A discussion On What Constitutes Abuse And What Should Be Done About It
-
Mark_Wallace wrote:
Someone has decided to flag my above posting as abuse
Yeah, the same person responsible for mis-flagging a ton of messages. I'm adding code specifically for his enjoyment.
cheers Chris Maunder
I never get to work on code that would be that much fun to do.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I think his signature is like a bumper sticker - It's a way of sticking his point of view in someone's face that they can't do anything about it. Bumper stickers are allowed on private vehicles, but if you don't own the vehicle, you probably shouldn't put your own stickers on it. I say that he doesn't own this vehicle, and so should abide by the wishes of the owner - Code Project ownership and staff.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
I think your analogy shoots itself in the foot -- which is a shame, because I like it. If a message were a car, it would be owned by the poster; CP would be the road network.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Yes, that's exactly what I and others think
It's certainly taken a long time to get here. So: Your sig is part of your signature. Include religion or politics in your sig and I consider it as including the content in your message. At that point I'll judge whether your trying to incite a conversation on religion or politics in a given forum and will take the appropriate action. This isn't up for debate. This is how I will run my forum. a) My discussion on language included a bunch of details you've conveniently elided. Swear words are obfuscated, most public newspapers are fine with posting obfuscated swear words, so from the point of view of propriety, I have no problem. b) Swear words are words. They aren't discussions on religion and politics that take over the Lounge and make it a place where the majority of developers no longer want to visit due to it being hijacked by those wanting to use it as a soapbox. That is the reason for the ban on religion and politics in the lounge. Two very different things.
This is starting to need a very big DON'T FEED THE TROLL Every time you have said something, he has tried to turn around your words. It is not worth, he is not going to change the way he answers in this "conversation". I have read the full thread so far and (for me) it can be resumed to:
do
{
if message.contains (respect)
play_the_card_of (it was not so bad)
else if message.contains (rules)
play_the_card_of (speech freedom)
else if message.contains (you are not getting the idea)
play_the_card_of (other people support me)
}
while (someone answers)--------------------- About the original question asking for opinions: I am one of the 99% who doesn't know who Matt is. I am one of the 90% who doesn't care who Matt says. For me signatures are a very tricky thema. To avoid all kind of "grey zones" boundaries to spam, abuse, bypassing guidelines and so on... I would just delete signatures or add a very simple and easy to understand rule for them... NO LINKS AT ALL, it doesn't matter if URL, a href, plain text or whatever format.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
The thing is, his signature isn't abusive. The topic however is a hot one and people will always think it's abusive if it doesn't automatically support their opinion. Setting different rules for each forum is the right choise. You either have to start having separate sigs for each forum, delete them entirely, or accept that if they're allowed in any one (Soapbox), they should be accepted for all. If his sig was in the Soapbox as a message, it would be a hot topic and marked as spam incorrectly. If his post or signature was actively condemning someone, then I agree it should be removed.
^This hits the nail on the head. Is having a link to a political article or petition in a sig the same thing as creating a post on a political topic? I don't think it's the same thing: unlike a post that will get read along with the rest of the thread, a link in a sig says nothing unless you click on it. Also, if it's OK to have the sig in the soapbox but not other forums, is there some kind of mechanism to allow the sig in one forum but not the others? Does there need to be? Is the fact that the sig is going to show up outside of the soapbox enough to ask for the sig to be removed entirely? If he was posting political statements in the wrong forums I'd see that as a clear-cut violation, but it's a bit different with sigs. Does he really need to have that in his sig? No, but does anyone need a sig anyway? If it's getting this messy, maybe they should just be done away with.
-
Hey, what's wrong with prog rock. I'm not saying punk was bad, I have plenty of punk in my collection. Prog rock is still going too. Yes has just released a new album and Rush (not as big in the UK, but icons in Canada) a couple of years back. The Moody Blues toured recently .... Disco on the other hand. X| Ya young whippersnapper!
Disco is still around, they call it house music these days.
-
Zeppelin were finished before punk came along. I am talking about all that late 70s prog rock crap like emerson lake and palmer. God it was pretentious drivel. All I need to know about guitar is how to play Whole lot of Rosie b ACDC, or stairway to heaven. :) (Yes, I could tell you about dorian, phrigian, mixalodian and all that crap. But I am sure its only used by pretentious prog rock artists! :) )
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Yes, I could tell you about dorian, phrigian, mixalodian and all that crap. But I am sure its only used by pretentious prog rock artists!
Actually, modes are mostly used by traditional folk musicians.
-
Just a link to another anti-Israel hate site. It is only the Jews - so who cares indeed.
