Anyone leaving soon?

[etc-etc]

[swthiel]

[etc-etc]

Probably due to votes entered in the poll, the options cannot be changed anymore.

[Crazy Finn]

I guess people aren't able to be fence-sitters on this one.

(well, except by not voting)
_________________
LA Benge 3X Bb Trumpet
Selmer Radial Bb Trumpet
Yamaha 6335S Bb Trumpet
Besson 709 Bb Trumpet
Bach 184L Bb Cornet
Yamaha 731 Bb Flugelhorn

[mike ansberry]

I personally don't see the big deal about the Capt. I sometimes skim his posts. If there is something there that I'm interested in, I'll look more carefullly.

I don't remember seeing the Capt. attack people on here. Well, maybe after someone has taken a personal shot at him. I've seen him argue over ideas. Sure he has some screwy ideas, but some of them are interesting. I think maybe he comes at trumpet from an industrial-technology point of view.

Why do you need a button to ignore him?

And like some people said, just stop talking about him.
_________________
Music is a fire in your belly, fighting to get out. You'd better put a horn in the way before someone gets hurt.

[puckish02]

new member here - I've been lurking for quite awhile. A friend of mine that I work with recommended it about a year ago. I almost registered and posted just to add my two cents regarding "cap'n crunch" and then a more irritating development happened in the mean time. It seems the captain can foment all sorts of discord on this site and at most one of his posts might get edited or pulled. However, my friend who got me hooked on this site just answered a question a non-US resident posted asking for clarification on another guy's off-hand remark about Barack Obama and his post wasn't edited or pulled - he has been banned. It seems to me if the Trumpetherald doesn't want people exposing another poster's remarks as racist they ought maybe to edit the racist's post, eliminate the racists offending post or ban the racist - not the guy who pointed out his remark was racist. In view of the moderators' screwed up handling of my friend's participation I wouldn't be surprised if this is my first and last post at TH - that would be a shame . . . but not much of a surprise.

By all means, keep the captain safely among the fold and ban anybody who explains upon request of another the racist remarks of one of your favored and immune few.

[Maarten van Weverwijk]

Has Mr. John Baumchen left the forum?
Is he only giving TH a well-deserved time off, or have the mods finally taken action?
He's posted no more obnoxious posts since quite a while and some previous posts of his have been removed or revised.

The only way to ignore him was to virtually ignore the entire forum, so I voted "Yes".
If Bauchman's posts are an important part of what TH stands for then I'm out of here, but I'll gladly revise my opinion if the situation has changed.

MvW.

[Maarten van Weverwijk]

[puckish02]

Okay, maybe Captain K is no longer an issue - maybe someone could explain TH's approach to dealing with my associate. Why do the moderators simply edit some peoples' posts if part or all of the post offends their delicate sensitivities . . . but they jump right to "banishment" for others? If these banished posters had a long (or even short) history of needing to have their posts edited or even deleted then, yeah, I can see banishing someone. But that's not the case here, is it moderators? You never took a single post by my colleague that contained content objectionable to you and edited out the "objectionable" leaving the rest of the post (and the poster) to participate in reasoned discussion - did you? You never even deleted an entire post and left the message "deleted by moderators" - did you? You just yanked a guy who had been on here a pretty long while because he called out your friend for his fascist, racist positions. Political? Sure it was political - and it was in response to one of your "heavy weights" behaving poorly and politically. You should have looked at his post, contacted him and told him he needed to behave - not banished the guy who explained your racist friend's racist comments to a member who lives outside the US and couldn't understand your racist friend's remark . . . and who asked for clarification. I understand you think you need to intervene in the interest of maintaining a certain propriety but you guys sure do exercise the "nuclear option" with very little provocation.

[Moderators]

The user in question was banned after repeated warnings and continuing to post material in violation of the Usage Agreement.

Please note also the guidance in this post:
http://www.trumpetherald.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=83216

[fraserhutch]

[Maarten van Weverwijk]

[trumpetmike]

[garrett901]

A wise person once told me: "When it comes to opinions, take it all in, then take out the trash!"

