"How sad, how disappointing and yet how reaffirming that those who wish to make the case that DVDTalk can and does conduct meaningful dialogues without turning into flame wars can't provide feedback without resorting immediately to the exact kind of insults and hostile tone they profess to be against."

My experience here is that people often respond in the tone they are given. This is one of the reasons we have rules that limit how far we can go with it.

"Most of your collective posts have done little more than reinforce the need for just such a no holds barred forum."

Actually, the reverse is true. The rules that keep us from openly tearing into you are the same ones you want to eliminate in a sub-forum. Your past of ducking under the covers when it got to hot for you to handle was extremely relevant which was why a few people brought it up.

"How embarrassing."

Yeah, like that wasn't another one of your cute attempts at being dismissive.:rolleyes:

"Going forward, I will constrain my comments, observations and questions for nemein and VinVega, who are the only moderators (so far) involved in the discussion, and my original post was clearly intended for them, since none of the rest of you have any say either way on what's added to DVDTalk*."

Funny, my observations at DVD Talk have shown that the man who makes the final decisions listens to everyone. The place isn't ruled by committee, it's not a democracy, and there aren't votes on how it should be run. No offense to the moderators in question (they are great guys that do a better job moderating then I would) but concentrating your efforts on them is folly, especially acting dismissive of the rest of us. From the very beginning of the website, G! has listened to all the other crackpots too but maintains a steady course for the rules and policies; stating why on a regular basis. As others have pointed out, the trend here is to be MORE restrictive on those who try to push the limits, not less. Most of us (at least "I" won't make up net statistics in a weak attempt to prop up a failed argument) are happy with the rules. Those that aren't happy can appeal to G! for change, live with the rules, or find a better place to spend their time.

"I seek only an addition of a new, single subforum where the rules are looser; think of it along the lines as a companion piece to the DVDTalk Adult subforum, a specialized place for people who enjoy a different, even unpopular, type of discussion."

Your routine comparisons to the adult forum are poorly made. The forums are set up on the basis of content, not the style of presentation, especially a style of presentation that has led to problems in the past.

"...it is abundantly clear (par for my consistent course here at DVDTalk) that my recommendation has been summarily dismissed without real consideration..."

Given the comments made, it seems as if most of us have experience with such forums as you're suggesting or at very least forums with more lattitude to act like a prick. Had you made a clear, CONCISE argument as to why it might be a good idea, you may have convinced a few to support your inevitable request to G!. As stated earlier though, the only one you need to convince is the head guy himself, not the ones in charge of enforcing the rules you find so upsetting (which strikes me as arguing with a cop that the speed limit should be raised after he pulls you over).

"If you'll afford me the courtesy, DVDTalkers, I'll make one exception and inquire as to your suggestions..."

I have a bunch of suggestions for you but I'll play nice. As we've found in the past, it isn't "your" place to dictate terms of discussion (which is also the basis of your current request). You can make all the exceptions you want but that doesn't mean anyone has to listen to them. Given the nature of your plea for a forum fitting a specific design, perhaps you'd like to narrow down your request (Yahoo Groups have thousands of places you can rant like a lunatic at others, who will do likewise in return, without moderation as one direction to go). For "Adult" matters, you can go to XXXporntalk.com (they have a non-porn forum you can try too) but narrow it down a little and I'm sure that even with your attitude, people will assist in finding you another place to go to.

Hey Don, what are those blank lines that you leave inside the text??? It sure makes reading your post easier. I noticed that you said what you wanted to say in a sentance or two, and then left a blank space between different points. Genius! You should pattent that idea. With a little luck, everyone will start using it.

:scratch2: None of the responses so far have been in violation of the existing rules. I don't see how at the same time you can say you want a "no holds barred" forum while complaining about the nature of the posts that are perfectly allowed within the rules. If you feel differently please use the report this post feature and the mods of this forum (Geoff is one of them) will receive the note and look into it.


How do you know there's been no consideration on the part of the people who are responding? DVDtalk has been around for years and has morphed several times during its existance. Ideas/suggestions such as this one have come up in one form or another during that time. Sometimes publically such as a thread like this (or [1]), sometimes it's just amongst the moderators, esp when we were trying to decide what to do w/ the Political Forum. To dismiss the criticism people have offered of your idea in this fashion leads me to believe you haven't really thought it out much yourself (both the pros and cons of what you are suggesting) if you don't recognize they may have a valid point. Additionally to try and limit the discussion to only the moderators makes me think you aren't really interesting in hearing the opinions of everyone after all, even though you profess to want open discussion. The bottom line though is it's Geoff's site, we play by Geoff's rules and in the past he's been reluctant to have such a forum as you are recommending. Maybe w/ a persuasive enough argument you can get him to change his mind, I don't think your present argument/tact is going to do it though. You might want to change course and explain why you think DVDtalk will be enhanced by adding such a forum (I mean are we talking a different type of ads/sponsors we might be able to bring in, are we going to attract more people who'll give the site more support, etc) when forums similar to what you are suggesting are a dime a dozen.



