My honest opinion about something was deleted [SPLIT]

[FurryCurry]

Think about all the people left out of those. Or all of those multi-editor projects that only have so many slots available? Lots of disappointed people there too. And what did they say in all of those threads when the limit was reached? Sorry, we're closed.

Disregarding all other issues brought up here, I have to say I think this is a lousy example, and a poor fit with the others.

Regarding the projects I've participated in, and those I've read the threads for, a thread is often started to recruit editors and backup editors, at least until all the available or necessary spots are filled. Even beyond that point, they can be used to recruit replacements if necessary, and provide a means of communication between the involved parties, or those interested in the progress of a project because they are interested in seeing the final product.

With one exception, every project I've become involved with has started with a thread on these forums making people aware of it and inviting editors to apply. One might also say they are of more interest and provide more benefit to the AMV community as a whole, in the form of opportunities to participate, and hopefully completed projects that everyone can download and enjoy. This is a bit different than your corbo threads, which are exclusionary from the very beginning, and provide no tangible benefits to the greater community, unless you count pictures of drunk people from the previous year's party in the current thread.

Another point of commonality shared by the projects I've participated in, is that each had it's own website/forum/yahoo group available for the participating editors as a means of communication. I personally don't care at all, one way or another, but if you did feel you wanted to protect your privacy and spare the feelings of those sensitive to feeling excluded, I'd expect you could do the same if you wanted to, given the experience and resources of the "corbo crowd".

TL;DR version:

Comparing MEP threads to the corbo thread is pretty whacked out, WTF were you thinking?

[Arigatomina]

But is that reason for deleting the thread? Well, I'm not a moderator here and I don't know exactly how things work. You, Paizuri, do bring up a good point about AMV studio threads (especially the closed studios) and multi-editor projects. Although, with the multi-editor projects, these threads are very useful for coordination.

Off-topic threads are and should be deleted. This particular thread is better suited for a journal, or even a website shared only with the individuals the thread concerns. Since the thread did not concern the general members of this site, or the amv community as a whole, it has no place on the forum. We don't announce videos if we're not going to share them with the other members. Why announce a party?

As for the studio threads...it depends on the thread. I hate to say it, but announcing a new member in your studio isn't much different from announcing a major update to your website. Unless there's an amv in there (and not 'future vids' since threads announcing unmade vids are also locked), or something that concerns members of the amv community, the announcement is better suited to a journal.

Project threads are another tough call. If you already know you're not welcoming anyone who isn't on a predetermined list, put it in your journal. If it's open - even if it's only one open slot - to any member interested, then it belongs in the forum.

I liked the OT boards, but they're gone. We've defined 'off-topic' as things that do not concern the site or the community. If only 'friends of a friend' are involved, it concerns those friends, not general members who may frequent this website. Like we say to new members introducing themselves in hope of making new friends, put it in your journal.

[Flint the Dwarf]

As for the studio threads...it depends on the thread. I hate to say it, but announcing a new member in your studio isn't much different from announcing a major update to your website.

I'm with you on that. I felt a little uncomfortable when Farlo announced Nailz and I were new members at Globocide.

Project threads are another tough call. If you already know you're not welcoming anyone who isn't on a predetermined list, put it in your journal. If it's open - even if it's only one open slot - to any member interested, then it belongs in the forum.

But that's assuming that the only purpose of the MEP forum is to enlist creators for projects, and I don't think that's it. It is also for organization and discussion, so it doesn't matter if they're accepting new recruits.

[Arigatomina]

But that's assuming that the only purpose of the MEP forum is to enlist creators for projects, and I don't think that's it. It is also for organization and discussion, so it doesn't matter if they're accepting new recruits.

Yeah, if it's open for discussion with anyone - and not just the members of the project - then it's like 'amv suggestions' - talking about a video that's being planned, inviting open commentary on the idea. If the thread starts after the 'join us' has closed, and the only ones invited to post are the participants, then it shouldn't be 'public' here. A chatroom would be more appropriate, or a private forum.

And for the record, I was glad to hear the studio's update. ^.~ I just had most of the members on my buddies list already, so a journal announcement would have worked just as well.

[paizuri]

Do you really want a debate over here where I nitpick everything you say and have said in the past as well? My last deleted post was a re-iteration of the conversation I had with Kalium. The post that I made was of :

My deleted post was not flaming anybody in anyway... why was it deleted?