I completely agree. The trouble is, the inexperienced will sometimes have trouble distinguishing the trash from the treasure.
_________________
Jeff Garrett
Playing "G" Soprano Bugle, Freelancers Alumni/Mini Corps
NorCal Horn Line Instructor/Musical Arranger
Kanstul G Soprano (Powerbore Bell)
Yamaha YTR-739T
Xtream XZ w/ XXX backbore GREAT MP!!!
http://freelancers-alumni.org

[puckish02]

"The user in question was banned after repeated warnings"

I read the three PMs from, obviously, the same individual moderator - three PMs in response to a single post which was, itself in response to the resurrection of an earlier thread, most of a decade old, in which several religeous blowhards went on and on about their beloved one. My friend acknowledged he had responded to a dated post and had hoped the issue was behind everyone . . . and then, a week later and out of the blue, this lone, bully moderator started sending him PMs threatening him and, obviously trying to goad him into responding in anger. He kept the messages - I could post them if you'd all like to judge for yourselves whether he was the victim of a rogue bully purporting to represent the wishes of the entire "moderator corps". So yes, he got repeated warnings - for the same (one) perceived offense and well after he had, essentially apologised for not having noticed the thread to which he objected was years old and from another time when religeous blowhards could, with impunity, spread their pseudo-piety at Trumpetherald.

"You're always free to start up your own board with your own rules."

During the fifties, in the McCarthy era, the John Birch Society came out with a mantra much like this; "America, Love it or Leave it". Eventually clearer heads began to prevail and the response to that became "America, Change it or Lose it". Many of the folks heading up the movement to confront the bullies and take back their country . . . were the musicians of this nation - at least that's how I remember it. If you want to borrow your bumper sticker discussion points from the John Birch Society and Joseph McCarthy I guess I can't stop you. Sadly, at least in my view, from the 60s to the present, the number of venues for trumpet players dwindled to where the majority of opportunities to play wind ensemble music in the US were in the military or in churches of a size to support such ensembles. What's the outcome of that? A vocal community of conservative, religeous minded guys started controlling discussion where prior they would have been ostracised for their intolerant views. Given what must feel to some of them like ultimate power a few (only a few) have chosen to flaunt that power, purport to speak for the whole of the moderators, and say intemperate things like "You're always free to start up your own board with your own rules." Can there be a more childish, playground-like response to a disagreement?

"Anyone else smell something fishy"

You're free to believe what you please. I work in the same university department as my "friend" and we play in the same Brass Band in neighboring Spokane. He's an architect - I'm a mechanical engineer. We carpool to Spokane (an hour and a half each way) to attend rehearsals - we have lots of time to fill with discussion of boorish rogue moderators who act unilaterally to ban fairly innocent occassional posters while allowing blatant nonsense by others who, coincidentally, share their world view. That's fishy. Three PMs, beginning a week after a post that was hardly in non-compliance with the user agreement . . . and all penned with the same childlike writing style - that's fishy. Aren't you guys the least bit disturbed that a single person can exhert such uncontested control over the positions of the majority? Hey, mods: aren't you getting a little bit embarrassed that this loose cannon is making you look like intolerant rednecks? Captain Kirk can bad mouth legitimate posters for months on end with no alteration to his offensive posts (and certainly not banishment) . . . and my friend responds to a years old post (a single incident) and the multiple PMs from an individual moderator turns that into "repeated warnings"?

That's fishy. That should be unacceptable to all of us.

[puckish02]

Maarten - my friend's username was johnsboy. He is an articulate, well educated, ordinarily patient 54 year old man. He is much beloved in our office and in our Brass Band. Those of us who know him "in the flesh" usually respect his opinions. When we don't we discuss our disagreement with specific points . . . and we don't, unilaterally, cut him off in mid discussion and ban him from our presence. That's how adults deal with varying points of view.

We don't tell him to start his own Brass Band - that would be childish.

[Maarten van Weverwijk]

[puckish02]

Sadly I think it does answer at least these questions: Do moderators make the tough decisions as a body, or can individual moderators impose their own world view. Do a few (maybe just one) moderators make decisions about who stays and who goes with little or no regard for what the "community" would prefer and control discussion not with reason but by banishing what they (he) considers a dissenting viewpoint? Are the moderators ever going to do something about this individual moderator who keeps acting outside the group and embarrassing them with his boorish, playground bully behavior?

[ConnArtist]

[Maarten van Weverwijk]