# Forsaken Inn



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 21, 2005)

I see that new threads in The Forsaken Inn are once more to be vetted by the moderators (when I joined, this policy was in place, and was Ciryaher's responsibility).

(a) Why was such a decision taken?

(b) What kinds of topics are likely to be rejected?

(c) Could a list of rules governing the discussion of religious and political topics be placed in the Forsaken Inn on a "sticky" basis?

Thanks.


----------



## Gothmog (May 22, 2005)

The decision to Moderate theads in the Forsaken Inn was taken due to increasing animosity in the forum which seems to be spreading to other parts of the site.

As to questions 2 and 3, we are looking in to this and will give a full answer to them shortly.

Gothmog
SuperModerator


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 22, 2005)

Gothmog said:


> The decision to Moderate theads in the Forsaken Inn was taken due to increasing animosity in the forum which seems to be spreading to other parts of the site.



Aside from a couple of isolated incidents which were swiftly dealt with, I honestly haven't noticed the degree of animosity in the Forsaken Inn that would warrant this kind of action. It surprises me that it has spread to other parts of the site (which parts?).



> As to questions 2 and 3, we are looking in to this and will give a full answer to them shortly.



Cheers


----------



## Valandil (May 23, 2005)

Are the remaining threads all considered 'approved' then?


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 23, 2005)

Valandil said:


> Are the remaining threads all considered 'approved' then?



I think the moderation applies to new threads rather than existing ones--and then only those threads which are deemed religious or political (or even both) in nature. That is how I understand it.


----------



## Valandil (May 24, 2005)

Just the same - it'd be nice to hear it from a mod.


----------



## Gothmog (May 24, 2005)

Valandil said:


> Are the remaining threads all considered 'approved' then?


The already existing threads are all considered "approved" and will be allowed to continue their natural life.


Valandil said:


> Just the same - it'd be nice to hear it from a mod.


You are correct. and therefore you may hear it from me


----------



## Confusticated (May 24, 2005)

Probably because Alcuin and I ranted about it in that _Laws that Shouldn't be on the Books_. (More him than I of course, as my opinions carry less weight than most.) Otherwise the timing is just funny, isn't it?

But the notice says (among other things):


> Due to the nature of these threads, we must limit political and religious discussions.


"Limit". So perhaps they will just not allow too many to go on at once. Say, perhaps, no more than 4 or 5 active ones at a time? This is just a guess, and I am waiting too, to hear back from the mods about it.

This whole cycle has been going on for ages, and most of it has made little sense from my point of view.


----------



## Gothmog (May 24, 2005)

Well Nóm, There is more than just what you are refering to. Also, your opinions carry as much weight as any other member. You may think the timing to be funny, however, no matter when the decision to moderate such threads would be taken, someone would think that it was because of them.

More will be said when the final decision is in.


----------



## Confusticated (May 24, 2005)

And that someone would have good reason if they had very recently griped publicly after a long time of no griping from anybody. Something must have triggered it in any case, and no one has said what (or where), so I can only guess. But since there is more behind it, I guess I can't be blamed if the topics get shut down .


----------



## Valandil (May 24, 2005)

If my opinions also count as much as any other member:

* I would NOT like to be responsible for causing any discussion on such topics to cease.

* I think such discussion can be respectful and will be enjoyable to a certain segment of this board's members.

* In my opinion though, the recent outpouring of threads has really been depressing. Almost all seem to be from a liberal slant, they seem quite 'sensationalized' in tone and there are just so many of them... a new one every day it seems. The tone set at the start of each thread, and the quantity of these threads, just make me want to stay away from the discussions. (*EDIT:* and admittedly, I allow their very presence to put a damper on my spirits each time I visit here - but my first point still holds)


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 24, 2005)

Valandil said:


> * In my opinion though, the recent outpouring of threads has really been depressing. Almost all seem to be from a liberal slant



