# Due to current circumstances



## Daniel

*IMPORTANT:*

Enough ad hominems.
ANY, and I emphasize ANY new reply with ad hominem - content, posted by any member who was involved in these previous discussions, will mean: Ban of this member. It is a last official warning.

The moderation


----------



## Yagan Kiely

That's what SHE said.

(Finally good to see the moderator team trying to 'do good')


----------



## Daniel

Who is SHE?

You do not have to comment this, Yagan Kiely. A German meaning: Talking is silver, silence is gold.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

Don't be harsh on the moderating team, they always try to do good. They are always doing what _they _think is best.


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> Who is SHE?


Um.... it's quite obviously a joke.



> Talking is silver, silence is gold.


Yes, being silent while treated unfairly, that always rectifies the situation....


----------



## Edward Elgar

Yagan Kiely said:


> Um.... it's quite obviously a joke[/URL].
> 
> Yes, being silent while treated unfairly, that always rectifies the situation....


I nearly killed myself with laughter when reading this! Even on a thread designed to relax our current climate, you have to argue to the bitter end! If you post "that's what SHE said" after a moderator has spoken do you understand that this might easily not be interpreted as a joke? We are all being treated the same by various threads being put on hold and the rest of us are not making sarcastic comments. Be silent, it might make a refreshing change!


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> Even on a thread designed to relax our current climate, you have to argue to the bitter end!


Put it this way, I brought a joke to this thread. You have decided to bring an argument to the thread. Now why don't you bring a joke that YOU think is funny?


> If you post "that's what SHE said" after a moderator has spoken do you understand that this might easily not be interpreted as a joke?


To me it is an obvious joke, which I emphasised with the capitalisation. Maybe I have a weird sense of humour, but cyanide and happiness IS a popular comic strip.


----------



## Edward Elgar

Same old Yagan, projecting your lust for argument onto me! You don't even try and defend your use of sarcasm, just straight in there challenging my sense of humor which really has nothing to do with anything! I'm getting so used to your weak method of counter-argument I may be able to predict what you are going to say before you say it!


----------



## Yagan Kiely

Please, I again tried to promote a joke from you but you are arguing again.

I was criticising my own sense of humour, suggesting it may be a little weird, not yours. I have not used sarcasm at all in this thread! My post was indeed a weak argument, because there was none. I suggested you post a joke that you find funny. If you find the one I posted not funny, then that's fine (there are those that do).


----------



## Edward Elgar

Yagan Kiely said:


> I have not used sarcasm at all in this thread!


How about:


Yagan Kiely said:


> Yes, being silent while treated unfairly, that always rectifies the situation....


?


----------



## Guest

You jokers just can't help your selves eh  there is nothing wrong in good robust discussion, *it's just that no one wants to back off*


----------



## Yagan Kiely

I was talking about with you Elgar. Why can't you just leave it? Why do you have to make it antagonistic all the time? You are so defensive, I suggest you bring a joke you like (if mine you don't find funny), and you believe I am attacking your humour....


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

Andante said:


> ...there is nothing wrong in good robust discussion, *it's just that no one wants to back off*


An EXCELLENT point.

Rather than say some of the things I've said before, let me add some new observations.

1. I believe that letting others have the last word in a thread is often a sign of posting maturity. (I feel as though this relates directly to *Andante*'s point, above.)

2. The "24 hour" rule: if someone makes a post that really incenses me, I sometimes impose a "24-hour rule" on myself- that is to say, I intentionally wait a day, so that some of my unproductive initial impulses have a chance to settle down. I pass this along because perhaps others might find it useful in repsonding to points without main-lining into one's temper.

3. In extreme cases, we have an "ignore poster" function. I've almost never used it- but I've had occasion to use it recently...


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> 2. The "24 hour" rule: if someone makes a post that really incenses me, I sometimes impose a "24-hour rule" on myself- that is to say, I intentionally wait a day, so that some of my unproductive initial impulses have a chance to settle down. I pass this along because perhaps others might find it useful in repsonding to points without main-lining into one's temper.


I do that sometimes, but often with posts that challenge me, or have a complicated answer. I actually have never been incensed by anything written on a forum.



