a final poll to decide this list's policy

[Jeremy Martin]

As I mentioned in a recent post, I have always assumed the L-OT list
to be loosely music related. In fact I wouldn't have a problem at all
with threads talking about politics *that directly relate to music*,
e.g. new laws that would effect the music industry in any way. IMHO
this just isn't the place for a general world history class, or even
for people to talk about the best chocolate chip cookie recipie
they've ever had. My mistake was thinking this was clear to everyone -
after this big issue came up I realized that "list philosphy" was
never said anywhere in big bold letters for all to read, so I can
understand why some of you didn't realize that's what was intended
for this list (by some of us at least).

The last poll is very inconclusive -- "yes" politics is only ahead
of "no" politics by 3 votes, but 3 people unsubscribed on the second
day of the big political thread who probably would have voted "no",
so IMO it's still extremely even. After discussing this with the
other admins, we've decided to let all of you vote on this issue to
decide.

The question is not just about politics: Does the Logic-OT list need
to stay somewhat focused on things related to music (not just music
production, but e.g. Dennis's interesting thread a while back about
Japanese music, etc.)... or should we allow all "way off topic"
subject at all to be posted here? The poll will conclude on October
27th, and we will go with whatever the majority of people vote for.

Also please note that *if* people vote to keep the list related to
music, we *will* create another list for Logic users to discuss
anything and everything they want, even if its way off topic. This
would save people uninterested in non-music-related threads from
having to sort through way off topic threads, and it would give
everyone interested in political or other way off topic subjects to
freely discuss them with other Logic users without any moderation at
all.

I'm creating the poll now, so you should receive another email right
after this one with the link to the poll.

All the best,
Jeremy Martin; sadus-4grdRRbp/***@public.gmane.org
http://www.carrollsweb.com/sadus

[kumpy105]

Post by Jeremy Martin
Also please note that *if* people vote to keep the list related to
music, we *will* create another list for Logic users to discuss
anything and everything they want, even if its way off topic. This
would save people uninterested in non-music-related threads from
having to sort through way off topic threads, and it would give
everyone interested in political or other way off topic subjects to
freely discuss them with other Logic users without any moderation at
all.

seems like a reasonable suggestion, but isn't that already
happening with the L-POL? there's just too little traffic here to
worry so much about it. Do you really want to moderate another
list besides the LUG? I guess you really like moderating. Why
not just go into Politics if you want to be a censor?

teddybut

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by kumpy105

Post by Jeremy Martin
Also please note that *if* people vote to keep the list related
to music, we *will* create another list for Logic users to
discuss anything and everything they want, even if its way off
topic.

seems like a reasonable suggestion, but isn't that already
happening with the L-POL? there's just too little traffic here to
worry so much about it. Do you really want to moderate another
list besides the LUG? I guess you really like moderating. Why
not just go into Politics if you want to be a censor?

L-POL was just a temporary solution so those of you who wanted to
continue the political talks could do so until we decided on this
issue. If people do vote for that option we'd probably create a
different list that's not specifically named after politics, such as
L-Pub or L-WOT (way off topic), something more generalized like that.

Even if people vote that way, this list would still stay unmoderated,
we would just ask people only to post music-related things here. We'd
re-moderate the list if we had to, e.g. if any huge way off topic
threads came up again, though hopefully it wouldn't come to that
again anytime soon.

Take it easy,
Jeremy

[mercutio]

Post by Jeremy Martin
The last poll is very inconclusive -- "yes" politics is only ahead
of "no" politics by 3 votes, but 3 people unsubscribed on the second
day of the big political thread who probably would have voted "no",
so IMO it's still extremely even. After discussing this with the
other admins, we've decided to let all of you vote on this issue to
decide.

Jeremy

I think you are probably well intended, but I urge you to re-read the
paragraph quoted above and reflect.

If you were a lawyer in court your supposition would be ruled out of
order. For example you are asserting facts not in evidence, which is to
say the opinions of people who did not vote, and who have not directly
communicated their opinions to the list.

Worse than that: you are assuming that any "unknown" is in favor of
moderation. This is not true. I can assert that quite easily: as your
logs will show - I did not cast a vote, yet it is clear to you and
everyone who reads the list that I am in favor of no moderation - where
does that figure in your equation? It is every bit as likely your
departees just don't have time for the list right now - I have left and
rejoined the LUG many times over the years - simply because for certain
periods I have lost interest or had too heavy a workload to keep up.

I trust that you will understand that when someone like myself reads
what you have written - certain bells start ringing - bells that sound
suspiciously like Richard Nixon invoking the "silent majority" - or
some other similar spin.

In any case a poll that shows maybe a dozen or so people interested in
moderation out of a 600+ membership does not sound like a ringing
endorsement to me.

More so now than at any other time - you should try to keep an open
mind. Please don't try and twist the facts to support your obvious
preconceptions.

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by mercutio

Post by Jeremy Martin
The last poll is very inconclusive -- "yes" politics is only ahead
of "no" politics by 3 votes, but 3 people unsubscribed on the
second day of the big political thread who probably would have
voted "no", so IMO it's still extremely even. After discussing
this with the other admins, we've decided to let all of you vote
on this issue to> decide.

I think you are probably well intended, but I urge you to re-read
the paragraph quoted above and reflect. <snip>
More so now than at any other time - you should try to keep an open
mind. Please don't try and twist the facts to support your obvious
preconceptions.

Regardless of the outcome of the last poll, the current one to decide
the list policy is much broader in scope. What I think about the
politics poll has little to do with the outcome of the current poll
(especially when I only have 1 vote like the rest of you), about
whether or not to have the official L-OT list policy ask people to
stay focused on issues that (more or less) somehow relate to music
here..

Jeremy

[Obliviän | Bacteria AS]

Post by Jeremy Martin
Regardless of the outcome of the last poll, the current one to decide
the list policy is much broader in scope. What I think about the
politics poll has little to do with the outcome of the current poll
(especially when I only have 1 vote like the rest of you), about
whether or not to have the official L-OT list policy ask people to
stay focused on issues that (more or less) somehow relate to music
here..

But don't you think this list will stay related to music naturally? There
are so few threads in this user group that isn't related to music or Logic
anyway. Before the last political thread (Palestine vs Israel), how long ago
wasn't the previous one? For what I can recall it was way back in September
2001. Let's stop this arguing wether this list should be moderated or not.
The lists history shows that it doesn't need to be. I think it is a
significant point that when we received complaints about our political
thread we stopped. We really did. I think that shows that the users of this
list are indeed very capable of moderating themselves. Uninterresting
threads die out naturally anyway.

Obi

[Jeremy Martin]

Well "moderators," I sure don't know how you're going to decide
what's "related to music" and what isn't. As far as I'm
concerned, everything in life is "related to music." Or, "Music
is life, the rest is details." However, in regards to what
started this "debate," Waves plugs are made in Israel, at one
point on another list, a boycott was suggested, not in support
of Palestinians, but in protest of the Israeli government's
recent actions against other human beings. I thought about it,
and decided to postpone my purchase of the Waves Bundle.

IMO this was on topic, since you're talking about Waves.

We just had the American Congress give our "President"
unprecedented power to make a preemptive strike on another
sovereign nation, while our economy is in shambles, partly
because people are more concerned with an impending "war"
than creating work, or creating anything, for that matter.
Then, we find out that another country, North Korea, has had
nukes in the oven for some time and our "President" knew that
a full 2 weeks before Congress voted to give him his requested,
unprecedented "power." A secret his administration kept until
after the vote, events certainly worthy of at least a 3 chord
Folk Song, recorded in Logic Audio Platinum.

IMO this does not have anything to do with music.. I know you
disagree, but why? I just don't see how this has anything to do with
music. Sure, it might inspire you to write some a new song or
something, but how does discussing this with everyone relate to
music?

Obliviän writes

But don't you think this list will stay related to music
naturally? There are so few threads in this user group that
isn't related to music or Logic anyway. Before the last
political thread (Palestine vs Israel), how long ago wasn't
the previous one? For what I can recall it was way back in
September 2001. Let's stop this arguing wether this list
should be moderated or not. The lists history shows that it
doesn't need to be. I think it is a significant point that
when we received complaints about our political thread we
stopped. We really did. I think that shows that the users of
this list are indeed very capable of moderating themselves.
Uninterresting threads die out naturally anyway.

Well first, we wouldn't be "moderating" the L-OT list like the LUG is
moderated. People could still writes messages and they would be sent
out to everyone without having to be approved by a moderator. We
could just keep an eye on the list and step in if things got out of
hand again. Moderating the entire list would be a last resort only
used when things get "nasty", *if* that happens again.

Second, unfortunately the political thread was only stopped because
the list became moderated. There were many replies sent after it
became moderated, and those replies would have generated even further
replies if they had been posted to everyone. I'm sure the thread
would have died out eventually, but if it only dies out after dozens
of people unsubscribe in disgust, I really don't think that's a good
solution.

As you pointed out, way off topic threads like this don't come up
very often at all, so I doubt we would have to stop in very often at
all, since the majority of the time list members do "behave
themselves" just fine.

Cheers
Jeremy

[mercutio]

Post by Jeremy Martin
As you pointed out, way off topic threads like this don't come up
very often at all, so I doubt we would have to stop in very often at

Exactly. So just let the OT list go its merry way.

Don't the "admin" people have enough to do keeping the main LUG on the
straight and narrow?

[kumpy105]

Post by Jeremy Martin
but if it only dies out after dozens
of people unsubscribe in disgust, I really don't think that's a good
solution.

ya, but you don't know that they unsubscribed in disgust. that
was the point. Some people, like me, unsub when they have too
much work to read this list, and then come back when there's
something relevant.

teddybut

[Jeremy Martin]

Well now Jeremy, now that you have crossed swords with
Dennis. How does it feel to be a true member of the LUG.

I hope this doesn't mean I have to start masturbating too

maybe if you started, you would release your negative
energy and not feel the need to control us 7 rebels.

Doubt it would change much.. I do live with my girlfriend ;-b

but if it only dies out after dozens
of people unsubscribe in disgust, I really don't think
that's a good solution.

ya, but you don't know that they unsubscribed in disgust. that
was the point. Some people, like me, unsub when they have too
much work to read this list, and then come back when there's
something relevant.

As I mentioned before, no one had unsubscribed for weeks before that.
I seriously doubt it was just a coincidence that 3 people
unsubscribed on the second or third day of the huge political
thread... though yes, of course we don't know why they left with 100%
certainty. I could look up their email addresses if you if you felt
like asking them?

As you pointed out, way off topic threads like this don't
come up very often at all, so I doubt we would have to
stop in very often at

Exactly. So just let the OT list go its merry way.

Yes, that's one of the options in the poll. The other is to let the
list go on its merry way but remind it when necessary to keep focused
on the issues the majority of the active list members want to hear
about, preventing any personal/ethnic attacks etc. All of our other
mailing lists have a clearly defined purpose, though this list's
definition is very ambiguous right now. The whole point of the poll
is to find out what the majority of active list members think the
list policy should be.

Don't the "admin" people have enough to do keeping the main
LUG on the straight and narrow?

Now that we have a full 8 people helping out over there, the
individual work load is much bearable. Not many (if any) of the other
admins actively modreate this list anyway.

Best regards,
Jeremy

[Bob Lowen]

Jeremy,

I wanted to cast my vote. Went to the url you gave. No go. Not a
member. After a lot of red tape, registered. Went to the page of L-OT
to find out I don't belong to that group?? Been receiving emails from
it from the beginning, but oh well. Became a member of that group to
find out it apparently has no current poll going. What's going on or
what am I doing wrong?

Cheers, Bob.

[Jeremy Martin]

I wanted to cast my vote. Went to the url you gave. No go. Not > a

member. After a lot of red tape, registered. Went to the

page of L-OT to find out I don't belong to that group?? Been
receiving emails from it from the beginning, but oh well.
Became a member of that group to find out it apparently has no
current poll going. What's going on or what am I doing wrong?

You are subscribed to the list ok, but you don't have a YahooID
associated with your email address. You will need go create a new
Yahoo ID (just go to http://groups.yahoo.com and click "Sign In" then
there should be a link to create a new free account). Part of the
process will ask you what your email address is. Put in your current
one, and it should be able to automatically detect which YahooGroups
lists you are already subscribed to. *Then* you'll be able to vote.

Also be sure to edit your marketing preferences so Yahoo doesn't try
to send you advertisements through email. Once you create your
YahooID, go into Account Info (should be a link to it at the top of
any Yahoo Groups web page) and then click Edit My Marketing
Preferences. Turn all that stuff to "off" or "no". Let me know if you
have any troubles doing this.