Nick Polyak
Thanks, you just gave yourself away.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Or any politics for that matter
So this whole thing boils down to you taking the view that a signature is not part of a message or discussion. That what you include in your sig is essentially invisible, inviolate and not subject to posting guidelines. Was not me, guv'nor, 'twas my sig, the little rascal. Never know what he'll get up too next!
Actually, its about Israel. http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4986990/Re-A-discussion-On-What-Constitutes-Abuse-And-What.aspx[^] Some people just cant stand to have it criticised and will use any means at their disposal to crush criticism of it. Here, Nick has successfully convinced you that my posts are political. (At first you didn't, you thought his behaviour was wrong, and you 'had words with the nuker' to quote you. Clearly as part of that conversation he convinced you he was right.) Its a sad world where we have to tread on eggshells because of events 70 years ago in Germany. Where such a shadow makes us sit back and see innocent children murdered. Anyway, I am sure politics, morality and religion are not allowed to be discussed here so I will stop at that.
-
Thanks, you just gave yourself away.
Always obliged
Nick Polyak
-
Actually, its about Israel. http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4986990/Re-A-discussion-On-What-Constitutes-Abuse-And-What.aspx[^] Some people just cant stand to have it criticised and will use any means at their disposal to crush criticism of it. Here, Nick has successfully convinced you that my posts are political. (At first you didn't, you thought his behaviour was wrong, and you 'had words with the nuker' to quote you. Clearly as part of that conversation he convinced you he was right.) Its a sad world where we have to tread on eggshells because of events 70 years ago in Germany. Where such a shadow makes us sit back and see innocent children murdered. Anyway, I am sure politics, morality and religion are not allowed to be discussed here so I will stop at that.
Providing a link to an anti-Jewish hate site is clearly political. We do not want have Arab-Israeli massacres at this web-site. We want everyone to feel comfortable. I am a geek and came here to communicate with other geeks about software - not about politics. The value of the web-site is primarily not in the lounge but in the published articles. I do not want to publish my political opinions here because I want people of other political persuasion to be comfortable here too discussing and sharing software. Munchies_Matt has not published a single article here but was providing anti-Israel messages for several years. I do not think it is fair. If I noticed it before I would have raised the question earlier.
Nick Polyak
-
Providing a link to an anti-Jewish hate site is clearly political. We do not want have Arab-Israeli massacres at this web-site. We want everyone to feel comfortable. I am a geek and came here to communicate with other geeks about software - not about politics. The value of the web-site is primarily not in the lounge but in the published articles. I do not want to publish my political opinions here because I want people of other political persuasion to be comfortable here too discussing and sharing software. Munchies_Matt has not published a single article here but was providing anti-Israel messages for several years. I do not think it is fair. If I noticed it before I would have raised the question earlier.
Nick Polyak
Nick Polyak wrote:
an anti-Jewish hate site
And now you really give yourself away. The site is about Israel complying with UN law pure and simple. Your objection to my sig is not because its political, its because its anti Israeli extremism.
Nick Polyak wrote:
The value of the web-site is primarily not in the lounge but in the published articles.
That is your opinion, me and many others think its prime value are the non technical discussion forums.
-
Providing a link to an anti-Jewish hate site is clearly political. We do not want have Arab-Israeli massacres at this web-site. We want everyone to feel comfortable. I am a geek and came here to communicate with other geeks about software - not about politics. The value of the web-site is primarily not in the lounge but in the published articles. I do not want to publish my political opinions here because I want people of other political persuasion to be comfortable here too discussing and sharing software. Munchies_Matt has not published a single article here but was providing anti-Israel messages for several years. I do not think it is fair. If I noticed it before I would have raised the question earlier.
Nick Polyak
Anyway, is my new sig acceptable?
-
Or even a good old British Rock band!