> 3. In extreme cases, we have an "ignore poster" function. I've almost never used it- but I've had occasion to use it recently...


I find such a feature offensive. If this feature is used it reflects on either the person using the feature, or the ineptitude of moderating. This is my opinion.

Elgar: I have tried to respond to you kindly and defuse the situation you have with me. Can we start again (or something)?

If not, what do you want from me?


----------



## jhar26

Chi_town/Philly said:


> I believe that letting others have the last word in a thread is often a sign of posting maturity.


Not commenting on anyone in particular - we're probably all guilty of it every now and then, but I sometimes have the impression that people think that giving the last word to another poster is equal to 'admitting defeat.' But in reality it can just mean that you stand by what you have said in your previous post(s) and that you simply don't have anything more to add. Giving someone else the last word is not the same as admitting that you are wrong.


----------



## Krummhorn

Yagan Kiely said:


> Um.... it's quite obviously a joke.





Yagan Kiely said:


> Put it this way, I brought a joke to this thread . . . To me it is an obvious joke, which I emphasised with the capitalisation. Maybe I have a weird sense of humour, but cyanide and happiness IS a popular comic strip.


Erm ... this is not a "joke" thread ... In the context of the thread topic, I personally see no humor in what Daniel stated ... and I back him 100% ... he and I are a team and work very closely together here.

This being a multi-cultural forum of peoples from many lands and as many different languages. Many of those people have to literally translate the English into their native language in order to make any sense of it - and some English words or phrases do not always translate into the vernacular.

Yagan, you stated (in part) "ineptitude of moderating" in reference to using the ignore feature. Inept, defined means "Displaying a lack of judgment, sense, or reason; foolish". Now you find it necessary to verbally attack the forum Administration?

Nobody else is complaining about the thread topic!!

The purpose of the thread was to emphasize a point - the point was not intended to be humorous ... nor should it be taken that way. Bans are imminent ... there will be no further warnings ... that is no joke.

The intent of the thread was to stress an important point, not start another argumentative discussion.


----------



## Elgarian

Chi_town/Philly said:


> 1. I believe that letting others have the last word in a thread is often a sign of posting maturity. (I feel as though this relates directly to *Andante*'s point, above.)
> 
> 2. The "24 hour" rule: if someone makes a post that really incenses me, I sometimes impose a "24-hour rule" on myself- that is to say, I intentionally wait a day, so that some of my unproductive initial impulses have a chance to settle down. I pass this along because perhaps others might find it useful in repsonding to points without main-lining into one's temper.


Wise words. Thank you.



jhar26 said:


> Not commenting on anyone in particular - we're probably all guilty of it every now and then, but I sometimes have the impression that people think that giving the last word to another poster is equal to 'admitting defeat.' But in reality it can just mean that you stand by what you have said in your previous post(s) and that you simply don't have anything more to add. Giving someone else the last word is not the same as admitting that you are wrong.


Wise words also. Thank you, too.

Here are some words of my own, probably less wise than those by my two distinguished fellow posters above, but still, perhaps, useful to recall now and then:

1. Everything does _not_ have to be regarded as an argument. Not every response to a statement or a question is a challenge, or a disagreement. Very often a post by someone else triggers associated ideas that seem worth posting merely because they might be interesting, or broaden the scope of the topic being discussed. It's hugely beneficial to consider many sides to an issue; one doesn't have to be partisan about it.

2. Disagreement is not the same as hostility. When someone doesn't share my view, that doesn't make him my enemy. Almost always (at least in the kind of discussions we tend to have here), anger is an inappropriate and misplaced response. That '24 hour rule' is a very, very helpful one in this respect. The post made in haste and in anger will almost certainly be an unhelpful and destructive one.


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> Erm ... this is not a "joke" thread ... In the context of the thread topic, I personally see no humor in what Daniel stated ... and I back him 100% ... he and I are a team and work very closely together here.


I agree. The purpose of this thread is to sooth tensions. And what, may I ask, can do that? In response to what this thread is meant to do, I believe humour is quite relevant.



