A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Suggest features, report bugs, and discuss matters related to the website and the forum.
Kradokk
Runaway
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:48 pm

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by Kradokk »

Phil said this far better than I could ever express it.

I, personally, am not offended. Everyone has their line, and while imho it has been crossed, by no means do I speak for everyone. I am not singling out anyone, but the reality is that imho, the constant way that they Dave's jeans comments seem to seep out of their thread has grown old. Like I said, these comments aren't personal, just as I don't take personally the people that tell me to chill out.

There seem to be more holes in the Dave's Pants thread than there are in the pants themselves.

My post here was not intended as a cry for the moderators to rule with an iron fist and impose their will, but rather a suggestion that we all just try to be a bit more creative in our posts. Yes, times are slow, but there really is no need to start filling everything from show reviews, to questions about the bands financial status with comments about Dave's nether regions.

While Phill started it humorously, and innocently enough, it quickly spun into discussion of rushing the stage in an attempt to glimpse flesh. Dave is an adult, and by no means am I suggesting he cover up, or that people interested in going on a "what kind of underwear is he wearing" mission refrain from doing so. I just think this kind of talk is stale, and has grown way past old.

For those that have been around a long time, you will recall this, but for others, it might be kind of a new thing. There were times in the past, particularly when we were more limited to yahoo and aol groups and lacked the flexibility of this wonderful forum, that we all agreed to let certain topics die. I don't recall all of them, but a few examples at the time were Winona stuff, and Grant getting fired stuff, as well as the "old fans vs new fans" civil war that sprouted up a few times. We lost a lot of good posters, and strong members of our community over that, and I would really hate to see that happen again.

So as far as "Dave's Pants" posts go, there is already a thread for this. I am just kindly suggesting we keep it there.
Joe
Last edited by Kradokk on Wed Dec 10, 2008 3:11 am, edited 2 times in total.

Kradokk
Runaway
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:48 pm

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by Kradokk »

dells wrote:
If/when the site's owner's feel the need to reprimand me for any of my posts/commentary, I'll take it from them, but I refuse to let another user tell me what I can and can't talk about.

dells
Dells-

By no means am I, as a user of this board, trying to tell you or anyone else what you can and can not talk about. I personally, am not, and never was, offended by any of this conversation. While I found it annoying to see a thread about one subject, suddenly drift off into six straight posts about Dave, I understand that some feel the need to express this part of their fandom, and I just skip the talk.

Back to the forum in general...

The example I brought up is one area I don't want to see the board drift into. These types of discussions, while again I personally don't have a problem with them, can offend people quite easily. I cannot speak for the moderators, but I would imagine that the goal is to make a community where all fans can come and feel welcome, and not have to worry about potentially offensive topics. Most boards I am on have rules regarding discussion of religion, politics, and sexually related material in on-topic parts of the forum for this specific reason. While I am not saying the Dave's talks offended anyone, its possible that they may have, and I would hate to think we might drive away new, existing or potential members.

Also, selfishly, I want to make sure this website remains one I can safely surf at work ;)

Again, don't everyone jump on my back at once, its just a friendly post and suggestion :P

User avatar
Twiddly Dee
Social Butterfly
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:08 pm
Location: Kansas City, KS

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by Twiddly Dee »

Truce.... I think we can all coexist happily together, and we can keep it contained to one thread. I just wish you guys had spoken up earlier so we could have made sure it was done from the beginning, but thanks for doing it now.

Twiddly Dee~~gets out patches to cover holes in his holeyness thread...

Rusty
Don't want to be bored no more..
I know theres so much more

User avatar
no1rockfan
O'Jeezer
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by no1rockfan »

philipgar wrote: I want to say the thread in question is the pirners net worth one that really degenerated into talking about Dave's pants. I guess I brought them up, but in no way related to that, just as a joke about him wearing ripped pants and having 2 shirts...

Sure, no lines were really crossed, but that isn't really the issue. In a topic about one thing, people don't want 6 or 7 posts about dave pants sightings.
I'm female, and love Dave's attire and presence in general, but I agree that a thread about Pirner's money should stick to the subject. That's what my answer was, on subject.

Dells, I'm glad you're getting to the holiday show, and I know you're excited, but that was kind of the wrong thread to bring up the pants issue again. I still love you, and don't blame only you. Others were involved. And by the way, I'm so glad to see Dells on the forum so much lately!