Best wishes,
Jeremy

[Dennis Gunn]

Post by Jeremy Martin
As I mentioned before, no one had unsubscribed for weeks before that.
I seriously doubt it was just a coincidence that 3 people
unsubscribed on the second or third day of the huge political
thread... though yes, of course we don't know why they left with 100%
certainty. I could look up their email addresses if you if you felt
like asking them?

Watch how many leave when they know that censorship will be the policy.

[Hector]

from Jeremy.

Post by Dennis Gunn

Post by Jeremy Martin
As I mentioned before, no one had unsubscribed for weeks before that.
I seriously doubt it was just a coincidence that 3 people
unsubscribed on the second or third day of the huge political
thread... though yes, of course we don't know why they left with 100%
certainty. I could look up their email addresses if you if you felt
like asking them?

Watch how many leave when they know that censorship will be the policy.

God! you make such a drama, Dennis. Jeremy has already said that in the
proposed new system, on a day to day basis the L-OT list will not be
moderated. Only occasional threads being moved to a L-WOT list. I get
the distinct impression that you are twisting and exaggerating to support
your argument. Censorship is a very strong word and completely unjustified
in this case, as the posts would still be available, just elsewhere.

Hector.

[Dennis Gunn]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by kumpy105
ya, but you don't know that they unsubscribed in disgust. that
was the point. Some people, like me, unsub when they have too
much work to read this list, and then come back when there's
something relevant.

As I mentioned before, no one had unsubscribed for weeks before that.
I seriously doubt it was just a coincidence that 3 people
unsubscribed on the second or third day of the huge political
thread...

If I had left because being censored pissed me off then would I have
been counted as the fourth person in your calculation?

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by Dennis Gunn

Post by Jeremy Martin
As I mentioned before, no one had unsubscribed for weeks before
that. I seriously doubt it was just a coincidence that 3 people
unsubscribed on the second or third day of the huge political
thread...

If I had left because being censored pissed me off then would I
have been counted as the fourth person in your calculation?

Nope. Straight from the logs:

10/14/2002 12:58 pm st-OewI/KJbhT6sTnJN9+***@public.gmane.org Unsubscribe by amusaic
<st-OewI/KJbhT6sTnJN9+***@public.gmane.org> via web
10/15/2002 2:11 pm simon.mailliot-hey5j9xm3712KvL4dXO/***@public.gmane.org Unsubscribe via email
10/15/2002 3:50 pm anarkistos-***@public.gmane.org Unsubscribe by anarkistos
<anarkistos-***@public.gmane.org> via web

10/17/2002 9:34 am Edited group policies by s6a9d6u9s
<sadus-W1WbbPd4oPPp6HGS4gIZaAC/***@public.gmane.org>
(this is where I moderated the group)

[Hector]

Post by Dennis Gunn
If I had left because being censored pissed me off then would I have
been counted as the fourth person in your calculation?

Nobody is suggesting complete censorship, just moving some posts to an L-WOT
list.

Hector.

[mercutio]

Post by Hector
Nobody is suggesting complete censorship, just moving some posts to an L-WOT
list.

Because it will inevitably arise that some thread will be moved over
there - sparking again the debate.

Because this list serves as an "safety valve" outlet for the main LUG -
and functions quite well for that.

Because it would be just as easy or perhaps easier to create a "L-OT
Moderated" list for those who wish to have their email vetted before it
sullies their hard drive (all 13 of them) and leave this list alone.

Because the principle at stake here is this: do individuals accept the
responsibility for what they read or don't read? or do they ask someone
else to make the decision for them?

[Dennis Gunn]

Post by Hector
from Jeremy.

Post by Dennis Gunn

Post by Jeremy Martin
As I mentioned before, no one had unsubscribed for weeks before that.
I seriously doubt it was just a coincidence that 3 people
unsubscribed on the second or third day of the huge political
thread... though yes, of course we don't know why they left with 100%
certainty. I could look up their email addresses if you if you felt
like asking them?

Watch how many leave when they know that censorship will be the policy.

God! you make such a drama, Dennis.

I am constantly amazed at how people make so much of undramatic
statements. I made a straight one line observation that did not
contain a single adjective and that is called dramatic.

Post by Hector
Jeremy has already said that in the
proposed new system, on a day to day basis the L-OT list will not be
moderated. Only occasional threads being moved to a L-WOT list. I get
the distinct impression that you are twisting and exaggerating to support
your argument. Censorship is a very strong word and completely unjustified
in this case, as the posts would still be available, just elsewhere.
Hector.

Jeremy has been censoring people's posts and I am not just talking
about mine. And he has said he is proud to be a censor. More than
one person on this list has told me personally that they probably
won't be hanging around if that is the policy and I am not too sure I
will either. What exactly am I twisting or exaggerating. As far as
I know I am simply stating the facts in front of me.

It strikes me that we are entering the golden age of denial.

[Obliviän | Bacteria AS]

Post by Dennis Gunn
Jeremy has been censoring people's posts and I am not just talking
about mine. And he has said he is proud to be a censor. More than
one person on this list has told me personally that they probably
won't be hanging around if that is the policy and I am not too sure I
will either. What exactly am I twisting or exaggerating. As far as
I know I am simply stating the facts in front of me.

Further more, according to his Yahoo profile, Jeremy claims to be a prophet!
Now, that disqualifies any hint of an unbiased moderation in my ears! (I
hope he's not serious in his statement...?!?) I am sure he's joking, right
Jeremy?

[Obliviän | Bacteria AS]

Post by Obliviän | Bacteria AS

Post by Dennis Gunn
Jeremy has been censoring people's posts and I am not just talking
about mine. And he has said he is proud to be a censor. More than
one person on this list has told me personally that they probably
won't be hanging around if that is the policy and I am not too sure I
will either. What exactly am I twisting or exaggerating. As far as
I know I am simply stating the facts in front of me.

Further more, according to his Yahoo profile, Jeremy claims to be a prophet!
Now, that disqualifies any hint of an unbiased moderation in my ears! (I
hope he's not serious in his statement...?!?) I am sure he's joking, right
Jeremy?

I'd just like to point out that I meant this humorously... I don't think he
see himself as a prophet, litterarely. :)

[Orren Merton]

I'm back for more punishment. ;)

Post by Dennis Gunn
Jeremy has been censoring people's posts and I am not just talking
about mine. And he has said he is proud to be a censor.

I am also proud Jeremy is the censor. If he was not the censor, I probably
wouldn't be back here. I have total faith in Jeremy's censorship.

Interesting fact: I was one of the early extra moderators signed up for the LUG,
and I was also offered the "moderatorship" of the other Logic-oriented lists,
including this one. I thought this list was far too out of control to be the "logic
lounge" I would have hoped, and I saw that it would be more work than I had
time to do. Now that Jeremy has not only taken the job, but proven he's up to
the task, I think it's worth coming back to. Admittedly, at the moment it's mostly
posts about posting, but I think when that is over, this will be a far more
valuable, community-oriented place than it ever was before.

Post by Dennis Gunn
More than
one person on this list has told me personally that they probably
won't be hanging around if that is the policy and I am not too sure I
will either.

Ok, here's my take on things, as simply as I can put it:
1) I'd like a "logic lounge" where I can hang out with other Logic users, and
chat.
2) I don't want to read self-oppointed political experts vomit forth their
"wisdom" in a Logic Lounge.
3) I don't want to read self-appointed computer experts tell me that Apple
sucks, my Mac sucks, and I suck for using one.
4) I want to be comfortable that 2 and 3 won't be allowed to slip through.
5) I feel that anyone finds it so distasteful that they need to contain their
hateful, confrontational posts that they threaten to leave...well, I'm not sure
their antisocial poison is really necessary.

My personal take on things is that people who post hateful diatribes (on
anything--people, regions, computer systems, etc) should be banned. And
trust me, if I were a moderator of this group (and you never know...I might just
be one day :) ), I'd be a censoring, banning motherfucker. And after all the
defections of those who resent being taken to task for their hatred, those of us
left would be a rather pleasant group, able to discuss our likes and dislikes
and uses of Logic regardless of our personal or political backgrounds.

Post by Dennis Gunn
It strikes me that we are entering the golden age of denial.

I think it is denial to think that people are capable of conducting themselves
properly in complete anarchy. There must be order of some sort. These lists
are not a democracy. They are an "oligarchy" (rule by the few). Anyone who
doesn't like it, start your own! My God, yahoo groups is an easy place to start
a list; someone doesn't like the way this list is run, take your own initiative,
don't badger Jeremy for his!

But just a story some of you may know: one of the engineers on the motu-mac
list got so upset with the Moderator of said list for his censorship, he started
his own list, motu-masters. That list ended up being even MORE tightly
controlled!

Peace, Love, and Marshmellows,
The Lord Of Wolves

http://www.darkling.com

[mercutio]

Post by Orren Merton
My personal take on things is that people who post hateful diatribes (on
anything--people, regions, computer systems, etc) should be banned. And
trust me, if I were a moderator of this group (and you never know...I might just
be one day :) ), I'd be a censoring, banning motherfucker.

I am not interested in such diatribes either.

But I find it strange, even disturbing that you would feel competent to
prevent me from making my own decision regarding any post.

Posts I do not wish to read I trash. Those I wish to read I read.

I have no assurance whatsoever that you would make the same decisions
for me as I would make for myself.

Therefore I decline the service you offer, however well intended.

[Orren Merton]

Post by mercutio
I have no assurance whatsoever that you would make the same decisions
for me as I would make for myself.

Ideally, there would be a Logic-OT Rules document available and
automatically posted at some interval which outlines explicitly what the
guidelines and parameters for acceptable posts are. This document would
take much (not all, of course) of the guesswork out of eliminating posts or
posters. It would also allow any moderator who does reject posts or ban
individuals to cite a specific rule as the reason why, so even if the poster
objected, there would be an obvious reason for it rather than the whim of the
specific moderator.

Orren

[mercutio]

Post by Orren Merton
Ideally

I think we should agree to disagree

:-)

[Dennis Gunn]

Orren writes

Post by Orren Merton
2) I don't want to read self-oppointed political experts vomit forth their
"wisdom" in a Logic Lounge.
3) I don't want to read self-appointed computer experts tell me that Apple
sucks, my Mac sucks, and I suck for using one.

Orren you are a big computer literate boy. You know how to use the
delete button. You know how to use filters. Right?

Post by Orren Merton
4) I want to be comfortable that 2 and 3 won't be allowed to slip through.
5) I feel that anyone finds it so distasteful that they need to contain their
hateful, confrontational posts that they threaten to leave...well, I'm not sure
their antisocial poison is really necessary.

Am I hateful antisocial poison. I know there are people who see me
that way but I don't.

Post by Orren Merton
My personal take on things is that people who post hateful diatribes (on
anything--people, regions, computer systems, etc) should be banned. And
trust me, if I were a moderator of this group (and you never
know...I might just
be one day :) ), I'd be a censoring, banning motherfucker. And after all the
defections of those who resent being taken to task for their hatred, those of us
left would be a rather pleasant group, able to discuss our likes and dislikes
and uses of Logic regardless of our personal or political backgrounds.

All one of you.

Post by Orren Merton

Post by Dennis Gunn
It strikes me that we are entering the golden age of denial.

I think it is denial to think that people are capable of conducting themselves
properly in complete anarchy. There must be order of some sort. These lists
are not a democracy. They are an "oligarchy" (rule by the few). Anyone who
doesn't like it, start your own! My God, yahoo groups is an easy place to start
a list; someone doesn't like the way this list is run, take your own initiative,
don't badger Jeremy for his!

If I recall the DAW went for years with *no* moderation. Anyway in
the real world complete anarchy is dangerous. In the small virtual
confines of a single mailing list it is no danger to anyone.

[Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs]

A fairly unreliable friend of mine told me that Charlie Mingus once said
that "talking about music was like dancing about architecture ".
I'm ready to be corrected and all but I do like that quote .
Hey didn't Kool miss out on a hoot ,the group was on fire. If any
sado\masochist's got the whole thread they should send it to him . Like I
thought when I was trying to get off the real logic list .. it was like
Hotel California .. you can check out any time you like but you can never
leave .
Paul

[plaarg]

Post by Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs
A fairly unreliable friend of mine told me that Charlie Mingus

once said

Post by Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs
that "talking about music was like dancing about architecture ".
I'm ready to be corrected and all but I do like that quote .

