Membership Drive Underway

[Ron]

Luke has informed me that June is "New Member's Month" here at Lukedot.com.forums.pac.org. Our goal, and a lofty one at that, is to increase membership into the nose-bleed three-digit region--for you morons out there that means 100. As there are currently only 60 members signed on, that means we've all got our work cut out for us. Finding an additional 40 members won't be easy. Luke has suggested bringing our laptops with us where ever we go--the ballpark, school, the public baths--as you just may bump into a future [non-participating] member and can sign him up on the spot. Good luck to one and all!

[lukpac]

Works for me. Go get 'em, gang.

[Xenu]

I wonder if, at the sh.tv forum, they'll remember to subtract the members who they have but don't want anymore when they reach their "lofty goal."

[Ed Bishop]

I wonder if, at the sh.tv forum, they'll remember to subtract the members who they have but don't want anymore when they reach their "lofty goal."

Probably not, but... D, this won't take into account your irrational, stupid and self-destructive reactions to members you should have ignored.


Nothing personal, luv ya, but the truth hurts.

ED

[Sound]

Do they count the "irrational, stupid" 13 year olds?

[lukpac]

Probably not, but... D, this won't take into account your irrational, stupid and self-destructive reactions to members you should have ignored.

Come on, Ed. The main thing that was "irrational" and "stupid" was the way the whole "situation" was handled. "Oh, no! He's not being Friendly and Cheerful! We must have Harmony. HARMONY!"

[Ron]

Hey, let's lighten up, my thead-crapping friends. Insulting Xenu--O he who lusts for Asian boys--gets us nowhere, man. We've a Membership Drive underway!

[Rspaight]

I'm in it for the premiums. What kind of goodies are we talking about here?

Ryan

[Xenu]

Cookies.

OATMEAL COOKIES.

I shan't work for anything less.

[Patrick M]

Is it safe to take laptops to public baths? What about hair dryers?

[Ed Bishop]

Cookies.

OATMEAL COOKIES.

I shan't work for anything less.

I'm into oatmeal raisin, myself.

The thing about wanting members is, only so many are going to post. I checked several of the bigger sites out--including HTF and Macca, among others--and my estimation is that a full 25% of members who register never post ONCE! I would guess the percentage is lower in a small venue such as this one, but I was amazed at that high a percentage of goose eggs. I'll be the first to admit I've registered at some forums and posted very little, but I always make an appearance. Being a lurker anywhere, all the time, is kind of a waste, for me.

I've also found that every forum of any significant size has its share of what I would describe as 'button-pushers'--the kind who exploit the temper and weaknesses of others, rather than simply getting along. We encountered them when you and Luke did your Stones FAQ--idiots who wouldn't listen, then just started to piss in the pool, so to speak. There's little of that now. But if I've learned anything, it's that every board is different and it helps to adjust accordingly. At HTF, for instance, they don't have much tolerance for frivolous threads. I'm a firm believer in the occasional pointless thread, as it's a great place to relax and let off steam without being hassled. Though some of you may believe otherwise, SH is as loose and friendly as it's ever been, and even when it got hot--and last December was kinda hot, remember?--it was fun to be in, which cannot be said for HTF, and other forums where having a sense of humor is often considered some kind of offense. It was also heartening to see Krabapple return after a few months off. Always remember: their house, their rules. But it's a very nice house, and I wouldn't dream of staying away. Guys like Steve don't come along very often.

HTF is the tightest of any forums I visit on a regular basis; you really have to be careful when posting, with 35K+ members, there's always someone around to challenge anything you say. Gets to be a pain, which is why I now read much more than I post, when I have time to visit at all.

But while you may scoff at the notion of membership drives, let's face it, this little place could use a few more members. I see the word has been getting out, though.

ED

[Ed Bishop]

Probably not, but... D, this won't take into account your irrational, stupid and self-destructive reactions to members you should have ignored.

Come on, Ed. The main thing that was "irrational" and "stupid" was the way the whole "situation" was handled. "Oh, no! He's not being Friendly and Cheerful! We must have Harmony. HARMONY!"

Could it have all been handled better? Certainly. But like I said: their house, their rules, which have never been unreasonable. The fact remains, however, that D's outburts would have gotten him sacked at a place like HTF a lot faster than at SH. At HTF, it doesn't take much to get banned; I've seen it happen too many times. At Macca, it takes a lot, maybe too long. At SH they want everyone to get along, which is not unreasonable. I can't argue with the attitude that if you have a beef, don't bitch out in the open--that's what PM's are for. Once it gets personal, you always wind up the loser. I've learned to stay out of shitty threads that turn ugly, unless a friend is getting it, then I jump in, but always as detached as possible--getting angry does no good. The line between civil debate and ugly rancor isn't a fine one--you know when it's been crossed, and at most forums--not just Steve's--it simply isn't tolerated for long. Don't know about you, but I'd rather just have a lively talk than a vicious one. That Steve doesn't want that kind of shit is to his credit. He only asks that we not dump on each other, and I haven't any problem with that. The ban on poltical discussion there is hardly unique; HTF bans it, too. That siad, there are plenty of places to go--including here--when we want to hash out GW's latest line of bullshit. But politics is for the thick-skinned only; I've seen more than a few wilt under close scrutiny. I always try to leave my temper at the door. Better that way.

And I don't care what board you're in, you're never going to agree with every policy 100%. But the SH board gives off pretty good vibes these days, something to remember if you ever get an itch to return. More than a few of the veterans miss having you around. I understand why you don't want to go back, but members don't set policy. And SH policy isn't restrictive or unreasonable. If it were, I wouldn't be there.