> Yagan, you stated (in part) "ineptitude of moderating" in reference to using the ignore feature. Inept, defined means "Displaying a lack of judgment, sense, or reason; foolish". Now you find it necessary to verbally attack the forum Administration?


I'm not aware of any situation when the ignore feature is used, I'd never use it, I was critisising the 'feature' not you. 
If someone _does_ need to use the feature, either the person using has some problem accepting others, or the person who is being ignored should actually be banned. I don't see another option. I said that was my opinion, and I wasn't talking about you.



> The intent of the thread was to stress an important point, not start another argumentative discussion.


This is precicely why I made a joke, I see jokes as an antithesis to arguments...


----------



## JTech82

Yagan Kiely said:


> I agree. The purpose of this thread is to sooth tensions. And what, may I ask, can do that? In response to what this thread is meant to do, I believe humour is quite relevant.
> 
> I'm not aware of any situation when the ignore feature is used, I'd never use it, I was critisising the 'feature' not you.
> If someone _does_ need to use the feature, either the person using has some problem accepting others, or the person who is being ignored should actually be banned. I don't see another option. I said that was my opinion, and I wasn't talking about you.
> 
> This is precicely why I made a joke, I see jokes as an antithesis to arguments...


And yet he still continues to argue with the moderator....


----------



## Yagan Kiely

Well, I re-wrote my opinion of the ignore feature (hopefully any ambiguities leading to offensiveness have been ironed out), and I just pointed out why I think the joke was helpful to the situation. It's not my fault that I have a band of followers who just like to attack me rather than what I do. It wasn't an argument, because I didn't actually put forth an argument.

Jtech, same thing goes for you with what I said to E.Elgar.


----------



## Elgarian

Why don't we all agree to give jhar26 the last word in this thread:



jhar26 said:


> Not commenting on anyone in particular - we're probably all guilty of it every now and then, but I sometimes have the impression that people think that giving the last word to another poster is equal to 'admitting defeat.' But in reality it can just mean that you stand by what you have said in your previous post(s) and that you simply don't have anything more to add. Giving someone else the last word is not the same as admitting that you are wrong.


----------



## Krummhorn

No ... I would like to share some last words:



Yagan Kiely said:


> . . . I'm not aware of any situation when the ignore feature is used, I'd never use it, I was critisising the 'feature' not you.
> 
> If someone _does_ need to use the feature, either the person using has some problem accepting others, or the person who is being ignored should actually be banned. I don't see another option . . .


We don't either ... read on:



Yagan Kiely said:


> This is precicely why I made a joke, I see jokes as an antithesis to arguments...


Yagan ... antithesis defined: "The direct or exact opposite"

In the current situation that is seen by the forum management as an attempt to change the total meaning of Daniel's stern statement - It was not intended to be a joking matter ... as a forum administrator yourself, you should know that this type of action from a forum administrator is not a laughing matter.

Now, let's see you make a joke about this:

Good-bye, Yagan ...


----------



## Bach

Well that was slightly harsh - he obviously likes it here or else he wouldn't bother posting so much..


----------



## Guest

Krummhorn said:


> No ... I would like to share some last words:
> 
> Now, let's see you make a joke about this:
> 
> Good-bye, Yagan ...


Crikey KH you haven't banned him have you


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

Andante said:


> Crikey KH you haven't banned him have you


I believe he either did it or instructed someone to do it. And I find his final joke on this matter to be not just ungentle, but also, absolutely distasteful.

Enjoying the power, KH?


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

Krummhorn said:


> Yagan, you stated (in part) "ineptitude of moderating" in reference to using the ignore feature. Inept, defined means "Displaying a lack of judgment, sense, or reason; foolish". Now you find it necessary to verbally attack the forum Administration?


It should be accepted that in many cases forum moderators were, previously, just regular posters. The increasing activity requires an extension of the administrative staff, and it seems a very good idea to choose from the list of most active and respected forum members someone that can do the work. However, it could happen that _good posters_ were not supervisor material. And extending supervising privileges (and obligations) to such people will undeniably lead to an incorrectly moderated forum.

