"Fag," and double standards

That's the nature of the Internet. I've visited many forums devoted to people or subjects of interest to me and all of them have trolls, bullies, jerks, kooks, and clowns.

I understand your experience here is different than mine, but take a step back and try and understand the fundamental structure of this site: Solo is basically just a reservoir for information and a place of exchange among fans. The fans create the content. If Morrissey is actually upset about how "toxic" the environment is on this site, he's really knocking his own fans, not David. Why should David be criticized for giving the fans a platform to speak? Aren't the fans to blame?

It seems to me that if Morrissey doesn't like Solo, it's because he probably still believes, more than anyone else, the stale and insupportable myth about Morrissey "apostles" being a uniform brigade of polite, bookish, well-spoken gladioli-waving librarians. Some are like that, and some aren't, but all of them are fans, a handful of creeps and trolls excepted. Why should anyone be excluded?

No, if this site has a problem it's that David gives people too much freedom, not too little. These are the voices of Morrissey fans. We may not always like to hear ourselves, but there it is. And in any case it sounds like you don't mind the principle of censorship at all. You are okay with silencing some voices, so long as they are the right voices who go missing. I hear what you're saying, but that's just not how these sites work. Like I said, I don't know about the individual cases of "moderator abuse" you bring up, but this site, for the most part, is a model of what a fan community can be. I love some of the other Morrissey sites on the web, but in terms of a fan community nobody else has come close. There's a reason.

If I could tell Morrissey one thing, I would tell him to spend a few hours a day on the web, every day, reading various sites made up of primarily user-created content. He would soon understand that most of the problems with this site are the same problems found anywhere else on the web. Look around. It's not pretty.

You're totally missing the point. I don't have any problem with people expressing their ideas, views... Anything. The problem is that the mods are biased. They play favorites. They are hypocritical. They don't stop personal attacks if they're generally fond of the attacker, or if the attacker is a long time member. It is ABUSE that is the issue. Personal insults, mocking, belittling, calculatedly offensive behavior -- That's what I'm talking about.

I can't believe I'm having to explain this. It should be so obvious. It's possible to disagree with someone vehemently without insulting them, belittling them, etc.

See, everything we do and say creates a certain dynamic. If you allow bullies and trolls to get away with being bullies and trolls, that makes decent people leave and not come back. Nobody wants to stay where that kind of thing is tolerated. Eventually you end up with a site full of assholes who post things like, "Hey, why is Solo so dead?" It amazes me every time this happens. You REALLY don't know why Solo is so dead?! Nobody wants to put up with name-calling, belittling, personal attacks, trolling, baiting, etc. Even before the new site people would leave here in disgust. Most of the people I've met on the tours tell me they'll never go back to Solo because it's such a harsh place. It's HARSH! And it's that way because the mods allow their buddies to get away with it.

I'm not saying I think it should be all super-nicey-nice in here all the time. People should be able to express themselves unless they're abusive. Why don't the mods in here seem to know what abuse is? Or care?

You're wrong when you say that the fans create the content. The lowest member of any society will set the tone if lawlessness prevails. Always.

Your priorities are screwed up. You were too harsh on JJ (who was acting out due to anger and frustration) and you're too lenient with actual bullies. The TOS is meaningless because it's vague enough that the mods can interpret it any way they like. And do.

Also, you're wrong about Morrissey. He knows very well what goes on on the internet and he knows who his fans are. Anyone who has paid attention to this site for any significant amount of time can plainly see what's happened here.

"Why should anyone be excluded?" you say? Because decent people don't let jerks run the show. We should exclude people who are willfully offensive or abusive. Yes, those people should be excluded... Because if they are not they will take over. They already have taken over.

What do you think would happen if you let all the criminals out of prison? What if getting the police to protect you from them was like pulling teeth? Wouldn't the regular people hide? Leave that town? Lay low? Wouldn't the criminals take over? What if the police started allowing murderers and rapists to go free, but arrested people for jaywalking? That's the situation here at Solo, only on a smaller scale... But that IS the dynamic.

"No, if this site has a problem it's that David gives people too much freedom, not too little." We agree, somewhat. He gives the mods too much freedom and he gives the loud-mouthed jerks too much freedom. He allows people to be banned simply because a mod doesn't care much for them or for posting a photo of an old naked guy too many times. It's so clearly screwed up!



Are you suggesting that people comment with Morrissey's sensibilities/reputation in mind?

Of course not. I'm talking about the mods. I'm saying that they should try to foster a site that strives to allow for all voices to be heard, not just the hard-ass jerks who attack, deride, and generally make Solo a cesspool.
 
Last edited:
What you say is not true. There are many levels of censorship. Moderation is censorship. You've chosen to have moderation on this site, now why not choose to have good moderation on this site?

I do not want to be surrounded by those who have only positive things to say. The new site is WAY too censored for my tastes. The perfect site would be one just like Solo, only abusive behavior wouldn't be allowed. As it is, the nastiness over here is out of control because the simpleton mods play favorites, take sides, join in, and basically act like jerks. Some of them, not all. I can't believe how they act during a dispute! It's amazing. They (and you) ignore even the most civil communications, refuse to help sort things out, issue very terse and insulting warnings and bannings to people... I've never experienced anything like it in other forums, actually.