How about the Who? Townsend's work is full of 2nds and 4ths! Yes? Led Zeppelin? Queen - they were music students? Coldplay? There's plenty of "popular" music that uses more than the 3 "standard" chords. It may be true that they don't write music by scoring a stave, but then I doubt Beethoven did. I'd also suggest that most established guitarists could transpose a work written in a major key to a minor key. Many modern songwriters use Dorian and Aeolian modes regularly. They may not even think in those terms, but they definitely make conscious choices about using, say, D & E major or minor when writing a song in Am. Kids making a group might not know the theory of music and composition, but their ears lead them to make choices. They probably start of by moving existing chord shapes around to different positions or changing one note of a chord (either by accident or as an experiment), but I can virtually guarantee that they move on from your basic 3 chords pretty quickly. I agree that pretentiousness can creep in. I call it "Emperor's New Clothes" art, whether it's a potato sack in the Tate or someone chucking an augmented 4th into a piece of music (unless maybe it's a music score for a movie, used to indicate a threat), I don't get it. Maybe I'm a Philistine (pun intended!). You mentioned Stairway, it starts with an AmM9th - now there's a weird chord! Musical sophistication doesn't have to be pretentious. Finally, I don't believe that Punk started out trying to eradicate "pretentious prog rock" groups or Disco. The kids in the groups were doing what they wanted using what they knew how to do. The audiences for Progressive Rock and Punk probably had little overlap, except for music geeks like me. I think that the "intellectualisation" of Punk came later, largely from pretentious Punks like Malcolm McLaren. Final point: Progressive Rock is still about. It isn't mass market, but then it never was. Disco is also still around in a sense (as observed by another poster in this thread), it's just changed it's name. So if the aim of Punk fans was to destroy both, they rather failed! :)
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
How about the Who? Townsend's work is full of 2nds and 4ths! Yes? Led Zeppelin? Queen - they were music students? Coldplay? There's plenty of "popular" music that uses more than the 3 "standard" chords. It may be true that they don't write music by scoring a stave, but then I doubt Beethoven did. I'd also suggest that most established guitarists could transpose a work written in a major key to a minor key. Many modern songwriters use Dorian and Aeolian modes regularly. They may not even think in those terms, but they definitely make conscious choices about using, say, D & E major or minor when writing a song in Am. Kids making a group might not know the theory of music and composition, but their ears lead them to make choices. They probably start of by moving existing chord shapes around to different positions or changing one note of a chord (either by accident or as an experiment), but I can virtually guarantee that they move on from your basic 3 chords pretty quickly. I agree that pretentiousness can creep in. I call it "Emperor's New Clothes" art, whether it's a potato sack in the Tate or someone chucking an augmented 4th into a piece of music (unless maybe it's a music score for a movie, used to indicate a threat), I don't get it. Maybe I'm a Philistine (pun intended!). You mentioned Stairway, it starts with an AmM9th - now there's a weird chord! Musical sophistication doesn't have to be pretentious. Finally, I don't believe that Punk started out trying to eradicate "pretentious prog rock" groups or Disco. The kids in the groups were doing what they wanted using what they knew how to do. The audiences for Progressive Rock and Punk probably had little overlap, except for music geeks like me. I think that the "intellectualisation" of Punk came later, largely from pretentious Punks like Malcolm McLaren. Final point: Progressive Rock is still about. It isn't mass market, but then it never was. Disco is also still around in a sense (as observed by another poster in this thread), it's just changed it's name. So if the aim of Punk fans was to destroy both, they rather failed! :)
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
Well, in fact the Who are one of the greatest rock bands, if not the founders of rock and are the group I learnt to cut my teeth on playing guitar, and uniquely, Townsend used a lot of chords, in fact a mind blowing number, played in quick sucession. I cant think of any other mainstream guitarist like him for that.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Yes, I could tell you about dorian, phrigian, mixalodian and all that crap. But I am sure its only used by pretentious prog rock artists!
Actually, modes are mostly used by traditional folk musicians.
Not so, Jazz makes extensive use. It's true that some folk instruments are simple modal instruments (e.g., bagpipes, the Apalachian Dulcimer). As mentioned in my reply to Matt, popular music frequently uses Dorian or Aeolian modes (as opposed to "harmonic minor") for songs in a minor key. The point I was trying to make is that as soon we start talking about comparing one musical genre versus another, you are one of: not knowing what you're talking about; trolling or maybe you have a valid point (i.e., don't bring a knife to a gunfight!) My argument is that Matt's point is not valid, but he does appear to know what he's talking about. Trolling might be an over-statement, but he's definitely trying to yank my chain! ;p
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
Well, in fact the Who are one of the greatest rock bands, if not the founders of rock and are the group I learnt to cut my teeth on playing guitar, and uniquely, Townsend used a lot of chords, in fact a mind blowing number, played in quick sucession. I cant think of any other mainstream guitarist like him for that.