KH, it's quite clear many of us are not comfortable with your (latest) performance. You should not take this as personal attack, in my case (and I suppose it was Yagan's too) I am just making clear that I don't think you are up to the job.

On which grounds was YK banned? I can see he was very persistent on some discussions, not coherent in others, but it looks like his last comment on what he regards as ineptitude on your end triggered the ban.
Was it because he didn't believe this forum was well moderated? Should we (posters, members, those who make this forum *work*) refrain from making any comments at all on your performance?


----------



## Guest

I personally think that most of us are adult enough to handle what even the most argumentative posters dish out, however we need to abide by the rules particularly ad hom remarks, the problem is “IMHO” that it is easy for remarks to be taken the wrong way more so when posters are from all over the World, what is a joke in one Country is offensive in another, even a single word can have an entirely different impact, perhaps a sense of humour and a couple of deep breaths and the odd apology would help.


----------



## JTech82

I'm not really that surprised that Yagan was banned. This is not a joking matter and his "joke" was inappropriate given the circumstances.

Moderators have a job to do. They have to break up "fights" so to speak and I'm glad they exist, otherwise, there would be chaos. They bring order to the discussions. It's kind of like this: you're on a train. There's a kid sitting across the row from you. The kid keeps screaming and yelling and kicking his seat, bothering everybody on the train. Do you let that kid keep misbehaving or do you get an attendant to make the kid behave?

These moderators are simply just doing their jobs. I think the least we could do is do what they ask of us, which is be more considerate of other people and refrain from making things personal.


----------



## PostMinimalist

I guess throwing the kid off the train was not on the cards in the above example.

My own personal feelings are that banning Yagan was a bit harsh and even though I have had disagreements with him I felt he was at least an 'honest' participant in this forum. I had just finished yesterday saying to ChiTownPhilly (in a PM) how I thought tha Yagan would mellow and learn to channel his obvious knowledge and spirit constructively as he matures. Alas, we will not see this development.

I know he moderates a site for public domain printed music so, as has been said, he must have had some idea that his actions would result in a ban (I had warned him too). I feel that sometimes it's difficult to know were the joking ends and the time for austerity and severity begin (especially if you are a 20 year old Ozzie).

Just as an example of how even hardened diplomats get this wrong you should see the meeting between Hilary Clinton and the Russian Foreign Minister on the subject of Nuclear arms reduction. After a very formal discussion there was the official photo shoot and exchange of gifts. Hilary presented the very serious Russian statesman with a box, she opened it up in front of him and pulled out his 'gift' which was a plastic replica of the 'red button' as sold on the internet! I don't know what she was thinking but I'm sure if the Russians could ban her from their forum they would have done it there and then!

it was like this but I guess it said 'Nuke 'em!' not 'Panic'.










In my experience if Yagan were to return it should be as Yagan Keily with a more mellow, receptive attitude and not with some other screen name with the same problems, that helps no one.

FC


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

*Here... let me help:*



YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> Enjoying the power, KH?


Perhaps some words from the past are in order...


Daniel said:


> We cannot tolerate the behavior of provocation, personal accusations and attacks. *Every ban is not a pleasure for us, but a deep regret.* [Emphasis mine.] How often do we still have to remind you on our guideline?
> 
> *Guidelines for General Behavior*
> Be polite to your fellow members. If you disagree with them, please state your opinion in a >>civil<< and respectful manner.
> Do not post comments about another members' person or >>posting style<< on the forum (unless said comments are unmistakably positive). If you have any complaints about other users or their posts, please contact the staff directly (by private message) or use the >>report post<< function.


At juncture in the narrative, I'd like to make one further point.

*THE ADMINISTRATORS ARE NO LESS ENTITLED TO CIVIL AND RESPECTFUL DISCOURSE THAN ANY OTHER PARTCIPANTS IN THIS FORUM!* Of course, one may disagree with their decisions, but when one publicly questions their competency and their motives, we're stepping into the territory of "getting personal." If a person finds that he or she is unable to make their points without _getting personal_, please let me be so forward as to advise such users to take their rhetoric to the "private message" function, if at all.


YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> On what grounds was YK banned?