I've never asserted that they were designed to squash dialog, in fact in the original locked thread itself I invited people to start threads about the topics you mentioned. In this thread I've invited you to participate more in the Political Forum, so your characterization of my wanting to "squash" your POV is misplaced IMHO. All I've said is your comments (aka not your views but the manner in which they were expressed) generally promote a type of "dialog" we've determined we don't want here.


Have you read the "Please Read Before Post" in the Political Forum yet? Hang around the Political Forum for awhile and see how people are able to do it. Of course when discussing grand ideas/notions you have to speak in generalizations occasionally. It's the nature of the generalization and the effect it is meant to produce (aka when it comes across as being trollish/flamebait) that we are trying to counter in order to avoid flame wars and locked threads cutting off discussion.


[1] http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=459285 is a good recent thread about the nature of the Political Forum, what should be in there and the level of rhetoric that should be tolerated.

I didn't say rules were violated (grossly subjective that they've always been), I simply stated that people seem to be more interested in lambasting me than simply and objectively stating their perspectives on my request. I'm a big boy, I can certainly handle it (as my request indicates), but it's a sad commentary that I can't simply receive basic feedback without a hostile tone. I mean you'd think by these responses, I'd asked for a Pro-Pedophile subforum. I'm not crying about it, I'm holding up a mirror to show these anti-Filmmaker posters would be a perfect fit in a no-holds-barred forum. If, as a moderator, you aren't willing to concede the consistently hostile tone with which posters are "speaking" to me (within the blasted rules or not), then stop the planet, I wanna get off.

I already answered you--there has been no dialogue, no give-and-take. You haven't worked to get at the heart of my wishes and frustrations and tried to meaningfully offer alternatives/compromises. You gave a thumbs-down and end of story, with my favorite should-be-bronzed standard moderator dismissal, "if things aren't to your liking, maybe you'd prefer to go elsewhere." For the record, that is neither helpful nor respectful advice. I'm convinced everytime one of you drops that condescending line, an angel loses her wings.

Interesting. SO I'm not just talking out of my ass--multiple people have expressed a need this forum is disinclined to cater to. Always a sign of good management when a "business" tells its "customers" what to be happy with, rather than the other way around.

Don't misquote me, sir--I seek a subforum for open discussion; I haven't requested it in this thread. DVDTalkers opinionating here are not my interest because the best they have been able to convey is that such a subforum as I request is not their cup of tea. Fine, great, ignore it, move on and keep doing what you're doing, everyone. I stand to gain nothing from feedback of people who would have no use for such a subforum. As the phrase goes, "if you don't like what you're watching, change the channel". Moderators, on the other hand, have the power to grant or decline my request.

Easily the fairest and most constructive criticism I've received so far, and I thank you for it, though it does help reinforce my accusation that you were initially dismissing my request out of hand--otherwise, such advice would have appeared in your first post to me. Not to berate you too much, though; belated helpfulness is better than none.

Again, you're slightly misquoting me--you DID indicate that my words were "meant not to promote a point or position but belittle an opposing point or position. Typically it's also done in a fashion that is w/o real merit and/or there's little that can be said to counter it; "I believe X,Y and Z and there's nothing you can say that'll make me change my mind"; sounds like squashing dialogue to me.", which brought me to the lengthy post prior to this one about ad hominem "attacks".

Frankly, it all sounds like high-minded speech meant to convey that negative observations generalized about certain political and religious groups is not tolerated, just mutual-admiration, none-of-us-are-wrong, just-different dialogues, but I'll follow your lead and do some more observations of the Political forum to see if my accusation that discussions are watered-down and "vanilla" is valid.

Oh, and to everyone else, sorry, you're wasting your breath. I've read none of your subsequent posts. Again, even if you think such a subforum as I request is the worst idea you've ever heard, then just don't visit it. It's time for hard look in the mirror when it isn't enough to just let people play in their own backyard, you must deny them that very backyard.

Based solely on this, I vote "bad idea" for this website.

So I guess you really *wouldn't* like a no-holds-barred subforum. As the man said, you ain't seen nothing yet. The majority of hostility I've seen has been coming from you, subtle though it may be, unless you're defining 'hostility' as 'disagreement'.

Incorrect. They have conveyed that it would be *detrimental to DVDTalk as a whole*, not just 'not their cup of tea.'

Exactly. I think that's been a response to you, since it doesn't look like you're going to get what you want.

Do they? Or does adding a subforum have to originate from GKleinman?

You're half right. Negative generalized observations are not tolerated, but that doesn't mean all that's left is mutual admiration, and I don't recall anyone ever saying such.