Stravinsky said that first. probably Mingus liked it and also said it.
plaarg

[Orren Merton]

Post by Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs
A fairly unreliable friend of mine told me that Charlie Mingus once said
that "talking about music was like dancing about architecture ".
I'm ready to be corrected and all but I do like that quote .

It is a great quote. :)

I don't know where it originated, but I first heard it out of Angelina Jolie's
mouth in a warm and wonderful film called "Playing By Heart." I bought the
film on DVD I loved it so much. And not just for that line. ;) It also has a great
soundtrack, modern songs, but often obscure ones, really appropriate for the
scenes they were used.

Orren

[Tony Perretta]

Post by Orren Merton

Post by Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs
A fairly unreliable friend of mine told me that Charlie Mingus once said
that "talking about music was like dancing about architecture ".
I'm ready to be corrected and all but I do like that quote .

It is a great quote. :)
I don't know where it originated, but I first heard it out of Angelina Jolie's
mouth in a warm and wonderful film called "Playing By Heart." I bought the
film on DVD I loved it so much. And not just for that line. ;) It also has a great
soundtrack, modern songs, but often obscure ones, really appropriate for the
scenes they were used.
Orren

I too first heard it there. It's a good movie - the Angelina Jolie/Ryan Philippe
scenes are fantastic.

Keeping this kinda on the topic of Logic I saw Traffic again on TV last night
(which is a truly great movie) and saw sPlAtTerCEll (or something like that)
with guitar credits. Good on ya mate. Funniest credit was for Flea which was
something like:

Bassius Maximus incredibilis - Flea

I was amused anyway

tONy pERRetTa

[Bob Lowen]

Hi all,

What a waste of time having to argue concerning the OT list. My
personal views on this are the following:

1. I often rather enjoy reading people's opinions about current
non-music topics, there are times I trash almost all the rest, simply
because no music related problems which interest me at that time are
being dealt with.

2. The number of way-OT emails on the OT list is very low compared to
music-related OT emails. In times of heavy way-OT load on the list,
if you want to trash these emails, then the total amount of time you
have to spend to do this probably is less then 15 seconds a day.

3. There are too many, in my opinion, respected and long standing
members of this list who regularly have interesting non-music related
discussions, for me to want to stop them from doing that, and neither
should the moderators.

4. The job of being a moderator is tough. These members, without a
doubt, are doing a great job and for this they deserve our thanks and
respect. However, having said this, it is also such that they do not
represent us, and as such they should not be making or changing list
policy unless there is a clear list-consensus. Unless a majority of
list members cast their vote, one can question whether the outcome
has any meaning at all.

In view of all this, and unless there is a majority vote against, I
would like the OT-list to remain completely free.

Not wanting to spend too much time on this, I typed the above
practically in one go. Sorry if there is any inconsistency, it is
just my gut feeling.

Cheers, Bob

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

I'm sure the thread would have died out eventually, but if it only
dies out after dozens of people unsubscribe in disgust, I really
don't think that's a good solution.

Pure speculation... The last big political thread was due to the
sept 11 attack, and I don't recall dozens of people unsubscribing.
And believe me, that one was a firestorm compared to the tiny spark
this last one was.

As you pointed out, way off topic threads like this don't come up
very often at all, so I doubt we would have to stop in very often at
all, since the majority of the time list members do "behave
themselves" just fine.

Wrong. "way off topic threads like this don't come up very often at
all" and that's _precisely_ the reason there *never* is the need to
step in. These threads die out by themselves. In a few days, or a
few weeks -- who cares?

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

Post by Jeremy Martin
Good point, but by that same logic: should we leave the list 100%
uncensored with an ambiguous list policy and let people talk about
whatever they want, because 7 people want it?

Yes. If 17 are pro-moderation and 13 are contra, and the other
570 apparently don't care, then I don't see how you'll ever
have a strong point in favour of moderation. Apparently the
status quo (= no moderation) is fine for the large majority out
there -- otherwise they would have voted.

Pure speculation... It's impossible to tell if they didn't vote
because they like the status quo, didn't vote because they don't
care, or didn't vote because they have abandoned their email
address / YahooID and don't pay attention at all to the list anymore.

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
This list has been around for years, and usually has been a
"happy place". At times a fight broke out, nobody got hurt,
most had a good time witnessing how some people got beat up
:-), and everybody was happy. Why in heaven's name do we
even have to *think* about this?

I'm afraid it's because too many people like debating/arguing as a
hobby. :-) Everyone was happy before because for quite a long time
this list remained focued all by itself. Everyone was *not* happy
when the huge political thread broke out, otherwise I wouldn't have
moderated the list.

Originally when I had to "break up" the politics thread I had
intended to unmoderate the list again as soon as it settled down.
There was so much argument pro and against censorship etc, and
because the 8 admins couldn't come to a conclusive decision, we
decided to leave it up to the group to decide via the second poll.
Yes, the most vocal side here are the people who do not wish for the
group to have any restrictions, but it would not be fair to the
people who voted *for* moderation to simply end the thread and let
your particular side gets its way. The others might not be speaking
out as frequently and loudly as the anti-censorship camp, but it
would not be fair to ignore their opionions either. Since we can't
please everyone in this situation it's only fair to please the
majority of active list members, not the ones who talk louded and
longest about this.

It's exactly because we didn't want to have to think about this
anymore, that the last poll was created to decide this by a simple
vote..

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
Wrong. "way off topic threads like this don't come up very
often at all" and that's _precisely_ the reason there *never*
is the need to step in.

When way off topic threads start becoming racist and personal attacks
are being made, we do have a very good reason to step in. No one
needs that, here or anywhere else.

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
These threads die out by themselves. In a few days, or a few
weeks -- who cares?

All the people who signed up for this list, thinking since it is
a "sister list" to the LUG and our other Emagic lists, topics
discussed here would be related to music...

Jeremy

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

Post by Jeremy Martin
Good point, but by that same logic: should we leave the list 100%
uncensored with an ambiguous list policy and let people talk about
whatever they want, because 7 people want it?

Yes. If 17 are pro-moderation and 13 are contra, and the other
570 apparently don't care, then I don't see how you'll ever
have a strong point in favour of moderation. Apparently the
status quo (= no moderation) is fine for the large majority out
there -- otherwise they would have voted.

Pure speculation... It's impossible to tell if they didn't vote
because they like the status quo, didn't vote because they don't
care, or didn't vote because they have abandoned their email
address / YahooID and don't pay attention at all to the list anymore.

A bit of elementary logic applied to your above quote:
If they like the status quo: keep the LOT unmoderated.
If they don't care: keep the LOT unmoderated.
If they don't even read the LOT and thus don't count: keep the LOT unmoderated.

How simple can it get?

Oh, sorry, that was intellectual arrogance, I suppose :-)

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
Wrong. "way off topic threads like this don't come up very
often at all" and that's _precisely_ the reason there *never*
is the need to step in.

When way off topic threads start becoming racist and personal attacks
are being made, we do have a very good reason to step in. No one
needs that, here or anywhere else.

Personal attacks: everyone here is mature enough to defend him/herself.
Racism: I didn't see any around last time I looked. Or is saying
that the Isreali government is a bunch of bastards because they keep
killing Palestinian children racist nowadays? The same could be said
about the Palestines btw... If that is racist, then I have some nice
racist remarks in store for you regarding one bastard president of
one very well know superpower...

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
These threads die out by themselves. In a few days, or a few
weeks -- who cares?

All the people who signed up for this list, thinking since it is
a "sister list" to the LUG and our other Emagic lists, topics
discussed here would be related to music...

"*All* the people"? Then quite a few posters here apparently don't
qualify as "people". Or did you mean "all the people who thought
this would be a music related list"? In that case: how many people
are we talking about? You don't know, and I don't either.

AFAI can see, it's not even the majority who cares...

[Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs]

Shouldn't it be possible for all the people outraged concerning some of our
opinions to still be able to censor their received mails by carefully
deciding who they didn't like and then in their mail rules send us straight
to the recycle bin as in using "FROM" .
They could make us into virtual non people without needing to try to bend
us to their will ,wouldn't that be nice for EVERYONE or isn't that the aim
of this thread .

P.S make the 'against' case up by one, I was unwilling to negotiate the
yahoo maze yet again ,who worked out their protocols I wonder ,I always
thought e groups was so much more user friendly .
Paul
sorry for the opinionated
diatribe but I just love my own words on the screen in front of me ,it's so
empowering .
do you think people who do hate see hate everywhere . I dissagree with
a lot of people here but [possibly thanks to our moderators] I dont think
Ive seen any hate mail on the list at all , maybe hate is another misused
word/phrase like R'n B and Rock and Roll

[Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs]

Hold on there mate , isn't this poll becoming a bit florida . You ran the
poll ,you got a CLEAR result ,and now you've decided that because the moon
wasn't in the ascendant and your cats getting twitchy the result was
inconclusive .
Well excuse me but are you aware of the basic principle of democracy ...
the bigger number wins ...thats it ...it's over .
Anyway this thread is Clearly not about music so by your own thinking
shouldn't you just moderate it to death and get on with things .
winners are grinners and a miss is
as good as a mile
thanks for the laughs
Paul

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs
Hold on there mate , isn't this poll becoming a bit florida .
You ran the poll ,you got a CLEAR result ,and now you've
decided that because the moon wasn't in the ascendant and
your cats getting twitchy the result was inconclusive .

It was clearly stated that the first poll would *not* set the list
policy. We admins wanted to gage how everyone felt on the issue.
After reading everyone's opinions and seeing it was so close, we
chose to let you all decide this by having another poll.

Please read over the poll questions. The first one (which clearly was
never to decide the policy; please re-read the messages in this list
around the time of its creation, I was very clear about that) was
*only* about politics. The second poll is much broader in scope, as
it's about any way off topic issue, not *just* politics. There is a
very distinct difference between the two polls.

Cheers
Jeremy

[Dennis Gunn]

Post by Jeremy Martin
It was clearly stated that the first poll would *not* set the list
policy.

So you do at least grasp the concept of masturbation (if not your own
tool) and advocate the practice.

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

Post by Jeremy Martin
Regardless of the outcome of the last poll, the current one to decide
the list policy is much broader in scope.

I think you missed the point of mercutio's post. The fact that the
last poll only attracted so very few voters and the fact that only 3
people unsubscribed (for undetermined reasons) indicates that most
L-OT'ers don't give a rat's *ss about political threads or not --
otherwise they would have voted.

What if this new poll gets 30 votes: 17 in favour of pure music-stuff
and 13 in favour of a free-for-all forum? Will that mean that the
L-OT will be moderated from then on? Because 17 out of 600 people
want it?

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

Post by Jeremy Martin
Regardless of the outcome of the last poll, the current one to
decide the list policy is much broader in scope.

I think you missed the point of mercutio's post. The fact that the
last poll only attracted so very few voters and the fact that only
3 people unsubscribed (for undetermined reasons) indicates that
most L-OT'ers don't give a rat's *ss about political threads or
not -- otherwise they would have voted.

Or they could all be receiving "no email", and might not even be
looking at the list *at all* anymore. Maybe we do only have 25 active
list members? If we ever purged our subscribers and had everyone
still active re-subscribe I'm sure our numbers in all groups would be
substantially less.

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
What if this new poll gets 30 votes: 17 in favour of pure music-
stuff and 13 in favour of a free-for-all forum? Will that mean
that the L-OT will be moderated from then on? Because 17 out of
600 people want it?

Good point, but by that same logic: should we leave the list 100%
uncensored with an ambiguous list policy and let people talk about
whatever they want, because 7 people want it?

Jeremy

[Spectro]

Post by Jeremy Martin
Or they could all be receiving "no email", and might not even be
looking at the list *at all* anymore. Maybe we do only have 25 active
list members? If we ever purged our subscribers and had everyone
still active re-subscribe I'm sure our numbers in all groups would be
substantially less.

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
What if this new poll gets 30 votes: 17 in favour of pure music-
stuff and 13 in favour of a free-for-all forum? Will that mean
that the L-OT will be moderated from then on? Because 17 out of
600 people want it?

I actually went to Yahoo, and couldn't find, remember or retrieve my
login/pass info. Being pretty busy until right now, I chose not to go through
the motions of creating *yet* another Yahoo account simply to submit a vote.
There are likely others in a similar situation (or have chosen to filter out
all email's with poll in the header ;)

FWIW I vote to allow *all* discussions, politics included.

