If...

[Phil U]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As for this thread, I probably would not have supported closing it if it were not for the extremely tasteless timing. The man is not even buried yet..

 

Tasteless though it may seem to some, it is a fact of life that any politician and world leader's life, words, actions and history - both good and bad - will be discussed at the time of their death. There will be positives and negatives from people with differing views and experiences. Peter H put it typically well in the thatcher thread, here...

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/barnacks-bar/279334-thatcher-2.html#post2370630

 

Barnack's Bar is about conversation and debate. Those that find it tasteless do not have to enter the conversation in question, the conversation is contained in a thread that effectively represents a closed door. If you don't like the subject then don't open the door.

 

I don't think those that are interested should be stopped from having a reasonable debate on the subject of the day on the grounds of someone else's view on what is good taste.

[jaapv]

You may note that I did not criticize the content, just the moment.

[larsv]

You talk about posting in a provocative way?

 

This particular peasant thinks we'd all be better off if members made more certain than "pretty sure" before they launch ad hominem attacks and denigrations of the character of other forum members or moderators. Better still, we'd all be better off if we didn't do that at all.

 

I think pretty sure is good enough in this case:

Using the name of a musician as your own,

Using the logo of someone else (he or she cannot be both)

Leading questions in the Sony thread

Being provocative and tasteless on the Mandela issue

 

I did not attack any moderator.

 

In my view, those are facts.

 

To the peasant's uprise: I take that to mean that certain people feel oppressed, fight it and don't offer an alternative. But I'm not a native english speaker. So, if you have experienced that as provocative: my apologies.

[Orient XI]

I think everybody is becoming badly overheated in this matter. A post regretting Mandela's passing was posted on the German forum (Café Leitz 5/XII/2013) without, so far, attracting any comment at all either favourable or unfavourable. This corresponds to my own experience in showing a Japanese family around Parliament Square in London. Despite one visitor being the President of a company serving international markets none of them had ever heard of Nelson Mandela and were at a loss to understand why his statue graced Parliament Square. I suspect that only people in the Commonwealth and the USA hold him in regard (the majority) or loathe him (the minority).

[azzo]

...

 

....I will be tendering my resignation as a Moderator of this Forum forthwith.

 

 

 

I for one, hope that Andreas won't accept it !

[Phil U]

I think pretty sure is good enough in this case:

Using the name of a musician as your own,

Using the logo of someone else (he or she cannot be both)

Leading questions in the Sony thread

Being provocative and tasteless on the Mandela issue

 

I did not attack any moderator.

 

In my view, those are facts.

 

To the peasant's uprise: I take that to mean that certain people feel oppressed, fight it and don't offer an alternative. But I'm not a native english speaker. So, if you have experienced that as provocative: my apologies.

 

Thanks, but it is Les Paul to whom you owe an apology, not I.

[larsv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No I don't.

[jdsheepdog]

I for one, hope that Andreas won't accept it !

Me too, and by the way, it was not me either.

[Phil U]

I think it is important to note that Les Paul deliberately separated his contentious views on Mandela from the thread that was offering condolences and tributes. That was a reasonable step and showed respect to other members who may find what he had to say unpleasant, or that did not want to enter such a debate. Had he really just wanted to be provocative and tasteless he could have posted his views in the first thread.

 

Just because some may disagree with his views on Mandela and find them objectionable, it doesn't mean his intentions are bad or that he is trying to be a nuisance. It is unfair on him to suggest that, IMHO.

[M9reno]

Just to be a little pedantic, at the point Andy passed his comment that a person 'involved in the thread' was the person who reported it, four people had made posts and nine others had hit the Thanks button. So far, only the four posters have claimed their innocence whilst the nine have remained quiet. At the moment, euston, you can only claim that Andy was wrong about the four however, it is still possible that one of the nine is sat back having a chuckle at Andy's expense.

 

This rather misses the point, it seems to me. Why should anyone be deemed a hypocrite, or not "innocent", for his/her actions or comments here? Why should anyone feel obligated to say "it wasn't me"? Why should anyone who complains about a thread worry about being "outed" by a Moderator? This would seem to undermine the whole complaints procedure.

 

I am sorry, but there is a bad climate in this place. I am sorry to be contributing further to it here.

[M9reno]

By the way, I am complaining about this thread.

[andybarton]

Why should anyone who complains about a thread worry about being "outed" by a Moderator?.

 

That's a very good point and one that I regret doing.

 

I wouldn't have done so if the person who reported the other thread, hadn't then contributed to this one, which complains about that other thread being deleted.

[andybarton]

Thanks to everyone who has posted supportive comments here and for all of the PMs. They are appreciated.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Andy Barton,

 

I would hope you might reconsider your thoughts about resigning as moderator on this Forum. I understand that being a moderator puts you under unpleasant pressures at times.

 

I think that the Forum as a whole has benefitted from your presence & participation as a moderator even if everyone, myself included, has not always been in agreement with you in all instances.

 

I also realize that is easier for me as an occasional poster to write this than it is for you as a continuous participant to continue moderating on this Forum.