That might just point to the fact that the Forsaken Inn attracts less visitors overall than it has in days past, and that of the few who do frequent it these days, the majority of those who feel inclined to make new threads happen to be of a liberal persuasion. Those who have been making such threads have no control over whoever else might feel inclined to open a thread, and thus cannot be held responsible if a liberal point-of-view predominates. Anymore than a npw can be held responsible for a dearth of fad opinion in the movie section (hypothetically speaking). As for the "sensational" nature of the threads--"sensationalism" is of course in the eye of the beholder (as are "liberal" or "conservative," really), but yes, some threads are quite deliberately provocative (in the sense of provoking discussion should one feel so inclined). Nothing wrong with that, as far as I'm concerned--but if it depresses some people to the point where they feel they must avoid this corner of TTF, so much the worse for us. Avoiding the Forsaken Inn is an option. Critiquing the views professed in existing threads from a conservative point of view is another option. And opening new threads with a conservative slant is another option. We can all do any of the above within the confines of polite (if vigorous) debate, and no-one should feel concerned about animosity spreading out from the Inn--as it were a plague--to infect the Forum.


----------



## Confusticated (May 25, 2005)

Even though I disagree with these topics being allowed, it has been nice, on a personal level, to see a more liberal (even if democrat - which I am not) Forsaken Inn. Seems like it was always slightly more conservative in the past. I admit that the threads bothered me more on a personal level when the views that pre-marital sex is evil, and that the government had handled things well (especially regarding the invasion of countries) since the 911 attack were dominant rather than the views that gay marriages or at least civil unions should be allowed. But because of this I have sympathy for conservative members recently. I guessed how Valandil must have felt when he started that chicken little thread or how Alcuin felt when he ranted. I very seriously doubt that us three are the only ones who view this as a shadow over TTF.

I mean the country is divided enough, it would be nice if TTF were a place we could avoid all the liberal vs conservative/ christian vs. non-christian ugliness. And yes, I know that if we don't like it we don't have to read it. Its similar to saying just avoid the bad area of town rather than try to clean it up.


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 25, 2005)

Nóm said:


> I mean the country is divided enough, it would be nice if TTF were a place we could avoid all the liberal vs conservative/ christian vs. non-christian ugliness.



Don't forget: there _are_ threads on other topics in there.



> And yes, I know that if we don't like it we don't have to read it. Its similar to saying just avoid the bad area of town rather than try to clean it up.



I don't see that similarity at all. But it depends upon what you want to "clean up." If you're talking about insults and personal attacks--well, I'm all for cleaning that up. And the truth is that there hasn't been very much of that at all in there lately--barring one or two little bonfires which were very quickly stamped out. 

If you're talking about political and religious topics themselves: insofar as you believe (if I have understood you correctly) they cause disharmony in TTF because people might find themselves affronted by the views of other members on, for example, homosexuality, abortion, the death penalty, the Bush administration, etc.--well, if you're right about that, then maybe such topics _should_ be banned. But I _don't_ think you're right about that. I think that if there is disharmony in TTF it is much more likely to be caused by rudeness and personal attacks (actual or perceived)--and these, unfortunately, are not the special province of political and religious threads. Otherwise, I'd like to think most TTFers--willing as they might be to debate the issues--are at the end of the day happy to agree to disagree. There's no need for anybody to hate anybody.


----------



## Valandil (May 25, 2005)

Arthur_Vandelay said:


> That might just point to the fact that ..., and that of the few who do frequent it these days, the majority of those who feel inclined to make new threads happen to be of a liberal persuasion. Those who have been making such threads have no control over whoever else might feel inclined to open a thread, and thus cannot be held responsible if a liberal point-of-view predominates...



Very true - and you know, I almost clarified my previous post and wish I had. The fact that the threads were started from a liberal POV doesn't really bother me - but in most cases, the title and the tone are not engaging to me, nor do they seem conducive to conversation. It seems implicit in each opening post that to take an opposing view will result in sneers and ridicule. Instead of 'What do the rest of you think about...' they strike me as 'Look what the idiots (or worse) are up to now...' Some of them start with a wild extreme and go on to paint it as a broad picture.