ED

[Xenu]

I deleted my previous post on my topic. I won't delete this one.

Could it have all been handled better? Certainly. But like I said: their house, their rules, which have never been unreasonable.

Have never...? Have you been listening? Where do the rules imply that private conversation with a gort can get you banned?

The fact remains, however, that D's outburts would have gotten him sacked at a place like HTF a lot faster than at SH.

Your use of "outbursts" is frankly somewhat disingeuous and implies you know a heck of a lot more about me than you do. Forums are not necessarily an indication of one's....oh, inner state of being. I've been known to call people flaccid while *perfectly under the control of my higher faculties*, thanks.

At HTF, it doesn't take much to get banned; I've seen it happen too many times. At Macca, it takes a lot, maybe too long. At SH they want everyone to get along, which is not unreasonable.

Of course it's unreasonable! Have you *ever* seen *any* internet medium where everyone gets along all the time? Have you ever used Usenet? Have you ever used IRC? Enforcing "nice" means that personalities are stunted, and it engenders a whole lot of asskissing and hero worship. Which Steve might as well want...heck, it's certainly improving his stock by leaps and bounds (people are namechecking him in polls..."All hail Steve Hoffman". Thank god Roger McGuinn got off the internet when he did, or else the same crew might be offering to pluck his Rickenbacker daily)

I can't argue with the attitude that if you have a beef, don't bitch out in the open--that's what PM's are for.

Unless the moderator doesn't like you, because then you get banned for PMs.

Once it gets personal, you always wind up the loser. I've learned to stay out of shitty threads that turn ugly, unless a friend is getting it, then I jump in, but always as detached as possible--getting angry does no good.

Anger can be cathartic. Besides, it's just the internet...you have to operate on the principle that the people you're talking to know it's just an audio forum. And that they're not, say, psychotic stalkers who will hunt you down because you destroyed their UDI vs UDII fantasies.

The line between civil debate and ugly rancor isn't a fine one--you know when it's been crossed, and at most forums--not just Steve's--it simply isn't tolerated for long.

Your authoritative use of "most" intrigues me. I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

So we're discounting, say, USEnet again?

Don't know about you, but I'd rather just have a lively talk than a vicious one. That Steve doesn't want that kind of shit is to his credit. He only asks that we not dump on each other, and I haven't any problem with that.

He also asks that we don't disagree, ever, and that we don't disagree with the gorts, ever, especially not in private.

The ban on poltical discussion there is hardly unique; HTF bans it, too. That siad, there are plenty of places to go--including here--when we want to hash out GW's latest line of bullshit.

IIRC, the problem wasn't sh.tv's ban on political threads; the problem was the ridiculous "threadcrapping" rule (aka the "don't disagree" rule) that was trotted out frequently to stop criticism. Those lists of "Gee, remember in the good old days when you could chug lead paint and sodomize seventy strangers in nightclubs and get shot in the eye with BB guns and drink sewage-infested water and be crippled by polio but still be cheerful and aren't kids today spoiled and horrible and they don't like vinyl and they don't really like music and I wish we would just kill them all KILL THEM ALL TAKING MY SOCIAL SECURITY AWAY I WANT MY PENSION YOU MOTHERFUCKERS" were kinda insulting to us under-30 crowd. But we couldn't disagree, because the forum is fantasyland.

But politics is for the thick-skinned only; I've seen more than a few wilt under close scrutiny. I always try to leave my temper at the door. Better that way.

Again, difference between temper and passion. I'm never angry. Just bitter.

But the SH board gives off pretty good vibes these days, something to remember if you ever get an itch to return. More than a few of the veterans miss having you around. I understand why you don't want to go back, but members don't set policy. And SH policy isn't restrictive or unreasonable. If it were, I wouldn't be there.

A few points:

a) sh.tv does not give off good vibes. Have you seen/read/heard of the Stepford Wives? It kinda feels like that. Party line! Make everything look good for the suits who *might be browsing*. All noise reduction is bad! All compression is bad! There was a good a few weeks back who was asking if he "could" use NR/digital compression in his home recordings. If you're a hobbyest, that's all you have, and some people seem to forget that
i) Compression, as "We" dislike it, is a post-production mastering phenomenon, and not a recording phenomenon, and
ii) We don't like post-production NR because hiss is inherent in the tape medium, but digital setups are variable, adn some will produce noise, which can build up, so get rid of it

but anyway, the reaction was "NO! DON'T USE IT!" and Steve told him to get an analogue compressor, and it was just "why?"

b) Hero worship. It's irritating. Steve might be a great guy (he's never been particularly nasty to me--that was the Gorts' business--but we've never really communicated one on one), but hero worship is always disturbing. And you get lots lots lots of that there.

c) Oh fuck. I'm not spelling this out for you.


And guess what, Ed? If it were unreasonable, of *course* you'd be there. I don't see you disagreeing with Steve when he asserts that audio taken from a CD via ripping sounds "naturally inferior" to other sources. I don't see you bringing up the tests Luke's performed to gently remind Dave that, scientifically, he seems to be living in a fantasyworld. That's the stuff I'd do, because I was on that forum to discuss things and argue things and not to feel good about myself.

Presumably, that's why I'm banned and you're not. They don't seem to miss me. I don't really miss them. But I still dislike that things went this way.

[lukpac]

Roger McGuinn is off the 'net?

[Patrick M]

Unless the moderator doesn't like you, because then you get banned for PMs.

What of those "200 e-mails" purported to be floating around?