 

None the less I would hope that you wou would reconsider & continue as moderator.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[UliWer]

Gentlemen, I fear the days before christmas are not the best time for topics like those raised in this thread and the one that led to it. People become very sensitive and irritable. Better wait until January when it get's boring again.

 

It has been said, that moderators should only intervene, when something is against the rules of this forum. Well, here are some rules:

 

What the forum is not for

....

 

This isn’t the place for proselytising

 

No matter whether it’s political, religious or ideological, or concerns a specific brand (though with Leica we are more tolerant), anyone who seeks to impose their “truth” on others, should please do so elsewhere. They are excluded so that our forum can operate as a mixture of different people with a variety of religious, ideological and political convictions.

 

No more political, ideological or religious discussion

 

Café Leitz was set up at the end of 2011 as a place for off-topic discussions. Lately it has become, unfortunately, a place for regulars to air subjects which have nothing to do with Leica or photography (OK, off-topic) but do have maximum potential for stirring up trouble. And that is not OK.

 

The conflicts and animosities in Café Leitz are spreading to other parts of the forum. That is why, with immediate effect, we are going to close and remove discussions of that kind in Café Leitz and elsewhere. Our decision will appear subjective but it is based on our experience as a moderator and on what is best for the forum.

Café Leitz was set up at the end of 2011 as a place for off-topic discussions. Lately it has become, unfortunately, a place for regulars to air subjects which have nothing to do with Leica or photography (OK, off-topic) but do have maximum potential for stirring up trouble. And that is not OK.

 

The conflicts and animosities in Café Leitz are spreading to other parts of the forum. That is why, with immediate effect, we are going to close and remove discussions of that kind in Café Leitz and elsewhere. Our decision will appear subjective but it is based on our experience as a moderator and on what is best for the forum.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/about-leica-forum/293600-what-leica-forum.html#post2462784

 

When "Cafe Leitz" is mentioned in this statement, it stands for the equivalent of "Barnack's Bar" in the german part of this forum.

 

Unfortunately those rules leave moderators at a dilemma. If they try to "enforce" those rules, they are accused of heavy-handiness and their actions as an insult to enlightened discussers and tolerant people. If they ignore them, others stand up, to instigate moderators to do something against what they look upon as following an agenda to spread evil thinking.

 

So moderators can only loose. If I try to resume the time since those rules were set, I find both ways: letting discussions about political etc. topics go on, and stopping them at a certain point. Both ways have found their criticism. I still back those rules as I did when they were first discussed. On the other hand I have learned something:

 

The man whose commemoration led to this discussion once came to a point when he found out that you cannot have either black or white. You need to compromise between both an let live both. Some may say that grey is nothing - undecided, weak and unattractive. Though we are not in a Forum about everlasting truth, but just about photography. In photography grey has its own value. And there are lots of greys to be found.

 

Therefore I think that moderation in this case and in this Forum in general does follow the example of the man who was commemorated and it has learned the lessons of photography as well. I am confident they - and Andy Barton is the best example - will go on like this. To the best of the Forum.

[Phil U]

Oh please - this is a discussion forum. Why should it just be about banal music or whatever else members are using.

 

Lets have proper discussion and less middle class angst and guilt.

 

I'm not sure what I did to warrant this one and to start you off on a class war, Paul.

 

In post #23 I spoke up for having discussion, even if the subjects and remarks are disagreeable to some. I'm all for proper discussion (and preferably without participants storming off and taking their ball home when people challenge and disagree with their views.)

 

If you want a proper discussion then start one or contribute to one. Come to the table, rather than just heckling from the back of the room.

[Phil U]

Not a personal attack on you at all Phil, I know you like a good discussion. My point is that I miss the old Barnacks Bar, before the rule of no politics was introduced.

 

Apologies, I misinterpreted your point. My mistake.

 

It does seem a shame when the bar is not allowed to discuss current affairs openly like adults. It's become more like Barnack's Coffee Morning.

[Gibbo]

Doppio espresso per favore

[Phil U]

Doppio espresso per favore

 

If you asked for Espresso at the coffee mornings I'm familiar with, the reply would be...

 

"It's Nescafe instant, luv. I can put two spoons in if you want it strong. Milk's on the next table."

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pop]

Please consider the following to be written in a dark blue bold typeface.

I certainly regret that I had to close that thread. Closing threads is not something we like to do; rather, we like to help making this a useful and pleasant place. Luckily, we do the latter more often than the former.

After closing the thread I received an unsolicited PM by the TO, Les Paul, wherein he expressed his regrets that he could not post his apologies, due to the thread being closed. I offered to post on his behalf a brief message which he sent and I posted. I would not have expressed that note in quite that way, but that's what he wanted me to post. Someone used the occasion to plusunkindwise mention thinkpol. I'm ready to accept any apologies, should they arrive.

Since it's quite evident who closed said thread, I find it passingly strange that somehow moderators are now attacked who have no evident connection at all with the business at hand. This makes the connection of some of the contributions here to the stated cause a bit less than obvious, I think.

Some of you expressed the desire to be treated like the adult and sane beings they are. I, in turn, ask members to treat us moderators in that very same manner. TIA.