When I get that impression - I just have no desire to get involved.

So when I said; liberal, sensationalized and so many - it was really only the latter two that I felt were a problem. That's what I should have clarified in my last post.


----------



## Confusticated (May 25, 2005)

Arthur_Vandelay said:


> Don't forget: there _are_ threads on other topics in there.



If by "there" you mean Forsaken Inn, then I haven't. I don't see what that matters since I didn't suggest that I would like it if every thread in that forum were shut down.

I don't know why you are tossing around the word hate now. Hate doesn't need to have anything to do with bad feelings. I don't think anybody said anyone hates another poster. (Though I did post in another thread that I have come to dislike two posters - in the distant past too - because of their views _combined_ with their way of forcing them.) Don't confuse dislike for hate.

So maybe I am one of the very few who have had bad feelings about members because of the religious/political debates.

I'm not by any stretch arrogant enough to suggest the topics should be closed down just for my sake, and if I were to know that the topics only effect me in an ill way and no one else then I 'd feel better about them being allowed. Maybe I'm just an intolerant pig.

I'm not happy about Alcuin leaving either. He did leave because of being upset with these topics. For those of you who did not know it, he had actually been reading this forum for years - long before he registered, and spoke very highly of it.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 25, 2005)

Nóm said:


> ...the country is divided enough, it would be nice if TTF were a place we could avoid all the liberal vs conservative/ christian vs. non-christian ugliness. And yes, I know that if we don't like it we don't have to read it. Its similar to saying just avoid the bad area of town rather than try to clean it up.



The point is this: what you consider ugliness (and in a way it certainly is ugliness), others consider to be topics that impact them very personally, and want to talk about them. I know I am _very_ concerned about what may happen should the religious right succeed in co-opting the government, the public school system, pensions, medical care, job outsourcing, social security, etc. And it's not just "that weird old Barley going off the deep end again." Check the links in my signature. You'll find that a great many Americans who are NOT of the ultra-conservative position are also deeply concerned, to the point where they are starting to organize and fight back. I believe we are in a cultural crisis which will not soon be resolved. Such topics deserve discussion, and, if I may say so, the conservative voice has been allowed to prevail unchallenged for far too long. Indeed, it is precisely the unrelenting doctrinaire extremism of the Radical Right both religous and political — their arrogance and their _complete dismissal_ of the needs of the American people — that has started the pendulum swinging the other way. No one should be surprised that the worm is beginning to turn.

Barley


----------



## Confusticated (May 25, 2005)

"Ugliness" doesn't exclude the possability that it impacts our lives. I am not saying they are not important issues. It is because they are so important that they can get so heated.

I could toss out links, just to make the point...

Asad Ismi

Why is NATO at War with Yogslavia?

... don't think these would make me very popular around here. I would like to talk about those things, and yet for me, I don't feel this is the place. But I realise your point Barliman, I understand that others do think it is their place to talk about the issues that thay are concerned about.


----------



## joxy (May 25, 2005)

Nóm said:


> I don't know why you are tossing around the word hate now. Hate doesn't need to have anything to do with bad feelings.


I'm very pleased to read that comment on the word "hate'; I fully agree with it.
The word used to be used far too freely in certain areas of the forum, and my comment was always that it was much too strong a word to apply to the relevant topics.
However, I would classify the word "enemy" in the same way, and I regret that it *has* been used recently.


----------



## Confusticated (May 25, 2005)

Enemy was used, and "enemy" was ment. It was not applied too freely.


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 25, 2005)

Nóm said:


> I don't know why you are tossing around the word hate now. Hate doesn't need to have anything to do with bad feelings. I don't think anybody said anyone hates another poster. (Though I did post in another thread that I have come to dislike two posters - in the distant past too - because of their views _combined_ with their way of forcing them.) Don't confuse dislike for hate.



Ok. 