S.
--

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by Spectro
I actually went to Yahoo, and couldn't find, remember or retrieve my
login/pass info. Being pretty busy until right now, I chose not to
go through the motions of creating *yet* another Yahoo account
simply to submit a vote. There are likely others in a similar
situation (or have chosen to filter out all email's with poll in
the header ;)
FWIW I vote to allow *all* discussions, politics included.

You don't have a YahooID associated with your email address either.
Please follow the same steps I outlined in my message to Bob. (
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/logic-ot/message/4772 )

Cheers
Jeremy

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

Post by Jeremy Martin
Regardless of the outcome of the last poll, the current one to
decide the list policy is much broader in scope.

I think you missed the point of mercutio's post. The fact that the
last poll only attracted so very few voters and the fact that only
3 people unsubscribed (for undetermined reasons) indicates that
most L-OT'ers don't give a rat's *ss about political threads or
not -- otherwise they would have voted.

Or they could all be receiving "no email", and might not even be
looking at the list *at all* anymore. Maybe we do only have 25 active
list members? If we ever purged our subscribers and had everyone
still active re-subscribe I'm sure our numbers in all groups would be
substantially less.

If that's true -- i.e. 25 active members -- then the vehement
opposition to moderation over the last days seems to indicate these
25 (or at least a large part of them) want the list to remain
unmoderated.
I think however that the above is some kind of sophistry: the fact
that there are not 9000 active posters in the LUG surely doesn't mean
that only some 100 people actually *read* the LUG? The same applies
here...

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
What if this new poll gets 30 votes: 17 in favour of pure music-
stuff and 13 in favour of a free-for-all forum? Will that mean
that the L-OT will be moderated from then on? Because 17 out of
600 people want it?

Good point, but by that same logic: should we leave the list 100%
uncensored with an ambiguous list policy and let people talk about
whatever they want, because 7 people want it?

Yes. If 17 are pro-moderation and 13 are contra, and the other 570
apparently don't care, then I don't see how you'll ever have a strong
point in favour of moderation. Apparently the status quo (= no
moderation) is fine for the large majority out there -- otherwise
they would have voted.

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

I think this is all getting a bit silly, with polls and all. There
was a discussion, okay, Jeremy stepped in and started moderating,
sort of okay, and then quite a few people protested against that,
again okay. There were actually only 2 or 3 people publicly
protesting the fact that there was a political thread going on. All
others either didn't care, or read with interest without contributing
(me), or got actively involved.
And now, because 2 or 3 complained, we have to make this into some
sort official policy-thing, with polls and more such nonsense?

This list has been around for years, and usually has been a "happy
place". At times a fight broke out, nobody got hurt, most had a good
time witnessing how some people got beat up :-), and everybody was
happy. Why in heaven's name do we even have to *think* about this?

If L-OT gets moderated I'll seriously consider unsubscribing. This
has always been one of the places where I could simply speak my mind
without having to give it much thought or without being too careful
about what I could or could not say. Of course there are political
lists out there, but they don't interest me. What interests me is
the ability to exchange ideas and have healthy fights now and then
with kindred spirits whom I've come to know and value in a different
context (i.e. the LUG). Some political discussion list will never
offer that.

cheers,
HJ, bored & annoyed by it all...

[Hector]

----- Original Message -----

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
If L-OT gets moderated I'll seriously consider unsubscribing. This
has always been one of the places where I could simply speak my mind
without having to give it much thought or without being too careful
about what I could or could not say. Of course there are political
lists out there, but they don't interest me.

Again, what drama! Why can you not accept that the worst that can happen to
a thread is it gets moved to a L-WOT list? Big deal. Would you really feel
that you had to unsubscribe from L-OT because of this?

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
What interests me is
the ability to exchange ideas and have healthy fights now and then
with kindred spirits whom I've come to know and value in a different
context (i.e. the LUG).

And you would still be able to, just occasionally on the L-WOT list.

The only thing you would have to think about when writing on the L-OT is
whether the topic is music related or not. How hard is that?

Hector.

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

Post by Hector

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
What interests me is
the ability to exchange ideas and have healthy fights now and then
with kindred spirits whom I've come to know and value in a different
context (i.e. the LUG).

And you would still be able to, just occasionally on the L-WOT list.
The only thing you would have to think about when writing on the L-OT is
whether the topic is music related or not. How hard is that?

Not very. It is however extremely redundant in my view. The L-OT is
very low traffic, WOT-arguments come up only once or twice a year,
and moderating such a list, or creating yet another list for these
occasions seems a bit bizarre to me.

Post by Hector
There is a simple way to see how many people actually want to read non-music
posts. Just set-up the L-WOT group and count how many people join it. I
will be suprised if it gets into double figures.

Alternate suggestion: create a L-NTMOT list (Logic, not too much off
topic) for those who object to the occasional non-music related
argument. Then count how many people join in. I will be suprised if
it gets into double figures.

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

Post by Jeremy Martin
Good point, but by that same logic: should we leave the list
100% uncensored with an ambiguous list policy and let people
talk about whatever they want, because 7 people want it?

Yes. If 17 are pro-moderation and 13 are contra, and the other
570 apparently don't care, then I don't see how you'll ever
have a strong point in favour of moderation. Apparently the
status quo (= no moderation) is fine for the large majority out
there -- otherwise they would have voted.

Pure speculation... It's impossible to tell if they didn't vote
because they like the status quo, didn't vote because they don't
care, or didn't vote because they have abandoned their email
address / YahooID and don't pay attention at all to the list
anymore.

If they like the status quo: keep the LOT unmoderated.
If they don't care: keep the LOT unmoderated.
If they don't even read the LOT and thus don't count: keep the LOT
unmoderated.

I agree with the first one, but if they don't care, or don't even
read the list and thus don't count, why not let the majority of
active list members who do care decide?

This list will *never* be unmoderated. Most of you probably haven't
noticed, but new memberships to this list require the approval of a
moderator. I noticed the vast majority of spammers have been using
very similar random email addresses, e.g. fdxljsadfkjasd-***@public.gmane.org
(they all contain the same exactly number of random characters, about
13 of them). I reject spammers trying to sign up here at least three
times a week, sometimes much more often. Do you really want me to
stop moderating in that sense and let the spammers have their way
with the list?

Or, if you mean by "unmoderated", that each message does not have to
be approved by an admin before being sent out to the list: as I
mentioned before, even if the majority of voters do want to keep
politics etc off of this list, we would still leave new messages
unmoderated and only step in if things got out of hand again. We
never intended to always moderate all new posts (like we do on the
LUG) if the majority of people voted for the first choice in the
poll.

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
These threads die out by themselves. In a few days, or a few
weeks -- who cares?

All the people who signed up for this list, thinking since it is
a "sister list" to the LUG and our other Emagic lists, topics
discussed here would be related to music...

"*All* the people"? Then quite a few posters here apparently
don't qualify as "people".

That is becoming more and more evident, about a few guys here at
least ;-) (j/k, and I'm not talking about you of course, Hendrik)

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
Or did you mean "all the people who thought
this would be a music related list"? In that case: how many people
are we talking about? You don't know, and I don't either.
AFAI can see, it's not even the majority who cares...

Here's a little more clarificatoin:

All the people who: (signed up for this list thinking, since it was
a "sister" list to the other Emagic lists, topics discussed here
would be related to music.)

But anyway, you did not ask "how many care" -- but "who cares." I was
just answering your question.

Best wishes,
Jeremy
http://www.carrollsweb.com/sadus

[mercutio]

Post by Jeremy Martin
Do you really want me to
stop moderating in that sense and let the spammers have their way
with the list?

Speaking for myself - I have already stated in a previous post that the
"moderators" do a fine job on spam patrol.

But of course this discussion is not about spam. It is about legitimate
list members having their posts disappear at the whim of the
"moderator". This is not acceptable.

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by mercutio

Post by Jeremy Martin
Do you really want me to
stop moderating in that sense and let the spammers have their way
with the list?

Speaking for myself - I have already stated in a previous post that
the "moderators" do a fine job on spam patrol.
But of course this discussion is not about spam. It is about
legitimate list members having their posts disappear at the whim of
the "moderator". This is not acceptable.

Big difference between "at the whim of a moderator", and "because
they do not follow the policy the majority of active users vote for"

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
If they like the status quo: keep the LOT unmoderated.
If they don't care: keep the LOT unmoderated.
If they don't even read the LOT and thus don't count: keep the LOT
unmoderated.

I agree with the first one, but if they don't care, or don't even
read the list and thus don't count, why not let the majority of
active list members who do care decide?

Sigh... there's no arguing with you... Sure, fine, have your way.

Post by Jeremy Martin
This list will *never* be unmoderated. Most of you probably haven't
noticed, but new memberships to this list require the approval of a
moderator.

[...]

Post by Jeremy Martin
Or, if you mean by "unmoderated", that each message does not have to

Jeremy, I'm very well aware of how this list is run. And if by now
you still don't understand what I mean when I say "unmoderated", then
I simply give up.

Post by Jeremy Martin
only step in if things got out of hand again.

For the record: this is what I and others object to. Esp. your
apparent criteria for what constitutes "out of hand" situations.

[Hector]

----- Original Message -----

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
I think you missed the point of mercutio's post. The fact that the
last poll only attracted so very few voters and the fact that only 3
people unsubscribed (for undetermined reasons) indicates that most
L-OT'ers don't give a rat's *ss about political threads or not --
otherwise they would have voted.

I suspect that most people, being fairly busy, quickly scan throught posts
looking for stuff of interest and delete the rest in bulk. A poll on list
policy is not of immediate interest and gets ignored. These same people,
being musicians on a music list, are probably looking for musically related
posts. They would also quite possibly appreciate a better signal to noise
ratio of musical/non-musical posts, even on a 'OT' list. I find it hard to
imagine people wanting more WOT postings.

People should be given the choice as to whether they should have to accept
downloading WOT posts just to get to the musical ones.

There is a simple way to see how many people actually want to read non-music
posts. Just set-up the L-WOT group and count how many people join it. I
will be suprised if it gets into double figures.

As long as the Logic groups are email lists rather than newgroups, members
are going to want rules to prevent people taking liberties with their
bandwidth.. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that
LUG/L-OT/Sounddiver/EXS are music lists and all topics should be musical.

How much effort is it for those few people who so badly want to talk WOT to
join the L-WOT group? Not much at all.

Hector.

[Obliviän | Bacteria AS]

Post by Hector

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
I think you missed the point of mercutio's post. The fact that the
last poll only attracted so very few voters and the fact that only 3
people unsubscribed (for undetermined reasons) indicates that most
L-OT'ers don't give a rat's *ss about political threads or not --
otherwise they would have voted.

I suspect that most people, being fairly busy, quickly scan throught posts
looking for stuff of interest and delete the rest in bulk. A poll on list
policy is not of immediate interest and gets ignored. These same people,
being musicians on a music list, are probably looking for musically related
posts. They would also quite possibly appreciate a better signal to noise
ratio of musical/non-musical posts, even on a 'OT' list. I find it hard to
imagine people wanting more WOT postings.

I can only speak for myself, but I have signed up and signed off both the
LUG and L-OT several times over the years. It is for no special reason other
than that sometimes I get bored of all the emails or it is of no use for me.
In fact (I know this is a very selfish approach, but please forgive me) I
filter all messages from both LUG or L-OT to go straight into the trashcan
unless I have something I need help with. I've been using Logic since 2.5
and there is really not much I need help with though... That said LUG has
been of great value of resource for me over the years. My point is, if I had
signed off LUG or L-OT it wouldn't have had anything to with the threads
other than that I was bored with all the emails, topics being Logic or
not...

[teddybut]

Post by Jeremy Martin
too many people like debating/arguing as a
hobby. :-) Everyone was happy before because for quite a long time
this list remained focued all by itself.

right.... sure Jeremy.

and now that you've stepped in you think it's more focused? on what? We are
now focused on YOU man.... this list sucks now because of your moderation.
Henrik is right in every way... please don't take away our place to chat and
talk and make us sign up for yet another list...

annoyed
teddybut

[Obliviän | Bacteria AS]

Post by teddybut
and now that you've stepped in you think it's more focused? on what? We are
now focused on YOU man.... this list sucks now because of your moderation.
Henrik is right in every way... please don't take away our place to chat and
talk and make us sign up for yet another list...

Teddy, don't get so personal, Jeremy was only doing what he thought was
right, a mistake in my view, but still I don't think we should turn against
him. And there are seven other moderators here, not just Jeremy. Forget
about the moderation in the first place, there were so many unclear factors
to consider that no matter how you view it, no one was right or wrong.

