly to one another. But whether a person gets banned or not -- or whether their contributions are deemed valid or not -- is a legitimate topic for discussion. And, frankly, as the site owner Ray should care if people disagree with his decisions.

Think about this: If you started a support site so that people with common problems could come and share their ideas, experiences, etc., then by definition you want as many people as possible who have something to share to come in and contribute. If valued contributors start feeling uncomfortable with decisions made by the administrators or with the direction the forum is taking, they can pick up their virtual bags and head to a different forum. As a site admin, wouldn't you want the chance to correct any perceived problems with your site before people just take off and quit posting?

 

Well ... ... no offense but I guess we'll have to 'agree to disagree' here Wino.

Speaking as a banned member of another forum, I think Ray's been extremely open-minded & objective (in my opinion) & a very good 'steward' of the forum. If some day I find myself disagreeing with him more often than I agree with him, I'll have to weigh the pros with the cons & decide for myself about staying.

 

Sorry to hear this but not surprised. Hank baited, Nass bit.. It is Ray's house though and I'm sure glad it's here.

 

Wino, you need to look at this way, this is Ray's virtual world, he makes the rules, he sets the parameters what's right & wrong, which way the sun rises & sets and if he felt like it he could just end this world at anytime and that would be his right. We are all guests here and I feel privilaged to be here and I have no right's when I am here.

 

Stop and re-read that post for a moment. Just really let it sink in.

There is no human being on earth who has the "right" to treat another human being unfairly. That's not anybody's "right." You have the "right" to allow yourself to be walked all over and treated unfairly if you so desire, but that doesn't mean that the person doing it has the right to do so.

Ray created this forum, and not for completely unselfish reasons. He saw that there was a lack of a quality place on the internet where people with certain similar conditions could get together and commiserate. So he decided to put this place together. I think some of you folks greatly over-estimate the amount of work required to maintain a forum like this. The hosting site does 99% of the work and the forum owner does very little maintenance-wise other than putting in tickets when there's a problem, and generally moderating the place.

And I don't mean to sound ungratfeul to Ray, because obviously he got off his duff and put this forum out there. He's also shared his experiences with other people and otherwise done plenty -- as have John of Ohio, Henry, etc. -- to provide resources for people to deal with their issues. But it doesn't mean that posters can't, or shouldn't, have opinions about the way a situation was handled. That's flat preposterous.

Again, Ray has the "power" to do whatever the hell he feels like with this forum, including shutting it down altogether if that's what he wants to do. In that regard, he has the "right" to keep this forum up or not. However, there is a huge difference between having the power to do something and having the right to do something. And, frankly, posters have the right to express their opinions about whether something was done failry or not. Just like posters have the right to express opinions about the value of different approaches to treating MM.

 

True he doesn't do the maintenance, but he pays for the site. It's not the tech support that demands much of his time; all of the people PMing him complaining and him having to take the time to then investigate by reading the repartee to decide what is "fair" takes lots of time

I have been hanging around the forum since '04 and lurk more than I post (note, I think I am still number 8 in terms of total time on the boards) and this contentious discussion with which Ray is so frustrated is definitely not new. He has dealt with the sniping and drama for YEARS. With all due respect Wino, we can discuss the principles of fairness all day, but Ray comes out on the high road all the time. He has all the rights and we have privileges via his munificence.

I reiterate my view on the subject in shorter form--I'm not big on banning , but it wouldn't occur nearly as often if we treated each other better, took disputes to PM, and QUIT reporting things to Ray when we feel we have been disparaged in some way. Handle crap ourselves and we wouldn't be as likely to be having discussions about what is fair when it comes to Ray.

PS: if life were fair, only horrible people would get MM and I would have a thick head of hair

 

jim-you forgot the alien abduction

hair challenged or not - you are still a handsome person