> I'm not happy about Alcuin leaving either. He did leave because of being upset with these topics. For those of you who did not know it, he had actually been reading this forum for years - long before he registered, and spoke very highly of it.



But hasn't the forum _hosted_ political/religious threads for years (albeit on an on-and-off basis)? And the most recent instalment has been quite civil, you must admit--certainly things have been no _worse_ in there this time around than in other times. Like I said, if someone feels they must leave the Forum because a liberal POV has of late appeared to predominate--and no individual member has any control over that, except by keeping one's opinion to oneself, which one shouldn't have to do--well, what can we do?


----------



## Confusticated (May 31, 2005)

Of the original three questions, one was answered but its follow up was not. The other two are still not answered. I really wonder if they have even been getting discussed all this time outside of the public eye? Or is each forum leader sort of just assuming that others are taking care of it and will post the answer? Or is it being hoped that the questions would be forgotten about by the members? (Before anyone bites my head off, bear in mind that all of the sort of things I just mentioned have happened more than once in this forum's past.) 

It would be nice if there were an answer which makes this recent action seem reasonable, and its exact nature known. Though one wonders how much sense it makes to take an action before deciding why or exactly _how_ it is taken.




> Like I said, if someone feels they must leave the Forum because a liberal POV has of late appeared to predominate...



I don't believe that anyone has claimed to have left for that reason. 

I do know that in Alcuin's case he didn't visit these topics until more recently. Would he have had a similar reaction two years ago when there were more conservative arguements? If you have a reason to believe so, I am not aware of it. I only mention this because he is no longer here to defend himself against what _might_ be a claim that he was okay with these threads existing at TTF until they mostly went against his own opinions.


----------



## Ithrynluin (May 31, 2005)

Dapence, webmaster of TTF, has decided that the topics of politics and religion are to be banned once and for all. Thus, any future thread that deals with these topics will not be permitted. Any thread created in the Forsaken Inn will first go to the 'moderation queue' to be looked over by the staff, to make sure that the above mentioned regulation is followed.

Some may be dissatisfied with this decision, but what we should all do together is not brood over ill feelings and simply move on.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 31, 2005)

Ithrynluin said:


> Dapence, webmaster of TTF, has decided that the topics of politics and religion are to be banned once and for all. Thus, any future thread that deals with these topics will not be permitted. Any thread created in the Forsaken Inn will first go to the 'moderation queue' to be looked over by the staff, to make sure that the above mentioned regulation is followed.
> 
> Some may be dissatisfied with this decision, but what we should all do together is not brood over ill feelings and simply move on.



When was this decided, and why isn't he making the announcement himself? If true, you will lose some good people, and the forum itself will lose something unique and valuable. 

My impression of the structure of the forum is that there are hardly any threads in the Tolkien sections anymore that allow for the level of discussions available in the non-Tolkien sections. This makes TTF unique.

I believe those of us posting heavily in the non-Tolkien areas have been keeping well within both the bounds of civility and within the rules set by TTF. So why this decision??? I feel betrayed. We followed the rules and you came down on us anyway. 

Barley


----------



## Ithrynluin (May 31, 2005)

Sorry Barliman, but this is the final decision taken by the webmaster on 05-21-2005, 06:51 AM. He didn't get round to posting it publicly, and since the membership was getting impatient for answers, I provided a summary of them in his stead.



> If true, you will lose some good people, and the forum itself will lose something unique and valuable.



I believe we've lost good people when the ban was repeatedly put into place in the past and then annulled. Keep in mind that off-topic discussions are far from being forbidden, they are just being limited to everything outside of outright political or religious discussions.

Like I said, we ought to move on.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (May 31, 2005)

Ithrynluin said:


> Sorry Barliman, but this is the final decision taken by the webmaster on 05-21-2005, 06:51 AM. He didn't get round to posting it publicly, and since the membership was getting impatient for answers, I provided a summary of them in his stead.
> 
> I believe we've lost good people when the ban was repeatedly put into place in the past and then annulled. Keep in mind that off-topic discussions are far from being forbidden, they are just being limited to everything outside of outright political or religious discussions.
> 
> Like I said, we ought to move on.