..was my immediate response to that of finding out about the post I made last night being deleted. Then I posted the conversation I had with Kalium. I ask why that post was deleted and no, it has not been answered except for these reasons in which you give:

The time of your post which I am responding to is 09 Jun 2005 17:06. Although I have not responded to your inquiry, it is quite possible that you had received an answer as to why your post was deleted in the hour and a half (roughly) between your posts. OR it could be that you already knew the answer. At which point, I question why you are posting in here again as opposed to taking it up with me personally as I stated, if not to raise a big stink.

This does not answer the question that I asked, and as for raising a big stink, this involves you as well because you are also posting about this in this forum as opposed to messaging me yourself.

Now you attack my integrity and character by referring to posts I have made in the past. I thought moderators had no place for passive-aggresiveness in this forum?

So really....what are you trying to accomplish here?

Neither do you answer my question, what is your motive for posting your honest opinion?

You seemingly answer your own initial question in the chat log you posted when you state "i know you guys are trying to keep the peace". You could've said you weren't satisfied with that answer and asked for a clarification but you didn't. So I assumed you were complaining about the apparently exclusiveness of the thread due to the posts that were removed so I addressed those in my first post.

Your second response talked first about the censorship of the thread and then mentioned the harmful nature of the thread due to the actions of ONE user whose example you then characterize the entire thread with.

I will now address your apparent censorship concerns.

Although I did not remove them personally, your post along with two other subsequent posts were removed because a moderator deemed them to be a direct result and continuation of the initial conflict which definitely should have been, and was, removed. If there hadn't been any removed posts by the same people shortly before, this situation would not have played out this way. If this is all a simple misunderstanding, then I apologize.

Being an administrator, I have a responsibility to reply to people's complaints. I have an obligation to address the concerns you raise in order to clear up any kind of misunderstandings and I will always do so in the same method that you communicate in.

I had an opinion in which I stated, but it was deleted for reasons that aren't said except for 'Mr. Pilkington brought up the same argument' and Jimmyen gives some reasoning too.' Does that make my opinion invalid and therefore not allowed to be stated? Does that mean that I am not allowed to voice my opinion on a subject in which I had valid reasoning for and though it may cause some disagreement in the eyes of others, should be removed? Also, does that mean that I should be a target of criticism because of posts I had made in the past? I made no such attack towards you, yet you play it off as if I were on trial here and begin to tell me that I have no right in showing any kind of concern about the community.

Regardless of the countless other threads that have come and gone in the same vain as this ongoing thread, am I not allowed to voice an opinion about this particular thread without having to say everything about everything else? I'm not a martyr here trying to prove to create a better soceity for all of us, I simply stated an opinion about something I didn't agree with.

And I disagree with your simple statement. The post in question which was removed was this:

This thread should be removed.

What the private party is doing is wrong. A lot of new people come here and see something about a party at Otakon and they want to get involved in it only to be turned away because they weren't 'invited.' Posting about a private party in a public forum is wrong and condescending to many people.

It introduced no new information or reasoning than was already discussed. People may have posted more stuff in defense, or more stuff in agreement or just simply ignored it and went on talking about the party itself.

Having no other information to go on, I looked at your past behavior. Why would I do this? Because judging from the moved posts, your honest opinion about the thread was motivated more from a desire to spite one of the thread participants who, admittedly was a dick to one of your friends (and whose posts WERE removed), than an actual concern that the thread itself was detrimental to the amv community. The post of his that still existed that you pointed to was part of a larger conversation so it had to stay by necessity, which I explained in my previous post.

If you want to keep going on with questioning my motives and wanting to 'keep the peace.' Why is it that in the AMV Announcement forums, when someone says that they do not like a video that was released on there, those posts don't get removed? It causes just as much disagreement and strain especially to the creators of those videos. So, why in this thread is it any different for me to disagree with the situation? Why should I be sujected to modding when it is allowed to happen elsewhere on the forums? Now, I truly question the motive in which my honest opinion about a situation has to be deleted.

Dissenting opinions are fine in AMV Announcement, but if it can be established that their is real malice behind the posts, they get removed. Maybe we don't catch them all before they cause damage, but we try to.

If my theory about your motive is correct though, then I am adamantly opposed to this sort of behavior and would like to discourage it because it has boiled down to a successful thread lock by mob rule when the real issue was something else entirely. I like these forums which is why I agreed to moderate them. I do not want to see them go down this ugly route.