The only mistake I see now, is that this list is still being moderated.
That's completely un-necessary. Let's settle with this conclusion: Jeremy
was right to stop a discussion that got out of hand and we are right to
demand this list to be unmoderated further, now that things have settled.

Obi

[teddybut]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Dennis Gunn
If I had left because being censored pissed me off then would I
have been counted as the fourth person in your calculation?

10/17/2002 9:34 am Edited group policies by s6a9d6u9s
(this is where I moderated the group)

you didn't read what Dennis wrote apparently. you response is inadequate.

please try again.

thank you
teddybut

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by teddybut

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Dennis Gunn
If I had left because being censored pissed me off then would I
have been counted as the fourth person in your calculation?

10/17/2002 9:34 am Edited group policies by s6a9d6u9s
(this is where I moderated the group)

you didn't read what Dennis wrote apparently. you response is
inadequate. please try again.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. I did not moderate the list until
10/17. I only counted people who unsubscribed while the political
thread was still very active. Obviously since Dennis would not have
unsubscribed until after 10/17 his would not have been counted since
I only counted people who unsubscribed *before* some of you forced me
to step in.

Please quit trying to fuck with me. One single logical message such as
the ones Hendrik, Bob, etc have posted has much more of a chance to
make me change my mind (and thus my one small vote), than 10,000
insults.

Jeremy

[teddybut]

Post by Dennis Gunn

Post by Jeremy Martin
It was clearly stated that the first poll would *not* set the list
policy.

So you do at least grasp the concept of masturbation (if not your own
tool) and advocate the practice.

oh ya, that's what I like... the real OT. that comment is so right on it's
scary.

best,
teddybut

[teddybut]

Why are we still being moderated if we are not continuing the
Israel/Palestine topic? wasn't that the reason for the moderation?

teddybut

PS. there some new interesting polls for your consideration

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by teddybut
Why are we still being moderated if we are not continuing the
Israel/Palestine topic? wasn't that the reason for the moderation?

That's a good point. I'll unmoderate the list now. However you personally will remain moderated as less than 24 hours ago you posted more than 7 direct personal attacks which I had to reject.

Cheers
Jeremy

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by teddybut
PS. there some new interesting polls for your consideration

This is only one of the 5 Emagic lists I am the head admin of, and I
would like to remind you that I have no obligation to let you continue
your memberships. So far I have been able to resist banning you but I'm
not sure how much longer I'll be able to if you continue with your jokes.
I have no reason to take this shit from you and I can't think of a faster
way to put an end to it. And no, I'm not thinking of banning you because
of your opinion about the "censorship" issue, but because of your personal
insults to me and to others. I don't want to have to ban you, but I
gladly will if you continue to make insults. Feel free to write
whatever you want about the moderating issues but further insults
will not be tolerated. This is your warning.

Take it easy.
Jeremy

[Obliviän | Bacteria AS]

Post by teddybut
Why are we still being moderated if we are not continuing the
Israel/Palestine topic? wasn't that the reason for the moderation?

We are not being moderated anymore. Case closed.

[teddybut]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by teddybut
Why are we still being moderated if we are not continuing the
Israel/Palestine topic? wasn't that the reason for the moderation?

That's a good point. I'll unmoderate the list now. However you personally will
remain moderated as less than 24 hours ago you posted more than 7 direct
personal attacks which I had to reject.
Cheers
Jeremy

thank you, thank you, oh great one.

see it's a lot of work for you to moderate this insanity. why bother?

those personal attacks were only meant to make to make you realize how
futile this crusade of your's is. And how much work it would be for you if I
acted like a "retart" all the time and you had to constantly moderate me. of
course I did not succeed in changing your mind. of course, you also deleted
the only message where I obeyed your "rule"... sigh

teddybut

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by teddybut
those personal attacks were only meant to make to make you realize
how futile this crusade of your's is. And how much work it would be
for you if I acted like a "retart" all the time and you had to
constantly moderate me. of course I did not succeed in changing
your mind. of course, you also deleted the only message where I
obeyed your "rule"... sigh

Hmm, I know you mentioned before you thought the last one was "ok",
but they all seemed like very close variations on the same theme and
it didn't seem like even the last one was a non-personal-attack. Do
you mind reposting the last one again and I'll take a closer look at
it?

Thanks
Jeremy

[kumpy105]

Post by Jeremy Martin
Hmm, I know you mentioned before you thought the last one

was "ok",

Post by Jeremy Martin
but they all seemed like very close variations on the same

theme and

Post by Jeremy Martin
it didn't seem like even the last one was a non-personal-attack. Do
you mind reposting the last one again and I'll take a closer look at
it?
Thanks
Jeremy

not worth my time anymore to go back and help you unmoderate
me, sorry. It was a test. I didn't think you'd actually read them all
as they were so similar (except the last one).

teddybut

[teddybut]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by teddybut
PS. there some new interesting polls for your consideration

This is only one of the 5 Emagic lists I am the head admin of, and I
would like to remind you that I have no obligation to let you continue
your memberships. So far I have been able to resist banning you but I'm
not sure how much longer I'll be able to if you continue with your jokes.
I have no reason to take this shit from you and I can't think of a faster
way to put an end to it. And no, I'm not thinking of banning you because
of your opinion about the "censorship" issue, but because of your personal
insults to me and to others. I don't want to have to ban you, but I
gladly will if you continue to make insults. Feel free to write
whatever you want about the moderating issues but further insults
will not be tolerated. This is your warning.
Take it easy.
Jeremy

thanks for the warning. I appreciate you not banning me without one. I will
cease and desist with my attacks on you and others.

teddybut

[Alexis Aiosa]

Post by teddybut

Post by Jeremy Martin
too many people like debating/arguing as a
hobby. :-) Everyone was happy before because for quite a long time
this list remained focued all by itself.

right.... sure Jeremy.
and now that you've stepped in you think it's more focused? on what?
We are
now focused on YOU man.... this list sucks now because of your
moderation.
Henrik is right in every way... please don't take away our place to
chat and
talk and make us sign up for yet another list...
annoyed
teddybut

Jeremy and teddybut,

LOL...sorry I couldn't help but laugh as soon as I read this.
Jeremy...LOL...teddybut has got point man. Sorry. But truth be known,
we are debating censorship, which basically says, it's
censorship....LOL.

Jeremy, you've full right to censor the LUG, you don't really have
censor L-OT, really. Barely are the polls are in the favor of the MOD
team. Let it go. Control just ain't that important. Beside that,
it'll ruin the fun to not be able to talk about Britney Spears Ass.

This symbol "-" is known as a dash. The dash symbolizes from something
"to" something else. Logic - OT. Logic to off topic.

masturbated, showered and feel very reeeeelllllaaaaxxxxed.
Alexis

[kumpy105]

Hello all OT people,

After this email I am officially quitting this conversation. I value
being able to use the LUG and all it's accosiated lists and don't
want to be banned.

I've suggested to Jeremy the follwing:

setup an OT-DAW list

Divert non music, or music study/theory related posts here,
where the terminology makes sense, L-OT (completely)

the messages that have to do with other software, hardware not
made by emagic, etc... music DAW related, can go to the new
OT-DAW list.

I think that's a good comprimise. Maybe you could add that
option to the poll, Jeremy, to be fair and not one sided. I just wish
you, Jeremy, had thought of it sooner and not made so much out
of the moderation thing. It really did seem one sided on your part.
The admins should be like invisible angels who do what's best
for us without riling us, and therefore alienating themselves.
Taking sides from admins is asking for trouble IMHO.

The only reason some of us got pissed off at Jeremy, IMHO, is
because our free speech was being threatened, deleted and
censored. That is just about the most offensive thing you can do
to someone who is in the middle of expressing themselves
politically. Some people who didn't want to read the political
messages complained. Fair enough. That deserves to be
addressed. If the complainers had been accommodated
immediately and quietly in the background, with gentle authority,
we would have never missed a beat in our political discussion
and, I believe it would have had less impact on our discourse
here.

I've said enough,
teddybut

[T***@public.gmane.org]

Post by Jeremy Martin
That's a good point. I'll unmoderate the list now. However you personally
will remain moderated as less than 24 hours ago you posted more than 7
direct personal attacks which I had to reject.

So personal attacks are no longer allowed? Since when has there been this
change in policy? Man, this list is going to lose a lot of its excitement
without the nasty personal battles to spice things up.

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by T***@public.gmane.org

Post by Jeremy Martin
That's a good point. I'll unmoderate the list now. However you personally
will remain moderated as less than 24 hours ago you posted more than 7
direct personal attacks which I had to reject.

So personal attacks are no longer allowed? Since when has there been this
change in policy? Man, this list is going to lose a lot of its excitement
without the nasty personal battles to spice things up.

This has always been the policy on all of Emagic-ish lists (Logic-users,
Logic-TDM, Logic-OT, EXS-users, SoundDiver-users) as far as I know.

Best wishes,
Jeremy Martin; sadus-4grdRRbp/***@public.gmane.org
http://www.carrollsweb.com/sadus

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[T***@public.gmane.org]

Can we drop this boring moderation thread and get back to the personal
insults and hot political talk? Jeremy surely must have more important things
to do than to spend so much energy policing the free speech of a bunch of
adults. Here is a simple rule for moderation ... if the comments appear to be
a criminal threat, that person is moderated. Otherwise, lets talk.

And there are more things to talk about politically than ever. Impending war
in Iraq. The ongoing tragedy in Palestine. Afganistan. The world economy.
Terrorism. Bushism.

And oh yeah.. music!

[Richmond, James (James) ** CTR **]

Post by Jeremy Martin
I agree with the first one, but if they don't care, or don't even
read the list and thus don't count, why not let the majority of
active list members who do care decide?

Exactly.

Here in the UK. If you don't vote then bad luck.
If labour are voted out because all the labour voters didn't vote for
whatever reason, the govt cant say 'well all the people that didn't vote
were labour voters therefore we won' now do they.

Anyway, all this is starting to get very, very boring.

I am unsubbing for a while.

The last music related post was a bloody long time ago.
I'd give you an actual date if I could but too many political posts, too
many list admin posts make it impossible to tell.
I know I could set up filters but as people keep changing the heading,
and I already have about 40 rules running it really isnt worth it.

FWIW I voted to moderate the list not because I want to infringe on
anyones right to freedom of speech, but because I'd rather have people
talk politics on a political list.
I don't expect people to start talking logic mixing techniques on a
political list. But that is just me.

I know people have their objections to this- but if you were in a
restaurant discussing logic with a large group of people and two or
three started talking over everyone else about politics would it not
annoy you a bit?
It did me.
So I'm going to go to another restaurant.
Yay for the stupid analogy.

Bye for a while.

James Richmond

[Alexis Aiosa]

Why Jeremy Can Censor
I'm back for more punishment. ;)

I am gearing up for it Orren. I stand by HK's words, he seems to be
exercising his right to be voiced and sounds as logical and rational as
I would like to be. Henrik so far has made the strongest CASE.
Really...and I hope that Jeremy can see that and at least take that
into consideration. Cause neither has anybody effectively made a
strong case...not you, not Jeremy, not Dennis...Just Henrik.

Yet at this point...after reading what you just posted I am seriously
concerned with idea of putting you in a position as a moderator.
Jeremy is working with much more a level head than you are...at this
moment. Despite his frustration of being ridden a little to hard by
others. As far as I am concerned, you shouldn't be moderating at all.
You need to step away from the computer and perhaps go drinking with
some friends...because your diatribe has left me with a strong distaste
than anything else that was said here. Really, it is quite disturbing
what you wrote...more disturbing than anything...and I've read Poe. I
think you need to step down from being mod right now...literally step
down from the podium and let others do the job. Cause you my friend
are tittering on the brink of losing it. It shows...you might as well
being writing your memoirs in a little black book while drinking Lodnum
and eating datura leaves. Topped with licking lead based paint.

<Snipped a lot of stuff and some borderline dictator-like crap>

I think it is denial to think that people are capable of conducting
themselves
properly in complete anarchy.

Well there was a time where it was possible. But effectively, it is
now too late. But certainly any concept can be proven, so long as one
element is not involved. Pessimism. Many tribes have passed on
traditions of total peace with no Hierarchy, no jealousy, etc. No
traits of anything that binds the likes of us today. But effectively
piece by piece, we are destroying that to. It is because of people
like us, naively not knowing that we are destroying that...but we are.

