Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

Seriously, Jeff...if you don't belong here, then I'm just throwin' my little cap with the bells on it in a drawer and callin' it a day...

Politics, Religion and Sexuality..........Two of my pet hates........please, no more talk of politics and religion. In the UK, only 30% can be bothered to vote and 95% of them haven't got a clue what they're doing. As for religion, less said - soonest mended. Sorry Peter, but you started it

I'm all for a harmonious Forum. Keep up the fine work.

ps....Nice to see John Hall posting again.

Politics, Religion and Sexuality..........Two of my pet hates........please, no more talk of politics and religion. In the UK, only 30% can be bothered to vote and 95% of them haven't got a clue what they're doing. As for religion, less said - soonest mended. Sorry Peter, but you started it

I'm all for a harmonious Forum. Keep up the fine work.

ps....Nice to see John Hall posting again.

Whoops........repeating myself again.........

I tried a while back....Maybe another look.

http://www.rickresource.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=6&post=228549#POST228549

I have been spending too much time here ... I need to go get involved in sex and religion and politics ...

With roundwounds only, no string mutes, and only 5 string basses too right?

Jeff, your input is greatly appreciated by the community, and you would be sorely missed!

I think that we all have had a button or two pushed once in a while, and it is all too easy to let our knee-jerk response lead us to say things we shouldn't (been there, done that myself). As I have said so before, it's our diversity that makes us stronger, so we should strive to understand that a difference of opinion doesn't make a person an enemy.

Something that comes to mind is the difference in philosophies which the following statements embrace:

1.Those who are not against us, are for us.

2.Those who are not for us, are against us.

The difference may be subtle at first, but when one thinks about it, the statements represent two very different attitudes toward others. I try to abide by the first.

Sorry if this is a bit too much, Peter.

Besides all of that Jeff, we'll hunt you down and drag you back kicking and screaming to our looney bin.

So you see, "You can never leave" (Hotel California lyrics for those who have been living in a cave).

I started putting political jokes in a long long thread here last year and it blew up in my face and the whole thread got deleted. I also got involved in another stupid long thread of which I'm sure I don't have to remind most members here of and it was just to prove a point. I took about a 6 month break which I needed. I now occasionally find myself deleting posts which appear on the surface to be innocent but aren't. I've tried to become much more aware of posts that can potentially offend other people. An old (literally) friend of mine who passed away several years ago used to say "let the other guy win" it works although it is hard to do at first for some of us more opinionated members. It becomes easier to do with time. The time I spent away from here did me some good.

It's quite easy these days to post something in the heat of the moment. I've always felt that the notion of empathy must be taken into account when posting. Before I submit anything I always ask myself whether what I've written could be mis-construed or hurtful to someone on the board. If I have any doubts, a re-write is in order. A good rule - read twice - post once. But for the most part the folks on this forum are terrific and quite civil (especially when compared with other music forums).

Bob, did you go to Tahiti?

I always take the medium into account as well. I posted a remark here once and got (a rather sensitive and eloquent) response from a forum member thinking he had offended me and apologizing for it. When I went back and read my post, I realized my message could easily have been misconstrued although the original tone that I meant was equally valid. It is easy to post something that comes off harsher than you meant it to, more personal, more critical, more sarcastic, etc. This is compounded by the fact that even though people "know" each other fairly well on this forum, we are all essentially strangers in most ways and only rely on written words to communicate. When you stop and think about it, this is a pretty unique way to get to know people and our (mis)communication amongst friendly strangers is necessarily hampered by the lack of body language clues, intonation, expression, relationship history, context, and so on. So, while one guy might say something in a a half-joking way, or even in a friendly combative sort of way, the respondent can easily get their hackles up because they are missing the context of communication. And, I should note that they may get their hackles up justifiably, if the context of the post is taken in a certain way. It's the nature of the beast.

I actually enjoy diverse perspectives and "heated" exchanges, if they're conducted in a way that does not make anybody uncomfortable. I suspect that none of these "exchanges" would be "incidents" at all if the "debaters" were face to face and could read the other person in a more holistic way than an online forum allows. While I don't know you that well, I think I do know most of you well enough to know you are not mean-spirited or hostile and to me, that personally goes a long way in any kind of "heated" exchanges. In this spirit, I always give people the benefit of the doubt when talking whilst I have these digital blinders on.

My goodness, I've never written a post with so many "quotation" marks. I must be scared to offend...

Thanks Bill,

That was very well put and indeed a very timely post. I would like to think that we are all friends here in a manner of speaking. At least as much as we can be, considering the limitations of our method of communicating with each other.