But whatever the motive, the Corbo Bash 2005 thread has been locked now. I hope that no aspersions of elitism and aristocracy fall on the Corbo himself for he did not even get a chance to reply to any of this even though his name was being dragged through the mud this entire time and he is a nicer guy than I will ever be.

[paizuri]

What's at the core of this? The exclusion at Corbo Bash? Paizuri, you say you're under the impression that Corbo Bash is not a closed party?

I think it needs to be stated that this is not a public get together of amv creators, rather a private party consisting of many amv creators who are friends.

Just like last year the corbo bash thread appears as an invitation to everyone and their donkey, when it's not.

It would seem to me that it is indeed a private party, although it is possible for people to make their way in if they are good friends with someone there. I didn't see what Koop wrote, but I did see what Knives wrote, and I am in agreement. At the very least, the thread has served its purpose in perpetuating the inflated ego of already aristocratic and exalted creators. By making this public post about a private party, they are exalting Corbo Bash over any other potential AMV party and singling out these privileged creators, even if it's unintentional. I bear none of these creators ill will, and I don't believe that they are intentionally creating a further rift between "amateur" creators and "talented" creators. But they undeniably have a certain reputation, and that vibe of exclusion is very much understandable.

The exact conditions for attendance change year to year. I have definitely met completely new people at Corbo Bash over the years that they have occurred and I think AD's disclaimer is a bit more harsh than the actuality. The party is indeed limited by the size of the room, but I have never seen people turned away except after hotel security comes knocking with a noise violation warning. After that, yeah, I guess it's pretty much a closed party.

Since there are no other posted Otakon party threads, much less party threads in general, then I guess Corbo Bash IS pretty hard to top. I think that's more because people simply don't post about throwing parties at conventions here.

But is that reason for deleting the thread? Well, I'm not a moderator here and I don't know exactly how things work.

There has not been any formal forum rule to disallow this sort of thread. In its origin, it was indeed a party for amv creators. That is how most of us met each other and the strong ties formed prompted some members here to constantly post new Corbo Bash threads every year. Perhaps it is not an event worthy or relevant enough for people other than the 20-40 amv creators who use this site to keep in touch, but aren't 20-40 people the size of most multi-editor projects?

You, Paizuri, do bring up a good point about AMV studio threads (especially the closed studios) and multi-editor projects. Although, with the multi-editor projects, these threads are very useful for coordination.

Although the thread seems pointless (pointless enough for derobert to lock even), as the Otakon date approaches, past threads WERE substantially used for coordination.

I don't see anything wrong with people posting about throwing parties in the Anime Conventions section at all, private or otherwise. As long as they're not going out of the way to be elitist and posting lists of people who can come and who can't, I really don't see any harm in it. But I would like to hear what other people think.

[Koopiskeva]

Neither do you answer my question, what is your motive for posting your honest opinion?

It seems that you are only reading what you want to read. I wanted to state my honest opinion and I clearly stated my motive for posting my honest opinion in that deleted post, which you even quote yourself.

This thread should be removed.

What the private party is doing is wrong. A lot of new people come here and see something about a party at Otakon and they want to get involved in it only to be turned away because they weren't 'invited.' Posting about a private party in a public forum is wrong and condescending to many people.

What more clarification do you need about my motive for posting? I stated it right there.

You seemingly answer your own initial question in the chat log you posted when you state "i know you guys are trying to keep the peace". You could've said you weren't satisfied with that answer and asked for a clarification but you didn't. So I assumed you were complaining about the apparently exclusiveness of the thread due to the posts that were removed so I addressed those in my first post.

Yes, I was complaining about the exclusivity of the thread and I voiced my opinion about having it removed.

Your second response talked first about the censorship of the thread and then mentioned the harmful nature of the thread due to the actions of ONE user whose example you then characterize the entire thread with.

So, is there a certain amount of examples that I need to state before I am allowed to comment on a situation? To me, there was an air of arrogance and rudeness in the thread which I disagreed with. I found one example and stated it to defend myself upon the accusation that I was merely posting to bring up a big stink. And considering that I am not the only person to complain about it, the thread was obviously exuding some type of atmosphere which others disgreeed with and felt compelled to complain about it as well.