Persistent disregard for the guidelines of forum discussion would be my guess. I think it also bears saying that there likely were multiple warnings to the user prior to the action. There was at least one very public one in *post one* of this thread. I think I'm not exaggerating to say that it's the latest in a string of offenses. If looking at merely the latest event, the result appears obviously harsh... but I think the ol' "straw" and "camel's back" metaphor applies here.

I've said it before, the path regarding the forum's behavior guidelines may seem narrow, but it's *very well marked*. There are literally dozens of posters whose contributions I regularly enjoy- and their presence is proof that the Terms of Service guidelines are not an impediment to felcitous discourse. Occasionally, a person of considerable energy and knowledge will run afoul of the Terms of Service- and (to recycle another metaphor), the issue as to whether the roses of their knowledge are worth the thorns of their personality gets answered, in the negative.

Foe those who find the answer to the banning to be unsatisfying, let me allow the Administrator from the initial quotation have the last word, here:


Daniel said:


> We don't have to justify ourselves in front of you.


----------



## Bach

That's all very lovely and everything but I actually rather liked YK, a bit of inflammatory behavior makes the forum more interesting. I don't think he actually offended anyone. (I mean, what self respecting individual is really offended over the internet anyway)


----------



## Herzeleide

It's nice being able to breathe in the fresh forum air without Yagan polluting that air with his interminable and frequently ignorant and incomprehensible objections and general disputatious behaviour.


----------



## R-F

I liked Yagan too. I think it's a shame to see him banned.

He was arrogant, yes, but he had other qualities that in my opinion made him an excellent member of this forum. I think some people need to accept that there will always be people that don't agree with their views.


----------



## Rachovsky

I can see both sides of this argument. I've never saw Yagan say a statement that he meant to be taken jokingly until this thread. I don't even fully understand the 'that's what she said' joke. Was it in reply to "no more ad hominem attacks"? If so, I don't understand how that can be taken pervertedly, lol. What always confuses me is how argumentative he is on TalkClassical and how friendly and amiable he is on IMSLP. But I must say, I do think he tried and reconcile with some of his remarks on this thread. Whatever.


----------



## JTech82

Herzeleide said:


> It's nice being able to breath in the fresh forum air without Yagan polluting that air with his interminable and frequently ignorant and incomprehensible objections and general disputatious behaviour.


I couldn't agree more. All he did was argue and never really expressed any kind of interest in having a decent conversation with people.

His ban from this forum, while some my object, was a long time coming.


----------



## Mark Harwood

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herzeleide 
It's nice being able to breath in the fresh forum air without Yagan polluting that air with his interminable and frequently ignorant and incomprehensible objections and general disputatious behaviour. 

I couldn't agree more. All he did was argue and never really expressed any kind of interest in having a decent conversation with people.
His ban from this forum, while some my object, was a long time coming. 
JTech82

"Thank You" to the moderators for doing this.


----------



## Herzeleide

R-F said:


> I think some people need to accept that there will always be people that don't agree with their views.


'Some people' = everyone, 99% of the time, disagreeing even when wrong or only possessing a most superficial knowledge (or no knowledge) of the topic.


----------



## Rachovsky

Is the block effective for his entire IP address or just the name 'Yagan Kiely' ? 
Can he just create a new account (not that he would) and use it?


----------



## Krummhorn

For all interested parties:

The ban of Yagan was temporary ... call it a "cooling off" period if you will. Yagan will be allowed to return, at his option, towards the end of this week. 

Although good arguments are great for discussion, too many of them will tear down a great forum such as this in short order. Newbies visiting see all the negative things right away - too much negativity and the rather constant verbal attacks of other members is not healthy for any online forum. Our main purpose is to draw people into Classical music discussion, not keep them out. This forum is not a "social club" for a selected few - It was never intended to be such

The point is, is that this forum has certain posting guidelines for which the administration team (who are, btw, appointed by the site owner) is empowered, and expected, to enforce. When those very guidelines are contested, and the administration team is chided in the manner in which it was, there may be consequences in that type of action. 

We, the admin team, believe that there has been enough discussion on this matter. There is nothing further to debate on the issue at hand.


----------