At last we have some convergence! The first single I bought was My Generation and I maintain that Who's Next is a must have album. I've always said that one of the things that define a musician as great is having a distinctive style. Townsend owns this style, playing lead guitar using mostly chords rather than riffs. He especially likes his 4ths and 2nds. There are others who are continually changing harmonic structure on guitar, but doing it as aggressively as him, it's hard to bring one to mind. A lot of Jazz guitarists do. As far as founders of Rock. There are many who predate the Who that I can name, I'd only have to use Link Wray, a 50s rocker who was way ahead of his time, to win the argument (listen to Rumble)!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
Not so, Jazz makes extensive use. It's true that some folk instruments are simple modal instruments (e.g., bagpipes, the Apalachian Dulcimer). As mentioned in my reply to Matt, popular music frequently uses Dorian or Aeolian modes (as opposed to "harmonic minor") for songs in a minor key. The point I was trying to make is that as soon we start talking about comparing one musical genre versus another, you are one of: not knowing what you're talking about; trolling or maybe you have a valid point (i.e., don't bring a knife to a gunfight!) My argument is that Matt's point is not valid, but he does appear to know what he's talking about. Trolling might be an over-statement, but he's definitely trying to yank my chain! ;p
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at, but I never said that only folk music used modes. Yes some folk instruments are non-chromatic and suited for modal music, and much folk music was originally composed on such instruments (flutes and pipes in particular), which is one of the reasons folk music tends to be modal, but even when composed on chromatic instruments like the fiddle most traditional music is still modal. Folk music has been using modes for thousands of years. Keep in mind that by traditional folk music I'm not talking about 1960s singer-songwriters. How long has Jazz been using modes, and where did the influence come from? Traditional music is the foundation of most of Western music, that's been true since ancient times. And it's especially true of popular music.
-
At last we have some convergence! The first single I bought was My Generation and I maintain that Who's Next is a must have album. I've always said that one of the things that define a musician as great is having a distinctive style. Townsend owns this style, playing lead guitar using mostly chords rather than riffs. He especially likes his 4ths and 2nds. There are others who are continually changing harmonic structure on guitar, but doing it as aggressively as him, it's hard to bring one to mind. A lot of Jazz guitarists do. As far as founders of Rock. There are many who predate the Who that I can name, I'd only have to use Link Wray, a 50s rocker who was way ahead of his time, to win the argument (listen to Rumble)!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
Calexico isn't Rock, in the same way as rock and roll isn't. The first rock music is by the Kinks, You Really Got Me, and All Day and All Night. The Who are very close on their heels with Cant Explain and My Generation. In fact so far ahead were they that they were almost the first Punk band with Anyway Anyhow Anywhere. Just watch it, its amazing[^] Yes there are the Beatles, Stone, Yardbirds, but they are all blues or RnB based. These two bands were the first to totally distance themselves form the Blues chord progressions and thus to me are the true founders of Rock.
-
I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at, but I never said that only folk music used modes. Yes some folk instruments are non-chromatic and suited for modal music, and much folk music was originally composed on such instruments (flutes and pipes in particular), which is one of the reasons folk music tends to be modal, but even when composed on chromatic instruments like the fiddle most traditional music is still modal. Folk music has been using modes for thousands of years. Keep in mind that by traditional folk music I'm not talking about 1960s singer-songwriters. How long has Jazz been using modes, and where did the influence come from? Traditional music is the foundation of most of Western music, that's been true since ancient times. And it's especially true of popular music.
My apologies, I had read your statement as claiming that modes "weren't used" elsewhere. This particular sub-thread started by me poking fun at Matt for his incidental claim that Punk (given to the world by his generation) had destroyed "pretentious prog rock" and Disco. I think Matt sees himself in a super-hero cape ridding the world of evil which apparently includes Genesis and ELP. I'm still not sure where he stands on Yes, King Crimson and Curved Air. I certainly wouldn't want to deride folk music in any way. I was once both a member of the English Folk Dance and Song society and a Morris Dancer! (don't let Griff see this!) :) Of course, most (all?) modern popular music has come from folk roots. Much, of course, has come from Afica, via the US and Blues. Jazz and some classical music can be the furthest away from traditional music. The use of dissonance and "breaking the rules" is what moves these genres away from traditional modes. Of course modes are, and always have been around us. The "modern" major key is the Ionian mode. While simple melodies might be expressed in modes, it's subtle and, at times irrelevant and hard to detect (hard-line theorists will probably disagree!). As soon as we move into harmonies (without dissonance) we are very much in modal turf. I've never played the Pipes, although I believe they can be chromatic. The Apalachian dulcimer is definitely (I had/played one of those which got lost in my move from the UK to Canada), but both are played using a drone (drones) and a melody. It is the relationship between the drone and the melody that most simply defines and identifies the 7 modes, although reading up music theory on the subject can very quickly cause blood to ooze from your ears!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
-
Calexico isn't Rock, in the same way as rock and roll isn't. The first rock music is by the Kinks, You Really Got Me, and All Day and All Night. The Who are very close on their heels with Cant Explain and My Generation. In fact so far ahead were they that they were almost the first Punk band with Anyway Anyhow Anywhere. Just watch it, its amazing[^] Yes there are the Beatles, Stone, Yardbirds, but they are all blues or RnB based. These two bands were the first to totally distance themselves form the Blues chord progressions and thus to me are the true founders of Rock.
She Loves you ends on a 6th!
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