I will now address your apparent censorship concerns.

Although I did not remove them personally, your post along with two other subsequent posts were removed because a moderator deemed them to be a direct result and continuation of the initial conflict which definitely should have been, and was, removed. If there hadn't been any removed posts by the same people shortly before, this situation would not have played out this way. If this is all a simple misunderstanding, then I apologize.

Being an administrator, I have a responsibility to reply to people's complaints. I have an obligation to address the concerns you raise in order to clear up any kind of misunderstandings and I will always do so in the same method that you communicate in.

Fair enough, yet you should realize that the intial coflict was caused by the topic of the thread itself, and that multiple people felt the same way about what the thread was promoting. It was not merely a case of one person being an ass and trying to make a big scene. Several people felt reason enough to voice their opinion about the current situation in order to cause a change, not to just merely be silenced.

It introduced no new information or reasoning than was already discussed. People may have posted more stuff in defense, or more stuff in agreement or just simply ignored it and went on talking about the party itself.

Does that mean that I am not allowed to state that I am in agreement with the what was already discussed? I did not see anyone else in the thread saying that they wanted to have the thread locked before I posted that either.

Having no other information to go on, I looked at your past behavior. Why would I do this? Because judging from the moved posts, your honest opinion about the thread was motivated more from a desire to spite one of the thread participants who, admittedly was a dick to one of your friends (and whose posts WERE removed), than an actual concern that the thread itself was detrimental to the amv community. The post of his that still existed that you pointed to was part of a larger conversation so it had to stay by necessity, which I explained in my previous post.

What post are you referring to? The post that I used as an example of rudeness? I used that post simply as an example, I do not know who that person is. If you are somehow talking about SnhKnives, yes, I was on Skype with him and he told us of the situation after it had all been deleted, so I never saw what even happened there. He did not tell me post post anything about it either, I felt compelled to act on my own and others followed.

If my theory about your motive is correct though, then I am adamantly opposed to this sort of behavior and would like to discourage it because it has boiled down to a successful thread lock by mob rule when the real issue was something else entirely. I like these forums which is why I agreed to moderate them. I do not want to see them go down this ugly route.

What exactly is the issue that is different from why we were trying to get it locked? This paragraph makes it seem as if we are simply posting to cause trouble. I like these forums too, which is why I am here quite often. If you really feel that our actions were truly done simply to 'mob' the thread then you are mistaken.

But whatever the motive, the Corbo Bash 2005 thread has been locked now.

Having the thread locked was the motive, which was stated in my deleted post.

[paizuri]

If my theory about your motive is correct though, then I am adamantly opposed to this sort of behavior and would like to discourage it because it has boiled down to a successful thread lock by mob rule when the real issue was something else entirely. I like these forums which is why I agreed to moderate them. I do not want to see them go down this ugly route.

What exactly is the issue that is different from why we were trying to get it locked? This paragraph makes it seem as if we are simply posting to cause trouble. I like these forums too, which is why I am here quite often. If you really feel that our actions were truly done simply to 'mob' the thread then you are mistaken.

Then I have been greatly mistaken and I am sorry for troubling you and making you respond to my longwinded posts with your own longwinded posts. This has all been wasted time better spent in more entertaining pursuits. I hope you can accept my apology on behalf of the administration for the way this matter has been handled.

[derobert]

I think we need to figure out in general how we should handle threads about private and semi-private parties, and also at what point the thread on a party has degraded to pointlessness.

Personally, I don't think I'd of locked the thread if it were being used for something pointful, like making arrangements for the party, requests to be invited, or even confirming guests lists. The second one also would give it a good reason to be on Org's forums. I also don't see why some of the dissenting comments were deleted. [These are just my opinions; I don't speak for the Org administration here.]

I welcome input on the issue. We're thinking of making a policy on it tonight, assuming we can work out everyone's schedules to get together online.

[Moonlight Soldier]

I welcome input on the issue. We're thinking of making a policy on it tonight, assuming we can work out everyone's schedules to get together online.

Well, I know that when I go into the Convention forum I’m looking for events that I might participate in, or am posting something to raise awareness of an event so that other members may be alerted to its existence.

If an event has already taken place, really the only thing I’d leave it open to are posts with links to either after thoughts (like journals) or photo-albums of the event.

Maybe the admin should make a sticky regarding the convention forum as a whole and it’s purpose