You haven't even lurked in there before jumping in and demanding a subforum? I know you didn't read the 'Read Me First' post. And I'm betting I know how your 'accusation' will end up.

In other words, your argument is "done in a fashion that is w/o real merit and/or there's little that can be said to counter it; "I believe X,Y and Z and there's nothing you can say that'll make me change my mind", since now you're not even reading opposing posts.
I have a question--are your films as pretentious as your posts?

Ah...that is a flawed metaphor. You don't *have* a backyard here. Neither do I, nor does anyone else. We're in a public park, or maybe a neighbourhood playground, and I tell you what, the HoA here is one hell of a lot less restrictive than my real one. Domains are cheap, go start www.filmmakersopenforum.com; *that* would be your backyard.

How do you know that there's been no dialog if you are afraid to read posts that don't agree with your opinion?

I think the best argument against a "no holds barred" is the fact that even the person who wants one is incapable of carrying on a discussion. When someone disagrees with Filmmaker he acts like a petulent child and proclaims that he'll no longer read anyone's post who isn't a moderator. Man, if someone making light of the fact that he's long winded with get that reaction I can imagine what a full on flame war would do.

So Filmmaker, in the spirit of a give and take discussion (if you are capable of that) could you susinctly state why you think you would be more likely to generate meaningful discussions in this forum you've proposed when you are not willing to do it in this thread.

That's actually not the case at all. People have listened to your request and voiced a concern (that the heated arguments and rivalries from the proposed forum would spill over into other forums and bring down the level of civility we have, something which many of us have seen happen before). Given the following response:

It appears that it is you who is not participating in the give and take. That is not all we've conveyed, and your refusal to even consider the arguments put forward here is doing more to stall the debate than anyone else's actions.

The fact that you are choosing to not read our posts no concern of mine. I'm mainly voicing my opinion for the benefit of the discussion, I'm merely addressing the post to you as I'm addressing your comments, seems somewhat polite. After all I do come here because I enjoy the lively discussion and debate these forums provide. :shrug:

Are we reading the same thread? Most of the people who have responded so far have stated why they think this is a bad idea. So far I haven't seen any response from you about why their concerns are unfounded.


Now you have me confused... first you complain about how "milquetoast, mutual-admiration-society-type discussions" this place has become and the rules are too restrictive and must be changed (in atleast part of the forum). Yet you then complain about the tone of some posters here but agree w/ me that no rules have been broken :confused:


You're the one who started the thread w/ the suggestion... are you saying you held back some of your argument? Why should I have to work at getting to the heart of your wishes, why aren't you coming out and stating it? One would have thought you would have stated your position fully in the original post so people can comment fully. So what is at the "heart of [your] wishes and frustrations"?


Except for them to express their opinion on how such a forum would impact DVDtalk as a whole, something that I think is worth talking about, don't you? Do you really think this "no holds barred" forum will exist in a microcosm of it's own? Actually, Mods don't have the power to create sub-forums. I'm not sure if Admins do, but I'm pretty sure nothing on that level happens here w/o Geoff's approval. That's the person who have to impress w/ your case/idea.


The customers of this site are telling management they don't want this type of forum. There may be a small subset who do, but why should management cater specifically to them? Esp. when management has shown no interest in offering that type of service in the past. It's like going into a nice high-end steak house and demanding they sell hamburgers when management has decided that's not something they want on the menu.


:lol: So now I'm supposed to argue both sides of this... I told you in the initial post it's up to Geoff and I stated why I think it's a bad idea. "You didn't worked to get at the heart of my wishes" so I didn't state more initially.


No I was addressing your point about what the level of conversation between adults consists of. In every post we've exchange on this I've said/tried to get you to become more involved in the Political Forum. Doesn't sound like trying to squash debate to me, but I'll leave the final determination/judge up to everyone else.

:lol:

Blah blha blah

Even though I enjoy watching a good flame war, wouldn't an unmoderated DVDTalk subforum just be full of spam?

Of course, it might handy if I wanted to buy some v1agra or fake Rolex watches.

Request for archival. This has to be the funniest thread I've ever seen.

das

Das, you have got to visit the Adult Forum and read some of the classic Art threads. They go on like this for dozens of pages! :lol:

And again the problem is that hard feelings from that sub forum will spill over into OUR backyards.

It already does to some extent with some of the more combative forums (politics, VG Talk) etc. leading to arguments in other forum areas by members that hate each other due to flame wars in those forums. A no holds barred forum would just magnify that.

I opened this thread all ready to give my support to a Hulk Hogan-Tiny Lister forum. Imagine my surprise when I found out what this thread was really about.:(

While I'm not surprised at all to hear this coming from a Nintendo fan such as yourself, you're dead wrong in this appraisal.

