I’d recommend ensuring that people have watched a video before entering a thread that was bumped to discuss a video.
Also, turn off all hearts/likes for posts in a trial period of at least 3 months. That would probably be beneficial. I don’t even understand the point of hearts/likes on more technical forums like this, aside from the dopamine hit.
Ok i have a complete different feel about that post, he also says that he thinks Anton is just jealous. Wtf….!
But, i respect your opinion Troy, it’s your platform.
I realy enjoy all the material, all good advice and nice discussions, it’s all good!
Having a look at the settings, I don’t think it’s possible to put limits on the “hearts” thing, at least not on the current version of the platform we use.
My “opinion” is a thing that’s still forming, so no need to blanket agree with anything I say just because I run the place! That’s the point of this thread.
This post you’re referencing is a good point of discussion because it is a mix of things. Do parts of it cross a line? Maybe! What part crosses a line, and what would you do in this case? Remove the whole thing or strike certain parts?
That’s probably true. I am of the opinion that there is no way around the need for strong moderation, by humans who set the tone they want and attract or encourage like-minded behavior. We’ve only become more so over time as the need has become clearer. We’re just looking for specific guidance on when and how to do this better.
I didn’t mean to come off critical of you in any way. This site is great because what YOU have done. Unfortunately, some can’t/don’t heed warnings quick enough.
How one feels about that post is very subjective, as i understand now.
This is up to you now, and i totaly will respect your dicision 
I’d like to suggest instabanning folks for using the f-slur or referring to people they disagree with as “demented” or “schizophrenic.” That stuff seems blatantly beyond the pale to me.
Everybody gets heated, and succumbs to rage, I mean with gas prices I cant believe we arent all going crazy on the roads when people fly by you with no disregard, and for what to have to spend more money at the pump?
Agree. As you are suggesting, passes were given for this sort of thing after private discussions. They will not be in the future.
Hopefully I didn’t miss this earlier, but I’d add that mods should be the ones to tell people to stop being naughty. If we see a post that we think is out of line and we’re just regular forum users (like me), responding directly to the person probably isn’t our place. Flag it to notify a mod and don’t escalate the situation by making a citizen’s arrest
Eric, I don’t know what you are thinking when writing this post. It didn’t help anything. If my above suggestion seemed to target you or be facetious, it wasn’t. I genuinely mean that if people haven’t watch the video, they shouldn’t be in the thread. I don’t care if it’s you, me, Troy, Paul Gilbert, whoever. So if someone says “Hey I haven’t watched the video”, it should be acceptable to flag the post. That was a problem in that thread, and I suggested in one short sentence as much.
I apologized for the schizophrenic line, publicly and private (edit: For those confused I did not say the other things mentioned and Eric is not claiming I did just FYI). More than I can say for any of the people on the “other side” who never said anything to anyone that wasn’t a member of CTC.
Let’s not go down this path again. I know what you’re doing, or rather, trying to do. It won’t work. I learned my lesson. You - clearly - did not learn yours, because it would seem the only thing you accomplished with the post you just made is a tacit admission of guilt that you were in the wrong in that thread, and that my post triggered you even though it wasn’t targeted. If you still feel guilt, you’re more than welcome to vocalize this in a constructive way that is more in line with the spirit of this thread.
If you think I was targeting you with my above suggestion, you couldn’t be more wrong (Edit: in fact, I did not remember that it was you who had said any of those things). I remembered that certain things had been flung around that really really shouldn’t have been, and decided that it really needed to be brought up since I hadn’t seen it addressed yet. That’s all.
That’s totally cool. It just came off as very strangely worded and I might have been mistaken. No hard feelings.
I’m not aware of everything that happened the other day but I was not intending to make this personal our “out” you in any way, even passive aggressively. In retrospect thinking that Eric could quote you, even unattributed, and then replying to that, was probably a little glib on my part. So, apologies for that.
Things went off the rails in good part because I/we were too permissive, as has been stated, and I agree with that. This is why I wasn’t super comfortable handing out insta-bans when I could speak to people, particularly if they are long time commenters. I still feel a little guilty that I allowed this type of behavior to slide with only a slap on the wrist, but that’s just ego talking there. Powerful boss man, lay down law!
In the very general sense, devoid and any further judgment, personal insults of that sort are worth mentioning here, and that kind of thing probably * is * ban worthy moving forward.
Yeah I’m guilty of that too since I was the first on the “scene”.
I’m generally averse to conflict, so I was being too much of a “good cop” so to say. Will try to act more decisively moving forward.
By the way, it’s worth pointing out for anyone that missed this that there’s options in between banning and doing nothing or just “telling someone off”. It’s possible to suspend users for a certain period of time e.g. a week.
That’s also a good point. There is probably some argument for suspension over insta-ban based on the circumstances. Long-time commenter with a positive track record vs burner account for example.
This goes directly against me, but I’m fine with it: Do you think people should be held to the exact same standard, or is preferential treatment really what you want? It’s a tough question and that might snowball into “Well you just let him get away with it because of reason!” And that could create a whole other sticking point around here. Just anticipating future concerns.
(I’m reflecting on how hilarious it would be if you banned me right after this post lmfao, I don’t think I could even be mad)
don’t bring your rage here, from outside influences. pure and simple. getting annoyed and expressing some negativity in the context of guitar is one thing… you are bringing anger because of fuel prices into a discussion about a guitar teacher… it’s immature. take your grievances offline
Totally legit question. And I think the answer is that different responses for different situations isn’t preferential if it’s based on standards that are the same for everyone.
If someone has a long history of demonstrating constructive engagement with other people, it is sensible to expect that this person may come around with a reminder in the form a PM or temp suspension. If someone has the opposite history, or no history, it’s sensible to expect a different outcome and respond more aggressively.
It’s only preferential if the situation suggests one thing but we do another.