Yet even the Native American Indians were not violent with their tribal
disagreements. If they disagreed, and rational decision could not be
made. They literally had a paint war, sticks with balls of cloth,
colored paints of red and blue to mark the teams. But no harm was ever
done.

So far, I have heard you say this before about Anarchy. So, you are
becoming a tad redundant. I suggest finding other ideas to expand on.
Cause the only way things happen, is by making it happen, despite how
pessimistic others are. That Goth Pessimism stinks too, after a while
it becomes tired and boorish. Rather contrived and trivial now. I
rather expect it of them. You're a GenX'er...get over it already.

They are an "oligarchy" (rule by the few).

Ooooh, I like it when you get all macho, it makes me tingly all over.
Do you wanna meet in west hollywood at the French market...say noonish,
tomorrow. Later we can go to Stigmata and enjoy the trivial sites.

Yes, and that is fine...in some cases. Especially when the "oligarchy"
is ruled with a compromise of unbiased nature. That is truly the
point...and a democracy is the really the only way that is achieved.
Which we were actually setting coarse toward that...till you posted
some of your rather inane, yet distasteful diatribe. Really what you
have done here is successfully point fingers at the commoners of the OT
list. You separated and divided everyone into exactly what we were
talking about...the "conflict". You, effectively have done nothing to
make a rational resolution. You just created more opposition than
resolution. Really, I can't say how disappointed I am in you. You
effectively turned the view of the Mod Squad into sounding like a
Regime. Sorry, in my view...right now, in this moment...you suck,
Orren. Step down, and let Jeremy do his job...and perhaps you need to
take a break. If you wanna be separatist, then do it on your own time.

Peace, Love, and Marshmellows,
The Lord Of Wolves

Lord...LORD...whew. What happened, did you get your ass kicked a lot
in high school?

Whew...borderline_________________________dude.

Peace,
Alexis

[Hector]

----- Original Message -----

Post by Orren Merton
I'm back for more punishment. ;)

I am gearing up for it Orren. I stand by...

<vast ammount of wierd ramblings snipped>

...take a break. If you wanna be separatist, then do it on your own time.

Is this some sort of confusion tactic Alexis? I have never seen so many
words that make so little sense.

Orren's post on the other hand, makes perfect sense.

Hector.

[Alexis Aiosa]

Post by Dennis Gunn

Post by Orren Merton

Post by Dennis Gunn
It strikes me that we are entering the golden age of denial.

I think it is denial to think that people are capable of conducting
themselves
properly in complete anarchy. There must be order of some sort.
These lists
are not a democracy. They are an "oligarchy" (rule by the few).
Anyone who
doesn't like it, start your own! My God, yahoo groups is an easy
place to start
a list; someone doesn't like the way this list is run, take your own
initiative,
don't badger Jeremy for his!

If I recall the DAW went for years with *no* moderation. Anyway in
the real world complete anarchy is dangerous. In the small virtual
confines of a single mailing list it is no danger to anyone.

Wow...Now Orren and Dennis agree on anarchy...LOL. Boy this really IS
bad.

Peace,
Alexis

[Alexis Aiosa]

Post by mercutio

Post by Orren Merton
My personal take on things is that people who post hateful diatribes
(on
anything--people, regions, computer systems, etc) should be banned.
And
trust me, if I were a moderator of this group (and you never know...I
might just
be one day :) ), I'd be a censoring, banning motherfucker.

I am not interested in such diatribes either.
But I find it strange, even disturbing that you would feel competent to
prevent me from making my own decision regarding any post.

I totally agree to this.

Delete, Delete, delete...oh something I wish to talk about... Delete,
Delete, delete....Oh look, yet something else.

Post by mercutio
Posts I do not wish to read I trash. Those I wish to read I read.

Point.

Post by mercutio
I have no assurance whatsoever that you would make the same decisions
for me as I would make for myself.

Point.

Post by mercutio
Therefore I decline the service you offer, however well intended.

In accordance to his DIATRIBE, this NOT offered to you...You will
censored whether you like it or NOT. Of course, in accordance to
Orren's diatribe.

My questioning now is...Is Orren Merton suited to be a moderator? In
view of what I just read, personally I think the mod squad has the
responsibility to let him go. Since he has taken this too far...at
least with Jeremy, there is a compromise for a Rational Resolution.
But Orren is questionable, because he creating a greater divide, rather
than bringing people together and making final decision. At least
Jeremy is listening to Henrik, and taking note.

Post by mercutio
Yet, I do feel in favor of NO Censorship of the OT list. However I
did think the last issue just got a tad out hand. I just feel at this
point the "conflict" issue is misinterpreted by all, especially if
positioned with bias. I don't agree with any biased statements with
regards to the issue of the "conflict", because I don't agree with
either party...I think they are both stupid and immature
a. My hateful side of me says: Nuke the fuck out of all them, and
the utter the words, "fight over that mother fucker...ain't that
pretty, you're all fucking dead."
b. But my loving side says: Stop fighting, now. Make a peaceful
compromise and rational resolution that make everyone content to move
on with their lives.
Now...which side would you prefer I acted on?
If one said "b" is the answer...then one assumes to have answered
correctly...but then it goes with out saying...That...
The same should be expected of all of us.

Right now...Orren is acting out of "a" rather than "b". Unfavorable in
my view.

Peace,
Alexis

[Tony Perretta]

Post by Alexis Aiosa
My questioning now is...Is Orren Merton suited to be a moderator?

My views align entirely with his - so maybe we should both resign.

Tony Perretta

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
My questioning now is...Is Orren Merton suited to be a moderator?

My views align entirely with his - so maybe we should both resign.

Naaa, you guys are both excellent moderators. I think it's a shame everyone
enjoys arguing so much over here that it has come to this. I wonder if
there's a name for a psychological disease in which people are addicted to
arguing?

In the end, these are our own private lists with perfectly competent admin
staff. People might not agree with our decisions, but anyone who doesn't
have the heart (and/or the balls) to volunteer to be an admin has never
seen things from our unique side of the fence and is absolutely no position
to judge whether or not any of us are suited to be a moderator, period.

Best wishes,
Jeremy Martin; sadus-4grdRRbp/***@public.gmane.org
http://www.carrollsweb.com/sadus

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[plaarg]

Post by Jeremy Martin
I think it's a shame everyone
enjoys arguing so much over here that it has come to this. I
wonder if there's a name for a psychological disease in which
people are addicted to arguing?

Are you making a value judgment on whether it's good to argue
or not? I'd like to argue about that, if you don't mind. Your
argument that arguing is bad, mmmm-k, is a bit weak since it's
an argument.

thank you for your time,
teddybut

[plaarg]

moderator = moderate = in moderation = in the middle = not
opinionated or biased = non extreme point of view.... etc.

teddybut

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by plaarg

Post by Jeremy Martin
I think it's a shame everyone
enjoys arguing so much over here that it has come to this. I
wonder if there's a name for a psychological disease in which
people are addicted to arguing?

Are you making a value judgment on whether it's good to argue
or not? I'd like to argue about that, if you don't mind. Your
argument that arguing is bad, mmmm-k, is a bit weak since it's
an argument.

I'm simply making the point that all of our lists are private lists,
"owned" by the admins. We are free to have whoever we want as moderators.
If you don't like what we're doing, or don't think we should be moderators,
feel free to bring it to our attention (we are all very open minded
people), but never forget you can always simply leave if you don't like it
here.

Best wishes,
Jeremy Martin; sadus-4grdRRbp/***@public.gmane.org
http://www.carrollsweb.com/sadus

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[plaarg]

Post by plaarg

Post by Jeremy Martin
I think it's a shame everyone
enjoys arguing so much over here that it has come to this. I
wonder if there's a name for a psychological disease in

which people are addicted to arguing?
Are you making a value judgment on whether it's good to argue

Post by plaarg
or not? I'd like to argue about that, if you don't mind. Your
argument that arguing is bad, mmmm-k, is a bit weak since
it's an argument.

I'm simply making the point that all of our lists are private lists,
"owned" by the admins. We are free to have whoever we want

as moderators.> If you don't like what we're doing, or don't think
we should be moderators, feel free to bring it to our attention
(we are all very open minded people), but never forget you can
always simply leave if you don't like it here.
I was responding to you rather funny note, with a funny note. I
didn't mean for you to take it so seriously.

teddybut

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by plaarg
I was responding to you rather funny note, with a funny note. I
didn't mean for you to take it so seriously.

Ahh, sorry about that. There has been so much debating going on here lately
I'm a little desensitized to silly/funny arguments vs real ones. ;-)

Best wishes,
Jeremy Martin; sadus-4grdRRbp/***@public.gmane.org
http://www.carrollsweb.com/sadus

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by plaarg
moderator = moderate = in moderation = in the middle = not
opinionated or biased = non extreme point of view.... etc.

Moderator = simply the term Yahoo happens to use for "list administrators".

Main Entry: ad·min·is·tra·tor
Pronunciation: &d-'mi-n&-"strA-t&r, -"strA-"tor
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
a person legally vested with the right of administration of an estate

Best wishes,
Jeremy Martin; sadus-4grdRRbp/***@public.gmane.org
http://www.carrollsweb.com/sadus

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by plaarg

Post by Jeremy Martin
I think it's a shame everyone
enjoys arguing so much over here that it has come to this. I
wonder if there's a name for a psychological disease in which
people are addicted to arguing?

Are you making a value judgment on whether it's good to argue
or not? I'd like to argue about that, if you don't mind. Your
argument that arguing is bad, mmmm-k, is a bit weak since it's
an argument.

I'm simply making the point that all of our lists are private lists,
"owned" by the admins. We are free to have whoever we want as moderators.
If you don't like what we're doing, or don't think we should be moderators,
feel free to bring it to our attention (we are all very open minded
people), but never forget you can always simply leave if you don't like it
here.

I'm sorry Jeremy, but some people here are trying to do exactly that:
bring something to your attention, namely the fact that they don't
like the prospect of having a "strictly musical" moderated L-OT list.
Many of your replies to some valid arguments that have been made are
somewhat weak in my opinion, and (thus?) spark even more reactions,
etc, etc, ad nauseam. And then you go about saying that people who
like arguing have some sort of psychological disease. I don't think
I quite like that to be honest. And then I'm even ignoring the fact
that you seem to be as keen on an argument as the next guy...

[Jeremy Martin]

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
I'm sorry Jeremy, but some people here are trying to do
exactly that: bring something to your attention, namely
the fact that they don't like the prospect of having a
"strictly musical" moderated L-OT list.

Yes, that definitely came to my attention, as well as the attention
to the other admins. Which is why we created the poll, instead of
specifically focusing the list on music related issues. I was
referring to people suggesting other admins do not make a good
moderator, should resign, etc.

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
Many of your replies to some valid arguments that have
been made are somewhat weak in my opinion, and (thus?)
spark even more reactions, etc, etc, ad nauseam.

That's the problem: I was thinking the exact same thing about other
people's replies. Obviously the group here is split nearly 50/50 on
this issue. We are not all going to agree about this.

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
And then you go about saying that people who like arguing
have some sort of psychological disease. I don't think
I quite like that to be honest.

I was just joking, but still, some people don't seem to be able to
give this a rest and just wait for the poll to conclude.

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
And then I'm even ignoring the fact that you seem to be
as keen on an argument as the next guy...

Honestly I don't care that much what you guys talk about here. If
members hadn't started writing/complaining to the admins about things
we would not have done anything. When people start bringing issues to
my attention that make perfect sense to me (e.g. keeping this Emagic-
related list focused loosely on music-related things only, but
nothing that will always eventually start big flame wars such as
politics) what can I do but reply to the constant barrage of
argumentative posts people have been writing? In my opinion any time
list members are offended enough to write to the admins or start
unsubscribing in disgust, something is wrong. When a large number of
members express a valid opinion but don't wish to argue about it
repeatedly in public, I feel as if its my job as an admin to help
express their perfectly side of this issue. If no one were to argue
about this issue anymore I'd gladly wait for the poll to conclude in
silence..

Jeremy

[Hendrik Jan Veenstra]

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
And then you go about saying that people who like arguing
have some sort of psychological disease. I don't think
I quite like that to be honest.

I was just joking, but still, some people don't seem to be able to
give this a rest and just wait for the poll to conclude.

Maybe some people have given arguments as to why a poll is bound to
be inconclusive or why the validity of the outcome might still be
debatable.

On the one hand you say this group is not a democracy but an
oligarchy. Yet you use a democratic mechanism to determine
list-policy. And at the same time this same democratic mechanism is
bound to fail, for reasons explained earlier. Puzzling. And thus
sparking more debate. Oh well...