Closer
Social Butterfly
Posts: 507
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:37 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by Closer »

I agree that not every thread should go off topic about stuff like that, but is that how it is? I don't read every post that's written here but I don't think it's that bad.
And about being more creative with topics... if there would only be made posts about important news then there might be a few posts every month or even less. An inactive forum like that might drive someone new away faster than a topic about the man's pants or whatever.
If the subjects aren't interesting then don't read them. Let the people that do want to talk about those things have their fun. It's all innocent anyway.

And about driving people away... I used to post at the Foo Fighters board and you can't imagine the kind of threads in their sub forums that people made about how sexy Dave Grohl and their drummer is. Huge threads that are over a hundred pages, filled with discussions about how ''hot" they are or the latest haircut of the bandmembers. That Foo Fighters board has over 60.000 members. And good moderators.
I'm sure the fans that want to talk about only "serious" stuff won't be scared off by those topics. There should be room for everyone and there is.

User avatar
Homesick
Warden
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:31 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Contact:

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by Homesick »

philipgar wrote:And please, lets avoid getting Jim and Jakob involved in this. It's not a matter of what is "allowed" and/or "disallowed". If the forum gets to that point where the rules have to be explicitly defined, and applied, than things are failing. I think a friendly thread about this is really all that should be needed.
Excellent point, Phil. Me and Jim prefer not to get involved in moderating threads, posts, and users unless it's necessary, and Phil is right in that it should not have to be necessary in this case.

To respond sweepingly to the recent posts in this thread, I would say there are two aspects to this issue:

The first is that of offensive content. While opinions on the tastefulness of this topic is split, that doesn't seem to be the larger issue here.

The other aspect, however, is the fact that this topic keeps creeping into threads where it doesn't belong, which in turn leads to off-topic banter and derailed threads. This can alienate people and stop them from posting in threads because the actual topic has already been lost. The argument that "it's a public forum so you can choose not to read that stuff" is only valid when the threads are on-topic. When a thread goes off-topic in a way that ruins the experience for a user who was enjoying it, that user has every right to demand that the other topics be discussed elsewhere.

If I'm reading Joe right, the latter aspect seems to be his chief concern, and it's also the aspect that me and Jim have had to deal with previously. If this topic has its place, it's in the Holeyness thread—not every other thread where it could conceivably be brought up.
Jakob Kallin, webmaster of EnterTheSoulAsylum.com

User avatar
no1rockfan
O'Jeezer
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:52 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by no1rockfan »

Homesick wrote: The other aspect, however, is the fact that this topic keeps creeping into threads where it doesn't belong, which in turn leads to off-topic banter and derailed threads. This can alienate people and stop them from posting in threads because the actual topic has already been lost. The argument that "it's a public forum so you can choose not to read that stuff" is only valid when the threads are on-topic. When a thread goes off-topic in a way that ruins the experience for a user who was enjoying it, that user has every right to demand that the other topics be discussed elsewhere.

If I'm reading Joe right, the latter aspect seems to be his chief concern, and it's also the aspect that me and Jim have had to deal with previously. If this topic has its place, it's in the Holeyness thread—not every other thread where it could conceivably be brought up.
That's all I was saying!

Kradokk
Runaway
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:48 pm

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by Kradokk »

Homesick wrote: If I'm reading Joe right, the latter aspect seems to be his chief concern, and it's also the aspect that me and Jim have had to deal with previously. If this topic has its place, it's in the Holeyness thread—not every other thread where it could conceivably be brought up.
Yep. Hit the nail on the head.

Thanks everyone, for the constructive comments and opinions. Hopefully, we can all go back to being one big happy family. :)

Closer
Social Butterfly
Posts: 507
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 3:37 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by Closer »