Like _I_ said, *we went by the rules — in good faith — and you came down on us anyway.* I believe we are owed clarification of the reasoning behind this decision. I get the strong feeling that the decision was heavily influenced by conservative members who didn't like it that progressive voices were being heard at last. If I'm wrong, please tell me what's really going on. (And what's this about "the membership being impatient for answers"? Are you saying that each and every member of TTF was jumping up and down howling for answers?? If so, I was certainly not aware of it.)

EDIT: _Now_ I understand that a thread on *knife and gun control* has been permitted! What's the deal here: religion and politics are off limits, but anything else provocative is in? The subject of gun control is _highly_ political! How can that be discussed while avoiding the political and even the religious aspects of it? I get a strong whiff of somebody _playing favorites_ or _caving in to pressure_ here...

The webmaster owes us a personal and detailed explanation, not just a dust-off by one of his assistants.

Barley


----------



## Arthur_Vandelay (May 31, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> Like _I_ said, *we went by the rules — in good faith — and you came down on us anyway.* I believe we are owed clarification of the reasoning behind this decision. I get the strong feeling that the decision was heavily influenced by conservative members who didn't like it that progressive voices were being heard at last. If I'm wrong, please tell me what's really going on. (And what's this about "the membership being impatient for answers"? Are you saying that each and every member of TTF was jumping up and down howling for answers?? If so, I was certainly not aware of it.)
> 
> EDIT: _Now_ I understand that a thread on *knife and gun control* has been permitted! What's the deal here: religion and politics are off limits, but anything else provocative is in? The subject of gun control is _highly_ political! How can that be discussed while avoiding the political and even the religious aspects of it? I get a strong whiff of somebody _playing favorites_ or _caving in to pressure_ here...
> 
> The webmaster owes us a personal and detailed explanation, not just a dust-off by one of his assistants.



While I don't think the Webmaster _owes_ us an explanation--it is his site, after all, and he may do with it what he will--I believe such an explanation would be greatly appreciated by those members of TTF who are affected by the move, even if we are to "move on."

The thread on gun control canvasses an issue that is certainly no less heated and no less political that, say, abortion--so its appearance in the Forsaken Inn in the wake of a ban on religious and political threads is curious, to say the least. (And no, I'm not calling for that thread to be closed down--I just feel that it has no less potential to cause disharmony among TTF members than any other thread you might care to name.) What it suggests is, at least with respect to political threads, the ban is limited, not total. And therefore it begs the question: if political topics are now banned, how is the term "political" being defined? I think that any TTF member who submits a thread to the "moderation queue" should at least be equipped with this information beforehand.


----------



## David Pence (Jun 1, 2005)

An explanation?

Fine.

This is THE TOLKIEN FORUM.

How's that?

I allowed these topics to exist on TTF as something of a courtesy, a bending of my will to what I thought was the will of the members. Now it's apparent that was a mistake. No other topics of discussion on this site have caused so much consternation, and the best way to deal with it is to ban the topics altogether. It doesn't really matter what the frequency that infighting occurs over these topics, the fact that the occur repeatedly is enough to cause me to make this decision.

Now, as I said in the forum above, I have setup a small site where you discuss these topics to your hearts content. You just can't discuss them here.


----------



## Hammersmith (Jun 1, 2005)

Personally, I'd like to thank the webmaster and mods for providing this area to share the limited discussions that I'm sure we all enjoyed. I consider myself a conservative in most of the discussions here, Barley, and I certainly don't have a problem with listening to liberal viewpoints. It saddens me that we cannot continue them here, but who knows? Maybe someday we'll be given another chance. Perhaps someone will come forward who the webmaster would accept as a political threads moderator. Perhaps not. I'd just like to seize the opportunity to say thanks to everyone


----------



## Confusticated (Jun 1, 2005)

I was shocked to see the weapons control thread too. Really made me wonder _why_ it was allowed! Seems to have the potential to political to me, but with an IQ of 90 I could be missing something. Guess there is no clear line for something like this. Even "outright" could be argued over.