Post by Jeremy Martin

Post by Hendrik Jan Veenstra
And then I'm even ignoring the fact that you seem to be
as keen on an argument as the next guy...

Honestly I don't care that much what you guys talk about here. If
members hadn't started writing/complaining to the admins about things
we would not have done anything. When people start bringing issues to
my attention that make perfect sense to me (e.g. keeping this Emagic-
related list focused loosely on music-related things only, but
nothing that will always eventually start big flame wars such as
politics) what can I do but reply to the constant barrage of
argumentative posts people have been writing?

You could ignore them and simply refer everyone to the to-be outcome
of the poll for example. But, as I said, you like a good debate as
much as the next guy. I don't mind (to the contrary) -- but then
don't go about offending "us argumentative types" as suffering from a
disease, since you're not that different. Not at all.

Post by Jeremy Martin
If no one were to argue about this issue anymore I'd gladly wait for
the poll to conclude in silence..

I'll shut up. Fed up with all of this, and got better things to do
than defend some right I think people have against moderators who
think they know better, based on the opinion of a handful of
complainers.
I think it was Alexis who made a good point when he referred to some
extremely boring discussions on the LUG: VST vs AU, etc, or the Mac
vs PC debates being routed to the L-OT. Is any of those really on
topic? A zillion VST/AU messages with extremely little informational
contents? Or a PC/Mac debate -- is that L-OT stuff? Apparently it
is, according to the powers in charge. No problem with that: as
Dennis said, that's what you got a delete-key for.

The problem is: where do you draw the border? At some arbitrary
point, apparently. Because someone decides something is offensive.
Or because someone decides something is not appropriate. Or because
3 or 4 members complain to the moderators. Or whatever. And it's
this arbitrariness (?) that I protest against.

[Paul Wheeler&Kerry Higgs]

five questions for jeremy .
How did you get to be moderator on this list ?
Do you get paid for being a moderator ?
To whom are you responsible in an official sense ?
Why are you being so friggin boring ? its like the alphabetical
equivalent of an earnest but artistically empty funereal dirge !
To whom do we compain about the actions of the moderator ?

you seem to have all the attributes of a born again on a mission from god
, I'm sorry if that sounds a bit insulting but you just keep perpetuating it
day in day out . I can only assume you want to kill the list off because
another week of this and I'm definitely outta here too [hip hip hooray was
heard in the background ,or was that the moaning of a desert wind]
Paul

[Tobias Seyb]

Hi!

Long ago (at least it seems) I asked the members of this list to stop the
ongoing discussion and to keep to L- related topics...

...I shouldn´t have done that.

Since then a flood of discussions and metadiscussions wash through my modem
- none of them related to music or computers at all.

I want to excuse for having unintentionally triggered such an amount of
waste (not meaning someone special, as I haven´t read most of the mails
anyhow).

I guess I´ll wait a little more time to see if any kind of -WOT or -PUB or
whatever list will be started to keep away all that white noise from this
innocent little logic-related mailing list. If not, I´ll have to quit.
Oh - I am very pleased about the present state of LUG - since it´s
following strict rules, it´s useful again. Thanks to the guys who do all
the work.

Tobias

[T***@public.gmane.org]

Post by Tobias Seyb
Oh - I am very pleased about the present state of LUG - since it´s
following strict rules, it´s useful again. Thanks to the guys who do all
the work.

Thats why this list should be unmoderated - as a counter balance to the
strict censorship on the main list. This allows for a pressure valve for
people to talk freely. Not interested in banter? Then stick to the main LUG
list.

[Hector]

Post by T***@public.gmane.org

Oh - I am very pleased about the present state of LUG - since itÂŽs
following strict rules, itÂŽs useful again. Thanks to the guys who do all
the work.

Thats why this list should be unmoderated - as a counter balance to the
strict censorship on the main list. This allows for a pressure valve for
people to talk freely. Not interested in banter? Then stick to the main LUG
list.

Wrong. Most topics on the L-OT are not banter and are of interest to
musicians. Somebody who likes the Logic only topic restrictions of the LUG
could also expect and enjoy music related topic restrictions on the L-OT.
If that person is not interested in banter then they would have no reason to
subscribe to a L-WOT list, if one existed.

Some people want it, it is no skin off the backs of those that do not want
it. Does it really matter to them that the subject line shows [L-WOT]
instead of [L-OT] on ocassional threads? It makes no difference to them,
their only argument is that it is not necessary, people can use their delete
buttons. However, if this does not bother people, why is this thread
happening at all?

Those against a L-WOT list are simply trying to deny others their choice,
when it makes no real difference to them whether there is one or not.

Hector.

[plaarg]

Post by Hector

Post by Tobias Seyb
Oh - I am very pleased about the present state of LUG -

.since it´sfollowing strict rules, it´s useful again. Thanks to the
guys who do allthe workThats why this list should be
unmoderated - as a counter balance to thestrict censorship
on the main list. This allows for a pressure valve forpeople to
talk freely. Not interested in banter? Then stick to the main

LUG

list.

Wrong. Most topics on the L-OT are not banter and are of
interest tomusicians. Somebody who likes the Logic only topic
restrictions of the LUG could also expect and enjoy music

.>related topic restrictions on the L-OT. If that person is not

Post by Hector
interested in banter then they would have no reason to
subscribe to a L-WOT list, if one existed.
Some people want it, it is no skin off the backs of those that do
not want it. Does it really matter to them that the subject line
shows [L-WOT] instead of [L-OT] on ocassional threads? It

.>makes no difference to them, their only argument is that it is

Post by Hector
not necessary, people can use their delete buttons. However,
if this does not bother people, why is this thread Those against
a L-WOT list are simply trying to deny others their choice,when
it makes no real difference to them whether there is one or not.
Hector.

Hi everyone,

I have totally rethought my stance on this moderation subject and
I'd like to share it with you all and waste more bandwidth.

Our problem is that the above posts are both good arguments
for 2 things that can co-exist. We've been here in OT-land for a
while and things have been fine, except once in a while when
political disscussions break out. Ineveitably someone
complains about that and to be fair, maybe what Hector is
suggesting is pretty reasonble.

A W-OT list or a DAW-OT list are both good solutions for the
problem of the people who don't want to read about politics or
anything else not having to do with music. I would suggest
setting up another list called DAW-OT for the music people
instead of W-OT for the way out people. The reason? in reality,
the way OT people are happy where they are. The people who
are complaining are not happy here with all the mucky muck. If
you make the Way-OT people move and disrupt what's going on
in the process, it tends to upset people who are trying to
passionately work through some intense subject matter (to
them). Making value judgments on the content of the discussion
at hand is not really why we are here. We're here to share ideas
and knowledge with eachother. The W-OT people like to get
other people's perspectives on things other than music. what's
wrong with that. Same as there's nothing inherently WRONG with
someone complaing about the amount of non music related
material.

For me, it stands to reason that a DAW-OT list would be the best
solution so as to accomodate the maximum amount of people
on the list. We can argue about the semantics of what the lists
should be called, but the bottom line is that some people are
unhappy and that could be addressed for the mere sake of being
human about it.

My main problem with this whole situation was how it was
handled by the admins. The whole clamp down attitude that took
place was really out of line and un called for. The admins could
have gently setup the other list without bothering the discussion
and whisked those who didn't like the OT to be too OT over to the
new list. No big deal. no polls, arguments etc...

If complainers complained about that solution, the answer from
the admins should have been, "I'm sorry that's the best
compromise we could come up with, do you have a better idea?"

all this is my sincere opnion. all sarcasm aside.

thanks for listening,
teddybut

[Dennis Gunn]

Post by plaarg
Our problem is that the above posts are both good arguments
for 2 things that can co-exist.

The best solution is the delete button. I don't need other people
figuring out what I want to read. I have for example deleted long
long threads of Hector et. al. rehashing the centuries old education
vs inspiration argument. It was not difficult it did not piss me off
I did not resent it I just didn't read it. Adults can do it children
can do it why can't you? I have even on occasion filtered things by
topic. It requires about the technical prowess it takes to change a
light bulb.

[plaarg]

Post by plaarg
Our problem is that the above posts are both good

arguments for 2 things that can co-exist.
The best solution is the delete button. I don't need other
centuries old education vs inspiration argument. It was not
difficult it did not piss me off I did not resent it I just didn't read
it. Adults can do it children can do it why can't you? I have even
on occasion filtered things by topic. It requires about the
technical prowess it takes to change a light bulb.

that's a pretty inflexible point of view, and certainly a valid one. But
you could be a little more comapassionate about it. I'm not telling
here, I'm suggesting an alternative for you to consider. There are
people who are bummed about the list for reasons you can't
comprehend. Why not give them a place to discuss daw-ot
without our babbling? What would be the practical difference for
you if you were on both lists and still did your email filtering
magic. It would be pretty much the status quo except for 20
seconds of subscribing. The reason you're mad, and why I was
mad, is because you were cut off mid argument. That can't be
fixed now, No reason to cry over spilt milk though. So Jeremy
made a mistake, so what... he's a good guy, let's move on and
figure out how we can keep up our non DAW banter without
interruption.

teddybut

[Alexis Aiosa]

Post by Hector
Is this some sort of confusion tactic Alexis? I have never seen so
many
words that make so little sense.
Orren's post on the other hand, makes perfect sense.

Right...uh huh...sure Hector, and you make perfect sense your self.
Yeah, I am sure we agree on everything you said.

Whew, the belief forward motion while running on idle.

Yeah right.
Alexis

[Alexis Aiosa]

Here is the best thing that was ever written by anybody on this
list...are you ready for this, cause it makes absolute sense. Yet, I

Post by Dennis Gunn
The best solution is the delete button.

Very experienced, yet wise words.

Peace,
Alexis

[Alexis Aiosa]

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
My questioning now is...Is Orren Merton suited to be a moderator?

My views align entirely with his - so maybe we should both resign.

Perhaps, Tony...If that is how you feel. I can't argue a man, with a
level head that just made sense in their dialogue. If without
reasonable doubt, that is the way you feel...then by all means, you do
what you feel is viable. There is no dishonor in resigning...it is
brave to do so. And it is respectful to others...it takes a bigger man
to admit they are wrong or not able to change in light of things. That
is also a commendable trait in a human.

I am not saying you HAVE to, just cause I said so or IMPLIED it. But...

a) One does have to be pliable when positioned with authority.

b) One should question themselves, if viably questioned by others.

This is why we have things like Internal Affairs, with regards to
police...IA's position is very clear...To watch the watchers. Sorry to
say it, so far, most of the Mod Squad seems to be set on regarding
Admin's as being right and that is it. Case Closed.

I heard no admission of possibilities that indicate, that some of US
may be right in our views. None of the Admins here have said..."Hmmm,
Henrik, I think you have made the best case". Get my drift. So far
two factions, in disagreement and yet no compromise is being made. So,
now we are basically fighting over the very same thing we were
moderated for debating. LOL.

Yet, let's face it...I think I have deleted at least "50" AU/VST
diatribes over the past few days, coming in from the LUG. But hey, it
is On Topic right? Despite the fact that MOST of it is a long winded,
misinformed crock of shit. LOL. Sorry, but true. L-OT to me is just
an asylum for the lunatics on the LUG...yeah, me to...guilty as
charged...LOL. I remember many of Mac vs. PC debate being diverted
over here. Is really the Mac vs. PC debate even on topic to music
making with L-OT? Think about it. Not really...sorry no. But I let
it go...cause this is the asylum of where that can take place.

Peace,
Alexis

[Tony Perretta]

Post by Alexis Aiosa

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
My questioning now is...Is Orren Merton suited to be a moderator?

My views align entirely with his - so maybe we should both resign.

Perhaps, Tony...If that is how you feel. I can't argue a man, with a
level head that just made sense in their dialogue.

Sorry?

I am one of the admin team simply because at a time when the LUG was 'messy'
very few answered Jeremy's initial email asking for assitance. Jeremy sent out a
further email to whihc I replied saying that I didn't consider myself a
prominent member (tho I have been on and off the LUG since 96) but was willing
to help out on an ad hoc basis when there is any need. I have no interest in
moderating, and have never moderated, the L-OT.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
a) One does have to be pliable when positioned with authority.

huh?

Post by Alexis Aiosa
b) One should question themselves, if viably questioned by others.

Agreed.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
This is why we have things like Internal Affairs, with regards to
police...IA's position is very clear...To watch the watchers. Sorry to
say it, so far, most of the Mod Squad seems to be set on regarding
Admin's as being right and that is it. Case Closed.