"My personal feeling is that a higher form of friendship is one who will be hard on you and actually tell you you need to get your act into shape if they feel that way. If it comes across as disrepectful then you can disregard the opinion. But if it touches a nerve I think there is something there that should be examined."

I'm not sure I'm understanding you here. Are you suggesting that the unreasonable mods are our friends who just want the best for us? That the abusive members of Solo are being friends to those they hurl abuse at? To what do you refer? I can't even figure this one out.

So you're sorry you printed his private correspondence... Good to know. Still, you know the other reasons he dislikes this place. Are you really not aware of the reputation? He doesn't want to be associated with Solo because, due to poor moderation, Solo is a very unpleasant virtual place. You know this is true. I have personally discussed this with people who know him, so I know you must know this.

Why not choose to make this a site he can be proud of? Honestly, why not? Why do you allow Solo to be this way? If you allow it, the bullies will always thrive. Countless people that I personally have met have joined Solo only to leave, horrified. You must know this. In fact, it took me years to join Solo. The first time I ever surfed in I saw that someone was telling someone else to change their avatar because he was sick of looking at her ugly face. No mod stepped in to tell this person how inappropriate his comment was. I eventually gave in because it was the only show in town, but my first impression was correct.

No, I've never run a forum. I know that was meant to zing me since I can't possibly know what it entails. It doesn't matter. Solo is the result of poor moderation no matter how you look at it. I wouldn't shy away from running a forum. If Quiffaa hadn't started her site I was considering starting one.

Regarding what Worm said about how Solo has done a lot to keep Morrissey's career alive, I'm sure that's true and I'm glad of it. Thanks for that part of it. Still, Solo is also a reflection on him and it makes him look bad. Because of how you choose to run Solo, the bullies and jerks have the loudest voices here.

The ideal website you are envisioning is not realistic. What rules to the TOS do you suggest adding? If you add something as vague as you are suggesting - 'abusive behavior wouldn't be allowed', there will be more complaints... You deleted this comment, why wasn't this one deleted? This person called me an a-hole, why wasn't it deleted? etc. You complained about mods interpretations of the TOS, how would that stop by adding something that vague?

I asked if you had experience running a site because you are really are going around sounding like you are an expert. I'd suggest looking in the mirror before calling out 'bullies and jerks'. You got my attention with your personal attack previously - 'You know, there's a reason Morrissey dislikes davidt.'

Also, as much as I respect Morrissey as an artist I would not consult him on how a website should be run either. He is used to older media - radio, TV, music papers. If you look at the sites he does support however, you'll see they have nothing like an open forum. Not one person can really control an open forum.

Worm has said a lot that I wanted to say- "That's the nature of the Internet. I've visited many forums devoted to people or subjects of interest to me and all of them have trolls, bullies, jerks, kooks, and clowns". Every few years someone gets worked up about trolls and abusers on the site. I'll refer the article from 1999 which I usually end up linking to and I still stand by:

In Defense Of Anonymous Cowards by Jon Katz, Slashdot 1999
 
If Solo were my website and people were trying to tell me how to run it, I'd dig my heels in too. It's davidt's site (to ruin, his own waaaayyyyy!) and the decisions, for better or for worse, are his. Besides, he didn't cave in when Morrissey himself disagreed with him, so he's hardly likely to capitulate to a group of people who don't like one of the mods.

The option is always there for anyone to start up their own site if they don't like the way the existing ones are run. Most fail (mine did, Mozwa did, MDB did....) but Quiffaa's is doing rather well. It's not to everyone's taste but Q's running it the way she wants it and enough people like it to keep the place busy. Anyone here could do the same and see what happens, but I suppose it's just easier to mope around on Solo and moan about how awful it is, yes?
 
If Solo were my website and people were trying to tell me how to run it, I'd dig my heels in too. It's davidt's site (to ruin, his own waaaayyyyy!) and the decisions, for better or for worse, are his. Besides, he didn't cave in when Morrissey himself disagreed with him, so he's hardly likely to capitulate to a group of people who don't like one of the mods.

The option is always there for anyone to start up their own site if they don't like the way the existing ones are run. Most fail (mine did, Mozwa did, MDB did....) but Quiffaa's is doing rather well. It's not to everyone's taste but Q's running it the way she wants it and enough people like it to keep the place busy. Anyone here could do the same and see what happens, but I suppose it's just easier to mope around on Solo and moan about how awful it is, yes?

Yes, because that is the nature of a true Morrissey fan! :thumb:
 
Of course not. I'm talking about the mods. I'm saying that they should try to foster a site that strives to allow for all voices to be heard, not just the hard-ass jerks who attack, deride, and generally make Solo a cesspool.

I see what you are saying. But you know life is like that. Shrinking violets shrink. Squeaky wheels get oiled. What you make think as abusive, others might shrug and say it is par for the course.

And lets be honest, I lurked for a little while before starting to post and Scarlet you have done your fair share of name calling and back biting. I don't blame you. The internet is a place where sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.