Homesick wrote: The argument that "it's a public forum so you can choose not to read that stuff" is only valid when the threads are on-topic.
That's a good point, but as far as the pants talk is concerned, I think that it only got really mentioned again in the "Pirner's net worth" and the "while you were outpatients" (which was obviously a joke anyway) thread, and maybe a few show reviews, but for some people his pants are part of the show experience apparently, so then it is part of the review so let's not be difficult about that.
I don't have to defend myself because I don't think I even made one post about his pants, I don't care about it, and I know it's not about just that, but it's not fair to the people that do talk about it, because it seems now that they interfere many threads with this, while that's not true, or I'm just missing out on a lot of threads, then please ignore what I typed.
Homesick wrote: When a thread goes off-topic in a way that ruins the experience for a user who was enjoying it, that user has every right to demand that the other topics be discussed elsewhere.
Well... when I'm reading a thread and it goes off topic to a topic that I don't care for, then I just scroll through it till it goes on topic again. It's no big deal, it doesn't ruin anything for me and I'm sure it's that way for most so this shouldn't be taken THAT seriously.
I agree that not every thread should go off topic, but I think it's interesting how sometimes a new topic gets created through another topic. And when someone makes a mention on something that's not necessarily about the original topic then you should be able to react on it in the same thread. If that should create a whole new topic again in the thread, then you guys as moderators could always turn it into a separate thread, and if I'm not mistaken you've done that before. It's simple and that way everyone will be happy.

dells
Social Butterfly
Posts: 292
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 7:42 pm
Location: rural Richardton, North Dakota. A/K/A the hind end of nowhere
Contact:

Re: A ban on "Dave's Pants" or "Dave's Underwear" posts

Post by dells »

Kradokk wrote:So as far as "Dave's Pants" posts go, there is already a thread for this. I am just kindly suggesting we keep it there.
Joe

First, I do want to appollogise for damn near biting your head off and coming off very defensive in my response to your post.

But the idea quoted above isn't what your original post suggested at all. You didn't post a reminder/request to confine pants/holes comments to the holeyness thread, you called for a BAN on all such comments, so yeah, I got a bit peaved at someone trying to tell me what I could and couldn't say, but I wish I hadn't chosen to reply right away so that "I" could take a chill pill first. ;)

I'm also sorry that my post did fall off the curb into the gutter, but in my defense, I was just trying to respond to a specific comment. Unfortunately, I have a terrible tendancy to ramble on or over elaborate.

Regarding the "talk of *rushing the stage* to get a peek at flesh" comment, you misinterpreted that part of my post completely. Didn't you see the IF in the beginning of my response to that specific thought?
IF I managed to get close enough to see (the stage <-- I should have specified these words), etc., etc.....

My intent in trying to get a good vantage point in front of the stage isn't because I want to inspect those holes, it's because, I'm sure just like everybody here that goes to a show, I want to be able to WATCH the performance, as well as listen to it. And there will be no "rushing" involved for me, btw... Since the entire crowd will have already rushed the stage by the time I've visited the ladies' room one last time as close to showtime as I dare (not a quick trip for me any more, and I don't want to have to miss 15-20 min of the set) My son will have to try to maneuver me in my wheelchair into a place that I'll be able to see from, which might be impossible since I'm sure it will be packed.

I'm afraid I feel the need to address one more concept brought up in this thread before I force myself to shut up. :)

Regarding threads going off topic: It happens. It always has/always will. sorry, but it's the nature of the beast. A Conversation is a dynamic, living thing, and will naturally jump from concept to concept., and an online forum is simply a written conversation involving a LOT of people, so naturally threads are going to go off topic almost constantly. Sometimes it's easy to anticipate that you might end up hyjacking a thread, and are therefore able to avoid it. But often secondary or minor concepts/comments in a post are related, and an originally minor related point/offhand comment might result in some elaboration in the response, and thus, accidental thread hyjacking can happen easily. It's easy enough for a person to steer it back onto the original path if they want to. As I said, a conversation is a dynamic, living, breathing thing, and it constantly evolves. How often when chatting in real life with good friends, do you suddenly ask yourselves, How the heck did we end up talking about "Z" when we started out talking about "A"?? By chatting your way down a winding road, with a different veiw around every corner inspiring a new concept to spring into your mind that you then introduced to the conversation.

Sometimes a fork in the road is a good thing and the new path ends up being more fun and exciting than the original one. Sometimes the new path makes you come face to face with a mama grizzly and you get the shit smacked out of you. :D

Sorry if my hiking metafore might create yet another new "path" in the conversation.

I'm gonna try to back slowly away from the mama grizzly now and hope I avoid more mauling ;)

Before I play dead laying on my belly and try to protect my head and vital organs from serious damage, I want to just stress my appology for biting your head off earlier in this thread, Kradokk, in case that concept got lost with all the twists and turns I took in here.

I guess I need to appologise for this long, rambling post now, too, Because I "hiked" my way to several different destinations in this post alone. :)

dells

Post Reply