TromboneChat

MASSIVE eyeroll.

I kinda know the moderator folks from TTF, and fully support the efforts to build a new place for trombonists to hang out. Thanks a lot, guys.

But the TOS as published today is a massive overstep in trying to regulate the internet. I've run a couple online communities. Your TOS should be a couple of paragraphs so it is readable and digestible with a modern attention span.

It would be enough to say "stay on topic, be civil". There is no need to try to explicitly ban stuff like science and economics. Both science and economics are directly related to music and instrument manufacture. Book/witch burnings next?

I recommend that you simplify the TOS to a few sentences of common sense rather than trying to play net nanny.

Conflict and controversy are fundamental to the human experience. There is officially nothing left to talk about if we filter all conflict and controversy. Trying to white wash even something as innocuous as trombone and music discussion is misguided, and to me throws a very wet blanket on what could have been a fun place to talk about music and instruments.

So ease up, take a deep breath, pull that wedgie out, and take another shot at the TOS realizing this is 2018, we are mostly adults, and we're not talking about national security here. How about it?

The moderators are not "trying to regulate the Internet." They are trying to MODERATE ONE forum on the Internet. And many of us have NOT appreciated some of the more extreme digressions that ended up on TTF. We have any number of places to go for that kind of discussion. We have far fewer options to discuss things trombone.

To me it is a sad commentary on the evolution of the Internet that this forum has a TOS as long as this new one. But from discussions that preceded publication, examples are clearly needed to differentiate between a "religious discussion" and a discussion about the importance of religion in interpreting, say, the works of Bruckner. Likewise, it SHOULD be enough to say "keep it civil," but I have yet to see a forum where that has worked. I see no reason for the moderators to INCREASE their workloads and heartburn by having to define "keep it civil" multiple times a month (or week.)

I applaud the "work in progress" attitude of the authors, and firm stance against some of the cost TTF the active participation of a number of folks who actually could make a living at this.

So, perhaps you could lessen the rolled eyes and see what happens. Maybe this will work pretty well as written.

In just a few words:

1. This is maintained by the Staff.

2. If you act up, we can kick you off. We don't have to justify our actions.

3. Please limit discussions to things more or less related to Trombone or the music business in general.

Most of us have dealt with insulted trolls claiming "First Amendment Rights" when justifying their respective screeds on TTF. We want to avoid that here.

Yes, boneagain hit the proverbial nail on the head and Bruce summed up the problems that we had dealt with before as well. To add a little bit of context as well:

The TOS is a document that exists to clearly indicate where the line is for relevance as well as recommendations for how to stay on topic and be civil (such as the mentioning of grammar) so that ad-hoc decisions are not needed to be made in the future. Off topic content and it's contentious discussion was by far the most common complaint of TTF, and discussions from these posts resulted in easily 90%+ of the complaints that were received.

If a shorter document is needed, then we could create one. The TTF had such a parallel document. However, I think generally people consider themselves to be "on topic" and "civil", so without specific rules to delineate what those definitions are, it might not be worth a great deal. Do note that few of the restrictions apply universally. such as those that are blatantly discriminatory, those obviously apply to every content area, but most are applied to the "tangents" section.

If people use common sense and aren't jerks, they'll be totally fine. The document is mostly there to clarify for people who don't know how to do those things, or people who simply can't or won't do them.

Hardly anyone reads them anyway

I've always found something delightfully soothing about a wet blanket.

Neo Bri wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 4:42 pm If people use common sense and aren't jerks, they'll be totally fine. The document is mostly there to clarify for people who don't know how to do those things, or people who simply can't or won't do them.

It gives the impression of being petty, naive, and desperate for control. This isn't the impression you want people to have. Wouldn't it be easier to deal with a couple of bad eggs than to insult everyone else's maturity?

hyperbolica wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:09 pm

Neo Bri wrote: ↑Sun Apr 22, 2018 4:42 pm If people use common sense and aren't jerks, they'll be totally fine. The document is mostly there to clarify for people who don't know how to do those things, or people who simply can't or won't do them.

It gives the impression of being petty, naive, and desperate for control. This isn't the impression you want people to have. Wouldn't it be easier to deal with a couple of bad eggs than to insult everyone else's maturity?

Honestly, I'm not trying to impress anyone one way or the other with the ToS, which took considerable effort on the part of Matt to write. I'd prefer not to perpetuate the argument because I don't see how it's affects how you or I deal with 99.9% of the other folks. It covers the bases it needs to cover.

I'd prefer not to appear petty. We're trying to provide an outlet for people to discuss trombone-related stuff. That's pretty much it. I'm not trying for any controversy, and I really don't see why there would be any.

If you knew more about me personally, you'd know I'm not exactly in general favor of net-nannying.

Perhaps a statement negotiated by multiple parties would have been more appropriate. Writing a ridiculous TOS isn't going to prevent anyone from being a jerk.

But I personally am less inclined to participate at a site that thinks thats ok. Sorry to disturb.

Going against the apparent grain here...

While most of us are perfectly willing and able to comply with a TOS that pretty much just says "stay on topic and don't be a jerk", that's not the sort of person a TOS is written for. They're written for the people who persist in behaving like jerks and then argue that the TOS doesn't prohibit the SPECIFIC sort of jerkiness they're perpetrating.

I would offer one suggestion. If you're going to have a TOS that's basically a code of conduct, you might want to structure it as such, with sections and subsections that you can cite when someone steps over the line. I know that will seem even more officious, but if that's what's necessary to insure civil discourse, so be it.

>

All seems pretty sensible to me. Sad to lose the vigorous off-topic community from TTF, which could produce good and interesting things, but ultimately we are all here to talk about the trombone, and, while it seems pretty crazy to me that people were refraining from input to the forum as a whole due to posts in the off-topic section (talk about missing the point...), I see exactly why this place is being run this way.

Bruce - I am down with your hair choices. Know that you have support. Solidarity, comrade.

Being a member of other boards I like the civil discussion so far that I've seen on this board. I don't see people belittling others. Tubenet has a lot of people jumping on newer persons who are asking newbie questions. Instead of offering help there are usually insulting posts that are rather juvenile. Its one of the reasons that site isn't bigger and more supported than it is. I welcome the rules. There are a lot of contentious people out there and having specific rules can make it easier to manage. Just my opinion.