Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner - Non Classical A Civilized, Respectful PW or an Offensive, Out of Control PW?

Everyone? Take off the rose tinted specs.
Seems to me PW has again thrown out the baby and kept the bathwater.

TTFN

AD:

Your comment... (no offense taken)

Are we both part of the bathwater?



Jeanne W

"Well, nothing personal, but in my experience the word "bitch" is not used in civilized company".

Thanks for the useful - and very civilized - observation.

I am not "mother tongue" and I find the expression "bitch" used very often in, say, popular TV shows like "Friends" and from colleagues, particularly female ones.

I obviously noticed it because I had until recently thought that the word was a synonym of, say, prostitute, whilst it seems to be used very often (and correct me if I am wrong) in the sense of "fussy and unpleasant female" (German: "Zicke"; Italian: "Arpia" or "Megera").
So much so, that I have often heard even a verbal form (eg "she is bitching him all the time").

I apologize if the wrong meaning has been conveyed, but am now curious to know how other forum participants see the word.....

I think "bastard", which I have also used, is a parallel case: the literal meaning has been long lost to make place to a more figurative one.

"This is not a religious or political forum".

I do not see what this changes in the matter.

This is a forum.
In every forum political or religious opinions will come out because we cannot switch off a part of us when we write. My political ideas, to make an example, came out very clearly speaking about pianos made in communist countries. One just cannot write in a vacuum.

Moreover, the idea that a person has a right to have his privacy protected is not one that I have invented; it comes from the lawmakers, everywhere in the Western world, and with a reason.

It goes so far that here in old Europe (I have lived in Italy, Germany and now UK) everyone has the right to express himself in anonymous form in his communication with several public bodies: for example, in the UK I have a statutory right to remain anonymous even when I have to say something to the Police or to the Taxman even when I do not discuss politics or religion with them.

In the UK I do not even have a statutory duty to have an identity card! That's how far it goes!

In Italy an anonymous denunciation of a crime or illicit behavior has the same legal status, and must be dealt with in the same way, that a non-anonymous one.

That's as far as it goes, and with every reason.

Now to ask that such fundamental rights to privacy are sacrificed because someone is afraid of what Disciple might write (or what other people might write to him) seems to me way off the mark; not very libertarian if you ask me; and always in my eyes detrimental to a varied participation of the forum.

I also personally do not know of any forum where such rules are applied and the idea does not seem to me to be popular at all, even outside of "political and religious" fora; methinks, the disadvantages of practical (everyone can give a false name, address and date of birth anyway) and legal nature (protection of privacy, liability in case of identity theft etc.) vastly overcome the perceived advantages.

Just my two cents.

You have an incorrect and incomplete understanding of the law. I could obtain personal information about you very easily (I do it all the time in my work). You have a right to anonymity, but I have a right to pierce that anonymity, too -- for example, to sue you, or to obtain testimony from you.

It is my belief that in the future there will be much less anonymity on the Internet, because it protects inappropriate, unlawful and unethical behavior.

But hey, I could be wrong.

"I could obtain personal information about you very easily (I do it all the time in my work)".

I never said that you cannot. You can obtain the information which the law allows you to obtain, be that because you are my prospective employer, or because you want to know to whom a car who drove against yours belong etc.

But I have the right to control what expressions of mine go into the public domain, without being forced to give away my right to privacy.

You cannot, anyway (at least here in the UK) make enquiries about my political or religious ideas, or my sexual orientation. If you make an interview with me on the phone, you cannot ask me if I am white or asian etc. You cannot even ask me in an interview if I am single, married or divorced and if I have children or am (say) pregnant...

Of course and as always, the law will make a balance of conflicting rights (eg my right to privacy with the right of a bank not to employ someone convicted with fraud; or of a school not to employ anyone convicted with child molestation etc.; or a religious organisation not to employ atheists...; or a pacifist charity not to employ former SAS soldiers... ) deciding every time which information when who can obtain.

Notice that the idea that it can be of social advantage to renounce to anonimity in a forum seem not to be considered important anywhere, the right to anonimity being far more important (and mind: terrorists use the internet too...).

"I could obtain personal information about you very easily (I do it all the time in my work)".

On second thought: try and let us see what you get!
(But please send me per pm, I do not want it to go into the public domain...).

It might be fun, but seriously, I don't have time. Also, it would cost me money, which I prefer not to waste. This is the kind of thing I do for a client, when there is a reason that justifies the time and expense. I'm sure Frank could tell you all about it.

Let's not turn this into a personal thing. In the spirit of the thread....

I just wanted to contribute a bit to the discussion about anonymity. It's not as real as some people think. Indeed, there is very little real "privacy" left in this world, a fact that I have a lot of mixed feelings about....

Of course, Mark, nothing personal and nothing aggressive.

I was just curious to see how much would have been available just from the sources that I have myself "spread" on the Internet.