This is not the case - the moderators have all talked about this and some of us
are unclear (I include myself) as to the rÃŽle of the L-OT. Hence the poll. Hence
many of the msgs by moderators merely defending Jeremy's position as list admin.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
I heard no admission of possibilities that indicate, that some of US
may be right in our views.

You can't have been reading all the emails then. I have said that I have no
position as to what the L-OT should be. Though I do have a philosophical
position with repsect to the freedom of speech arguments put forward by others.
It might be that u did not realise I was an admin.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
None of the Admins here have said..."Hmmm,
Henrik, I think you have made the best case".

Maybe if we thought he had we would have said so.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Get my drift. So far
two factions, in disagreement and yet no compromise is being made.

Er ... Jeremy has agreed to let the poll dictate the nature of the list. What
more compromise would u propose?

Post by Alexis Aiosa
So,
now we are basically fighting over the very same thing we were
moderated for debating. LOL.

This isn't a fight Alexis. You are just misintepreting the admin's position
despite it seeming to be clear to me.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Yet, let's face it...I think I have deleted at least "50" AU/VST
diatribes over the past few days, coming in from the LUG.

You and I both.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
But hey, it
is On Topic right?

I would say so tho sometimes one wonders.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Despite the fact that MOST of it is a long winded,
misinformed crock of shit. LOL. Sorry, but true. L-OT to me is just
an asylum for the lunatics on the LUG >

Feel free to vote that way in the poll.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
...yeah, me to...guilty as
charged...LOL. I remember many of Mac vs. PC debate being diverted
over here. Is really the Mac vs. PC debate even on topic to music
making with L-OT?

Yes. It is like debating the merits of microphones. Some like to use expensive
Royer ribbon mics on guitar cabs and others super cheap SM57s (the greatest mic
ever). Having said this I must admit to finding MAC or PC evangelists for the
most part the worst thing on the LUG. I have no problem with informed opinions
and comparisons.

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Think about it. Not really...sorry no. But I let
it go...cause this is the asylum of where that can take place.

I think the problem, as astutely highlighted by Jeremy, is that some people
think the L-OT is one thing and others another. Is the L-OT here to serve the
LUG or have unlimited scope? I guess a decision will be made one way or the
other.

Alexis - hows about we just wait for the final outcome and abide by it? I for
one don't care which way it goes.

Tony Perretta

[Alexis Aiosa]

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
My questioning now is...Is Orren Merton suited to be a moderator?

My views align entirely with his - so maybe we should both resign.

Perhaps, Tony...If that is how you feel. I can't argue a man, with a
level head that just made sense in their dialogue.

Sorry?

I was giving praise to your implied decision and congratulating you for
being a bigger man to do so.

Post by Tony Perretta
I have no interest in
moderating, and have never moderated, the L-OT.

Great. I was never asked. How do you like that...LOL. I guess they
think I am mess or something...LOL. Rightfully so...LOL, since most
seem to think so. But get to know me, and you will find different.
But, even if I was offered, I probably wouldn't...since I couldn't
possibly devote the attention it deserved.

I think that they chose people, then asked...was Dennis ever asked?
eeeh...perish the thought...LOL. I would have to Runawaaaaaay,
runawaaaaay. Actually, I think Dennis would make a great Admin for
LUG, but not for L-OT...LOL.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
a) One does have to be pliable when positioned with authority.

huh?

If a person takes on a responsibility, they have to be flexible and
open to change.

pli·a·ble   Pronunciation Key  (pl-bl)
adj.
1. Easily bent or shaped. See Synonyms at malleable.
2. Receptive to change; adaptable: pliable attitudes.
3. Easily influenced, persuaded, or swayed; tractable.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
b) One should question themselves, if viably questioned by others.

Agreed.

Well then...what I see Henrik in total frustration. Do you honestly
think that it is okay to take a "well respected colleague of ours" and
push him to his limits of frustration. When he is in fact posing the
best support for the concept? Anybody with true objectivity reads what
he is saying will say, "hey, he is making sense." Which I did
insinuate in my last post to.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
This is why we have things like Internal Affairs, with regards to
police...IA's position is very clear...To watch the watchers. Sorry
to
say it, so far, most of the Mod Squad seems to be set on regarding
Admin's as being right and that is it. Case Closed.

This is not the case - the moderators have all talked about this and
some of us
are unclear (I include myself) as to the rôle of the L-OT.

Okay...Then why moderate what is unclear to you even?

Post by Tony Perretta
Hence the poll. Hence
many of the msgs by moderators merely defending Jeremy's position as
list admin.

I never questioned his position...in fact what you were originally
responding to was me questioning Orren's Position with his own
diatribe...LOL. Right? I made quite clear in the original that I
thought Jeremy was being more level headed than Orren was...remember?

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
I heard no admission of possibilities that indicate, that some of US
may be right in our views.

You can't have been reading all the emails then.

Are you kidding me? ...Ack! Mostly yes...but really fixated on Henrik
and Jeremy. But I can't read it all. But teddybut also stated some
interesting things. But some I just can't read through, just cause it
is pure babble and divides, rather than bring a conclusion that
everyone is content with.

Post by Tony Perretta
I have said that I have no
position as to what the L-OT should be. Though I do have a
philosophical
position with repsect to the freedom of speech arguments put forward
by others.
It might be that u did not realise I was an admin.

You said to me...you agreed and stood by Orren's words...therefore by
indicating that was your position. I know your an Admin, just as I
know there is a Mr. Simpson, Orren Merton, YOU and Jeremy are Admins,
though I don't really know the others.

Again...you wrote, in view of Orren:
My views align entirely with his - so maybe we should both resign.

You aligned yourself with Orren. Which made you seem like you made
your decision.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
None of the Admins here have said..."Hmmm,
Henrik, I think you have made the best case".

Maybe if we thought he had we would have said so.

Well, that depends. Are you looking at it from a position of being an
Admin or looking at it as "objectively" removed from being either?
That right there is what being in an authoritative positions is about.
That is what WE are questioning...are U looking at this objectively?
What is good for the collective, not the one.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Get my drift. So far
two factions, in disagreement and yet no compromise is being made.

Er ... Jeremy has agreed to let the poll dictate the nature of the
list. What
more compromise would u propose?

Again, all I see is Henrik in total frustration. I voted, yet there
seems to be no resolution. Because now there seems to be a debate over
what type of moderation and how to justify it. In one way it can be
viewed as threatening the service of moderation, for lenient
moderation. "well do you want me to protect you from spammers, then
you have to do it my way." So to speak, that was an implied view I
perceived. Or the fact, seemingly the vote of the "Freedom 8" who
oppose, don't outweigh the "Mod Squad 7". That and because the other
592 members don't cast a vote, that vote goes in favor of the Mod Squad
7. We can all dispute the electoral vote.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
So,
now we are basically fighting over the very same thing we were
moderated for debating. LOL.

This isn't a fight Alexis. You are just misintepreting the admin's
position
despite it seeming to be clear to me.

You're right...to strong a word "fight". So, let me rephrase that.

So, now we are basically "debating" over the very same thing we were
moderated for debating. LOL.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Yet, let's face it...I think I have deleted at least "50" AU/VST
diatribes over the past few days, coming in from the LUG.

You and I both.

Okay...so you see. Though AU/VST is not really all that On Topic, it
is effectively On Topic to the LUG. Despite that it is in fact boorish
attempt of debating paranoia, etc.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
But hey, it
is On Topic right?

I would say so tho sometimes one wonders.

I have been wondering for days...LOL. Days. But I certainly see, that
neither have any of the Admin's see it fit for moderating the topic of
AU/VST. So, sometimes we effectively act on tolerance and use the
delete key...despite what people think or do or say.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Despite the fact that MOST of it is a long winded,
misinformed crock of shit. LOL. Sorry, but true. L-OT to me is
just
an asylum for the lunatics on the LUG >

Feel free to vote that way in the poll.

I did. I went to the polls, and voted.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
...yeah, me to...guilty as
charged...LOL. I remember many of Mac vs. PC debate being diverted
over here. Is really the Mac vs. PC debate even on topic to music
making with L-OT?

Yes. It is like debating the merits of microphones. Some like to use
expensive
Royer ribbon mics on guitar cabs and others super cheap SM57s (the
greatest mic
ever). Having said this I must admit to finding MAC or PC evangelists
for the
most part the worst thing on the LUG. I have no problem with informed
opinions
and comparisons.

Yes...neither do I. But some of these so called "informed opinions"
are not as informed as they should be. Just Misinformed Crocks of
shit. So, you kind of go with flow, make attempts at corrections.
etc, etc. But tolerance is the acceptable policy for that concept and
so is the delete key.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Think about it. Not really...sorry no. But I let
it go...cause this is the asylum of where that can take place.

I think the problem, as astutely highlighted by Jeremy, is that some
people
think the L-OT is one thing and others another. Is the L-OT here to
serve the
LUG or have unlimited scope? I guess a decision will be made one way
or the
other.

Actually, the problem is that those who think it one way are correct,
with the intent for how L-OT was applied in the past. Other's can
think to be deemed correct, but the intent of L-OT was NOT built the
way they think it was. The original intent was to apply an asylum for
the lunatics. That has always been my view of the L-OT. Why do you
think I am here? LOL.

Look, I can sit here and say..."I am offended by all the Apple/Mac
hatred". I could have made great arguments for separating the lists
too. Put PC here and Mac over there. But it often really came down to
one thing...The PC and Mac People COLLECTIVELY and OBJECTIVELY realized
the benefits of learning from the more experienced users wether Mac or
PC. Like Henrik, is again a great example. A Mac user, teaching PC
users about MIDI. He effectively adds to both user groups. Yet, I
personally don't like Howie Wooten, and in certain cases he is wrong.
But I don't expect the Admin's to gag him, based on my one opinion of
him. Because he still offers some basis of knowledge to other users.

I could effectively tear apart Howie Wooten in front all the Admins.
Show his Bias, his misinformation, and demure like tactics of posing
and opening debate. But I don't. I got better things to do, than sit
around finding ways to gag him. One thing is for me to dislike him,
the other is to gag him from his view, which entails that one day I
would have to endure the same thing...LOL. Get my drift. I am careful
to what I vote for, because one day, I just might get it.

Post by Tony Perretta
Alexis - hows about we just wait for the final outcome and abide by
it? I for
one don't care which way it goes.

Well if you don't care "which way it goes", then why say anything at
all.

Post by Tony Perretta

Post by Alexis Aiosa

Post by Tony Perretta
My views align entirely with his - so maybe we should both resign.

Where are you...to me, it seems you're now wavering. Where as before
you made your position quite clear. Now, you tell me one thing, then
you tell me another. Hey, that is okay man, I am not trying to demean
ya...but effectively, right now you're just unclear in your position.
I think you originally set out to instinctually protect your buddy
Orren. But some how, by saying "you don't care which way it goes" is
implying to me: Then why say anything at all?

Peace,
Alexis

[plaarg]

Post by Alexis Aiosa
Henrik, is again a great example.
Peace,
Alexis

Hey AA,

are you secretly in love with Henrik? hahahaha

I really think the admins should have just taken the ball in their
able hands and made a DAW-OT list for the complainers and
thus avoided all this debate over moderation. They didn't do that,
so were stuck here voting on a one sided poll. If they want to be
democratic about it and have a poll, at least they should include
an option for keeping the OT-list how it is and moving the
complainers. That way it would be a less one sided poll,
seemingly favoring the complainers, who certainly also have a
right to be accomodated.

It makes more sense to me that way. Why have a list soley
devoted to L-Politics when there are so many very off topic things
being discussed here that the complainers are offended by?
When the music theory, university choice or PC vs Mac wars
come up, they can go where they have always gone without
making a new list for EVERY topic not related to DAWs. Like I
said: what's next a poll about a new L-OT-laundry detergent list?

so do you guys and gals like Coke or Pepsi.
teddybut

[Tony Perretta]

Hello Alexis

Your thrust seems to be that you think my views and those of Orren cannot
coexist. I find them wholly congruent but have no desire to reiterate them. I
was trying to supply some clarity not provoke you - clearly I failed.

You will find that Jeremy posted a number of msgs directly to the LUG regarding
the recruitment of administrators.

Furthermore I think this list is a dogmatic nightmare with limited potential. I
was looking forward to insights regarding stuff deemed too OT for the LUG and am
duly unsubscribing.

Good luck to all

Tony Perretta