The thing is, I can't stop imagining you self censoring. I believe you if you say you don't but you have mentioned several times how "Morrissey knows who his fans are" and "Morrissey knows what goes on in this site". I guess as you have met him several times and you are on good terms with his "people" you would like to be part of this select group. I can't help but wonder if this protest of yours is to get further into his good graces. It probably isn't. It probably is a genuine concern of yours but do you see what happens when attempts to be a representative of a third party enters the fray? The water gets muddy very quickly.

David runs this site to his own values. Not mine, not yours, not Morrissey's. You may despair at the wasted opportunity but that it is "wasted" is a judgement that you hold. Life can be frustrating. :)
 
Last edited:
The silliest part of this debate is Morrissey's supposed dislike of the site because it gives him a "bad image". Has anyone gone back and re-read Morrissey's fan letters to the NME? How about his personal letters, published by one of his pen-pals? Morrissey was sarcastic, standoffish, arrogant, self-important, and above all opinionated to the point of obnoxiousness. If Morrissey were a 14-year old user in today's world he would have been banned from all of the "friendly" web sites some people here are envisioning-- except Morrissey-Solo, an irony Morrissey is incapable of understanding, let alone savoring.
 
The silliest part of this debate is Morrissey's supposed dislike of the site because it gives him a "bad image". Has anyone gone back and re-read Morrissey's fan letters to the NME? How about his personal letters, published by one of his pen-pals? Morrissey was sarcastic, standoffish, arrogant, self-important, and above all opinionated to the point of obnoxiousness. If Morrissey were a 14-year old user in today's world he would have been banned from all of the "friendly" web sites some people here are envisioning-- except Morrissey-Solo, an irony Morrissey is incapable of understanding, let alone savoring.

Good morning, post of the day.


And mediawhore, squeaky wheels get greased. :p Your post was spot on as well.
 
I'm a...squeaky violet :straightface:

Each to their own. I like both sites and I hate what I percieve (rightly or wrongly) to be the 'us' and 'them' attitude that seems to have sprung up. It's not nice because I like people on both sites, and there are pro's and cons to both sites.

That's it really. Bit of a non-post, but as I said ages ago, it's like someone's parents getting divorced and I refuse to take sides 'cos there's no side to take.

Aurevoir.
 
what was this thread about?

Here's a translation:

Llamas communicate their moods with a series of tail, body and ear postures, and vocalizations. Humming is a common manner of communication between llamas, and indicates a variety of moods from contentedness to aggression. Another interesting llama expression is the shrill, rhythmic alarm call emitted at the sight of a strange animal (especially dogs) or a frightening situation.
 
I'm a...squeaky violet :straightface:

Each to their own. I like both sites and I hate what I percieve (rightly or wrongly) to be the 'us' and 'them' attitude that seems to have sprung up. It's not nice because I like people on both sites, and there are pro's and cons to both sites.

That's it really. Bit of a non-post, but as I said ages ago, it's like someone's parents getting divorced and I refuse to take sides 'cos there's no side to take.

Aurevoir.

Precisely how I feel. :thumb:
 
I just lurk here, so maybe you'll tell me I have no business posting this.

There is a user here who really likes to use the word "fag," and variations thereof. I'm gay, and there are times when I don't enjoy hearing or seeing this word--after it's been angrily shouted at me as I'm walking down the street, for example.

So then I come on a Morrissey site--a Morrissey site, OK?--and I see it being used very glibly, always to indicate disgust, impatience, or general disrespect. I never see anyone object to this, and you have moderators here who obviously aren't shy about objecting to things that they feel are insulting to themselves, and to the groups to which they belong. I'm thinking particularly of when you instantly banned someone for more or less randomly typing the phrase "Jap's eye," for instance.

I notice a trend in pop culture in general lately: gay people just have to take this. If we complain about being insulted, we're being "PC." We're spoiling straight people's fun. We're pushing our luck, and endangering our lucky new status as "tolerated."

I assume a large part of the apparent apathy about this, here, is due to many Morrissey fans refusing admit their sexuality.

So let me summarize by saying the administrator's recent remark about Morrissey needing sensitivity training--because he had offended a group to which the administrator belongs--was not without its hypocrisy.

Who gives a f*** really? I mean...there are much more important things to worry about than someone getting butt hurt over something someone else said? Grow a set, and man up...be proud you're a gay. You f***stick's here, get all too f***in bent -outta-shape over the dumbest f***in shit.

Save your drivel, for a better topic? for f***ssake......
 
Who gives a f*** really? I mean...there are much more important things to worry about than someone getting butt hurt over something someone else said? Grow a set, and man up...be proud you're a gay. You f***stick's here, get all too f***in bent -outta-shape over the dumbest f***in shit.

Save your drivel, for a better topic? for f***ssake......
I am deeply offended by your punctuation.
 
1=a
2=b
3=c
4=d
5=e
6=f
7=g

Simple gematria, Bach used it. Now vowels are free, you don't have to use them.

What number or no. was Bona Drag?

no 67

no fg

He's not gay. :p
 
Tags
good riddance
Back
Top Bottom