[edit: first section moved back to the oriental music thread]


I do hope that it will be a short hiatus.

Absolutely 100% agreed.  That this site was set up in direct response to the heavy-handed control at TOP (http://r3ok.myforum365.com/index.php?topic=345.0) makes this ban, whether temporary or permanent, absolutely astounding.  The irony dripping from my screen is so thick that I think I shall have to go get a mop to clean it up.

This is a place for conversation, and to suggest that one contributions to that conversation is less valid than another is extremely disappointing to me.  The one aspect I notice in all of the relevant exchanges w/ Ian is that someone else is always also involved.  In each case, these were discussions and arguments that involved multiple posters.  If his posts bother you, and if the nature of his replies bothers you, then  don't reply!  Were this a post-concert chat over a pint, if you disliked the direction of the conversation, you'd take your beer and move to another table, you wouldn't have him banned from the pub.

Utter nonsense.

Yes, that part I do understand, and I will agree that Ian's response was unfortunate.  I personally do see some sort of willingness to apologize for that aspect of the problem to be rather appropriate, but I am concerned at the increasing control in the moderation in general on these boards (there are, without any doubt, more red messages in recent weeks!) and the precedent this suspension sets is unfortunate.

And yes, it is indeed this element that perhaps bothers me the most.  I can absolutely understand the general rule to avoid postings of an explicitly sexual nature, but the implication that certain topics are 'about music' or 'not about music' seems exceptionally problematic.  Ian's politics are intensely interwoven into his music-making, as are the personal politics of several other posters on this board.

I am not at all certain where one draws the line on topicality when discussing music, composition, listening, and performance, and at the moment the moderation seems to be extremely haphazard and driven more by personal relationships (or e-relationships) than by any clearly defined rules or boundaries.

If rules about what is a 'musical' topic and what is not are to be established, they need to be posted here:  http://r3ok.myforum365.com/index.php?topic=106.0 ...

I would prefer you didn't put words in my mouth, thank you. 

I came very close to posting last night but pragmatism got the better of me and I assumed that things were probably all being sorted out behind the scenes, as many posters clearly know eachother outside of this site.

This is just to say that I was rather shocked that Ian had been banned. I must admit that I got rather bogged down trying to keep up in the latter stages of this particular thread and rather skimmed thriough it, but then I was free to do that. I really have not read everything on these boards, so I do not know if Ian has been disruptive elsewhere, or upset people unreasonably (from what Oliver says this may be the case), so I am sorry if I have missed something.

 I am rather an intermittent poster here so I am not sure really if it is my place to make comment, but I just did want add my voice to the concern already expressed.
 
Like increpatio I hope it will be a short hiatus. 

Before this discussion is taken elsewhere, I'd like to wholeheartedly second Aaron's and xyzzzz's last posts. As I'm unburdened by the eupehmistic conventions of  contemporary America, however, I'll be a little more explicit:

What arouses my "dismay", or perhaps disgust, is the combination of a)remarkable spinelessness and lack of character evident in the behind-the-scenes operation carried out by oliver sudden and his silent partners and b) the helpless resort to authoritarian methods by the moderation. There's something I quite simply don't understand: if someone is posting something people don't want to read, why can't they just IGNORE IT? It's very easy to do - that is, if you're adult enough to deal with it yourself instead of going off crying to Mummy, which some members here clearly aren't.

Treating Ian - who has a wealth of knowledge and ideas to contribute - like a troll is a greater breach of netiquette than any of his posts are. He always takes the time to argue in detail, unlike many posters who are content to dismiss his views with a few words. To recall a recent example, Reiner's thread on (supposedly!) Philip de Vitry - where he simply baited Ian and then mocked him for taking the bait - was far more juvenile and belligerent than any of Ian's posting activity, and would have been a far more appropriate cause for suspension.

Demanding apologies from Ian is nothing less than grotesque; why should he apologise for having different opinions to many other members? He hasn't, as far as I'm aware, levelled any personal insults, so to whom should he apologise? And though he could've avoided suspension by backing down - how many of us would yield humbly when someone is stifling our views?

I happen to moderate a forum myself, and I'd never dream of suspending someone just because they regularly caused heated debates. I seriously hope this isn't a taste of policy to come.