The mere fact that you might gather facts over me spending time and money shows in my eyes that the protection of the privacy, in fact, works; and the fact that someon ein the US can only gather information about me spending time and money shows that the protection of privacy is, in fact, a good thing...

But I agree with you that this is slowly bring us OT; although notice, we have handled our disagreement in a perfectly civilized way, which shows that there is always more than one way of doing things... and we have chosen the right one

Bitch should only be used as a verb in polite company (unless you are a rapper, in which case the n-word is fine too (though I think you have to be a black rapper to use that)). Bastard is kinda OK but has its contexts. I've forgotten who we're referring to now.

Bitch should only be used as a verb in polite company ..........( Bastard is kinda OK but has its contexts. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Having had purebred dogs and shown them the term BITCH is thrown around constantly.
As a craftsman BASTARD is a type of file I use.

And, of course, one could chase down a b*itch or a b*st*rd with a bastard sword....

nitch?

I didn't see the discussion that sparked this thread, so these comments are not about anybody personally. I'd like to pipe in that I completely agree with Jeanne. I choose not to associate with people either in real life or on the internet who are unpleasant, regardless of their knowledge or talents. I think it is perfectly OK to be critical and disagree. It isn't OK to be abusive.

I know lots of people think the expertise of a master is worth putting up with belittling comments. It doesn't work for me though.

From my experience, music and sports seem to be the last bastions where this kind of abuse is still acceptable.

When people are like this in real life, I find other people to hang out with--whether friends, family, employers, clients, or colleagues.

I find it hard to believe that people have completely different personas online, but I do believe that it is easier to say something nasty to someone you don't know personally.

BTW swearing in itself doesn't really bother me, although I respect that it does bother some people. Swearing AT somebody though, is over the line for me. And, I think I remember Frank himself posting that the language should be family friendly as we have younger posters here.

One other thought, on how to handle bullying online. "Don't feed the troll" is the common wisdom. If you ignore it, it will die of its own.

I believe that is true, but I also believe in assertively standing up for oneself or others when someone has crossed the line. I haven't quite reconciled the right thing to do in the online environment. Sometimes a PM to the victim may help--but some people have a higher tolerance for this stuff, so that may not be appropriate.

The good news is that the wonderful people here outnumber the trolls by a large percentage.

FWIW YMMV and all that.

The turning point in every case, where the thread goes bad, is where the discussion turns from discussing the subject matter to personal questioning or attack. Sometimes, this turn is totally uninstigated and pops up as a surprise attack. So, sticking to the subject and allowing each person his/her opinion does not seem unreasonable if we want to clean up the place. Why should personal attacks be allowed? They do not serve to enhance learning, exchange of ideas, communication, etc. Or, in the alternative, there could be an "anything goes" forum section where venting at each other is acceptable. Otherwise, it is always nice to exercise some measure of self-restraint (except when playing the piano of course).

It was the playing and abilities of (he who shall not be mentioned on this forum) that was being attacked first and it was several, not one member who publically called (that person) a terrible pianist. When (that person) responded that he wasn't the worst musician in the world, he was then attacked as a person, then banned for telling people to look at his video to determine if he could play the piano or not. (That person) was also told that he wasn't qualified to post about Chopin or Liszt on this forum, nor were his comments wanted. On some forums, members and moderation who have singled out individuals for acceptible ridicule would rather their target remain silent while they're trashing him. That seemed to be the case here. When members are told that their opinions are unwanted, that they are unwelcome because they're not qualified to speak on the subject matter and, then ridiculed for their posts there wil be ill-will. Especially if they are qualified to offer an opinion. And I know that I'll probably be banned for saying that and for being a student of (unmentionable name). Sorry that my rationale goes contrary to forum policy.

My hunting dog is polite but no linguist and I can tell you that this is one of his favorite words. His personal position is that it should only function as a direct object, but I digress.

Other forums on which I have participated in the past have had very active moderation around two areas:

- posting on topic, and
- personal attacks.

A little bit of personable off-topic banter and humor can keep things interesting. But, personal attacks can act as poison to a forum.

Moderation can result in posters being asked to edit offending posts and posters being suspended for issuing personal attacks. In the story of the disciple, on other forums there would have been more suspensions than just the one. Of course, self-moderation is always the best medicine.

Personally, I would rather have a high-value, rough & tumble forum where competent people exchange ideas frankly rather than a very quiet, polite, politically correct one where very little of substance is discussed. Having said that I wouldn't want pianoworld to turn into pokerworld.
And, just because it is anonymous here, there is no reason to trample on other people's feet or disregard people's emotions.

I think you are correct on this point. Perhaps some public warnings (a metaphorical banging of heads together) could have reduced the ugliness and immaturity a bit.

Spot on!

+ one for the rough and tumble!!!!
The internet is no tea party... especially when we're talking about playing the piano!
That said, it's not a foot-stomping fest either.

Did participate in two other threads that eventually got so bad, that they were deleted by the moderator! So I have "No Comment"!

Not sure if I'm bragging, or complaining!