I'm amazed at the thought and effort that has gone into debate over what basically comes down to 'boo hoo, I wanted to say that conservativism is a by-product of some people being totally lacking in creativity and too inherently stupid to be interested in life and the mods wouldn't let me.' Seriously.

The simple fact is that the type of forum proposed would invite discussion that most of us (maybe even all sans one) wouldn't really want here. It'd most likely fill up with threads about things like blacks being genetically inferior to whites and jews hoarding wealth from the rest of the world. I mean, the thread in question was about on that level, just with bigger words, less mispellings and an apparently broken return key.

And the most boring, at the same time, weird eh? And I agree with Nick. Dude, go check out the Art threads in adult. Very entertaining.

And some of you people really need to get laid/get a life/move out of your parent's basement and by you people I mean Bando.

..and this is exactly the kind of thing that could be said in a no-holds-barred forum, to which I might reply "and some people could put down the Durex long enough to stop their obviously troubled son from draning penis pictures." See how that would work?

As a realist, I weary of the debate; why waste energy on a D.O.A. concept? I must make one final comment, however, before I go off into that Good Night, regarding the multiple posts that have faulted my idea because grudges would spill over into other threads. This goes to the very heart of my accusation that DVDTalk treats its members like third graders. Rules are clearly stated in each subforum. For instance, you can post pornography in Adult DVDTalk (to return to the subforum that a minority are interested in, yet got the go-ahead anyway, and why? I guess because porn = $$$, right, nemein?), but that won't fly in the regular subforums. If you do it after being warned, you get suspended/banned. Seems to me the same psychology applies here--again, we're are &@#(%&)@%&!)&%) grown-ups here!. Rule of thumb in No Holds Barred subforum: go balls to the wall. Rule of thumb in all other subforums: standard walking-on-conversational-eggshells mode. Break the rules, you get suspended or banned. Oh, but no, we're children, right? Errant youths without a smidge of self-control or adult comprehension. That blatant condescension burns me so much more than having my request dismissed out of hand, and it makes me literally nauseous that so many people are actually climbing on top of one another to defend being coddled. In any case, though, I lose. Very well. DVDTalk remains offered in vanilla flavor only. Kick a man in the groin for trying, though, eh? Once again, I'll just have to chalk it up to being a Malcolm X in a room full of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s...

I just don't get your logic here.

An all out forum would attract those with a third-grade mentality, not "grown ups" you refer to.

Those "grown ups" are posting in politics and the other forums just fine as is, as they are capable of discussing things in a mature, civil manner---AKA like adults.

You're essentially requesting a forum for those that lack the maturity and tact to discuss issues in a reasoned and civil manner--people I'd hardly apply the "grown up" label to.

:rolleyes:

You expect anyone to take you serious? I don't even think Danol or Art would approve.

You're being more like a Pee-wee Herman in an adult theater.

You don't let people you don't know "have it" just because you disagree with them. There's real life for that. There's plenty of real people around to argue or disagree with. This is dvdtalk. People don't come here to pick fights or shit on other people. And while there's plenty of disagreement on the forum, but I don't think anyone really means any harm or ill will to other members. This should all go without saying......

"Life is very short, and there's no time
For fussing and fighting, my friend."

That's what gets me....Too many things labeled 'mature' are actually juvenile, and filled with either T&A [video games, movies] or gratuitous language [movies, music, message boards]. I guess when children [by age or mentality] use words they're not supposed to, they 'feel' old. And generally, those words are directed at someone, not an idea. I've often felt that using gratuitous language means you have nothing more to add to the conversation.

What debate? Didn't you quit reading?

Just because it's dead, or impossible, doesn't mean it's not ripe for debate. Some of the best debates I can recall focused on impossibilities or impracticalities.

*shrug* I have rules I must follow when driving to work. I have rules I must follow when at my work. I have rules I must follow even at home. Adults recognize that they may disagree on many things, and compromise by setting rules or standards of behavior to govern their interactions. If we were truly treated like children, we'd hear 'Don't do that, because I say so', and not be allowed to discuss the topic or the decisions.

So now you don't even want the forums topicality to matter?

I have no problem with an adult forum helping making $$$$ -- it helps keep my access free, and I know what I might get if I browse into it.

Pot, meet kettle. [re: the condescension, not the alleged coddling].

A. Disagreement with an *idea* does not necessarily equate to disagreement with the *person*; that is, if an idea is nonsensical, that doesn't mean the person is.
B. Vanilla? I guess compared to some of the hotbeds of sewage on the net, yes. Other people might term it 'respectful', ie, there can be disagreement without being arguments.
C. MLK Jr? There's worse people to be compared to. I know virtually every state I've been in has had more than one MLK Jr boulevard; I only know of one X movie.
D. Are you seriously equating the quest for a forum where you can cuss and call people names, to the struggle for civil rights and being treated like a human being? It is to laugh.
_______________