----------



## Gothmog (Jun 1, 2005)

*Mods comment*

I was asked by HGLStrider if she could start the thread. It seemed to me an interesting question to get the personal views of members. This shows that I am not perfect  However, I do listen to others and if I make a mistake I do what I can to correct it. The thread on weapon control is now closed and will be removed shortly.

Gothmog


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jun 1, 2005)

dapence said:


> ...as I said in the forum above, I have setup a small site where you discuss these topics to your hearts content. You just can't discuss them here.



Where is this area? Are you saying that in this area, controversial subjects are allowed? 

BTW there are other Tolkien sites — and you will surely say that I am free to visit them if I don't like your policies — that allow controversial subjects, and the sites are flourishing wonderfully. I don't see your problem with having them here: _the members are free to *avoid* them — no one is *forcing* anyone to visit threads which are political or religious in nature._ 

Without an area for the discussion of controversial subjects, TTF will be a duller place indeed, if all you want is _bland._

There are people here who want to discuss things a bit more challenging than talking about Balrogs' navels or the endless "what-if", "why not" and "how come" threads. You will be losing good people if you don't give them something substantial to chew on... I have made good friends here. I love this forum, and I have contributed my share to the Tolkien side of things, but without subjects of non-Tolkien controversy, it would offer me significantly less reason to spend as much time here as I do.

Barley


----------



## Gothmog (Jun 1, 2005)

> Where is this area? Are you saying that in this area, controversial subjects are allowed?


Check out This post by Webmaster. It contains the link.


----------



## Confusticated (Jun 1, 2005)

You know Barliman, not everybody thinks the book discussion is of a lower level than the political and religious talk, and not everybody thinks it is dull. In fact some people came here, and are still here just because of them!

I believe I know why you hold this opinion, and few else do... at least to the same degree.

In fact I can't remember there ever being an active member of this site who felt the need to answer so many questions with "Why are things that way? Because that is how the author intended them." and such. I think its fair to say your view is far more simplistic than most other approaches seen at this JRRT discussion site, and for that reason the talk strikes you as more dull or of a lower level than it does for most.

As someone who has maybe started more JRRT discussions that anyone at this site, I am offended by it for my own sake, as I have asked a great number of never before asked questions (mostly regarding First Age material) that are still not answered. In some cases not one person answered, and in the cases where people did it is not so thoroughly as the repeat LotR questions about Tom Bombadil, Glorfindel, and Balrog wrings... or any other question where you do not often see a new idea pop up. And I am offended by it for all the other contributors' sakes.

Its real rich to see people complain about book discussions being tapped out who haven't come _close_to reading all the published material on Middle-earth (or otherwise), but I guess its no surprise from those who don't believe posthumous work has much use or one who has little interest in _Silmarillion_. Though I am not sure you are claiming tapped out.

For every one who thinks TTF is lacking without the hot topics, there is apt to be someone who thinks it is better without.

I am glad a new site was set up for this. It was more than Webmaster needed to do, and I would feel more comfortable posting about hot topics there than here, though I doubt this applies to many.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jun 1, 2005)

Gothmog said:


> Check out This post by Webmaster. It contains the link.



All is forgiven, Dave! Thank you for creating, Eru-like, our own personal Void, where we will abide in chains forever! I have become a duly registered charter member of  *Project Evil* (rather a cynical choice of names, Dave), and invite all the TTF _provocateurs_, denizens and habituees of TTF's now-defunct political and religious threads to join with me and get that place *smokin'!*  

Barley


----------



## Ithrynluin (Jun 3, 2005)

Most of the Forsaken Inn threads have now been archived, and what remained (threads on literature, et cetera) was merged into Stuff and Bother.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jun 3, 2005)

Ithrynluin said:


> Most of the Forsaken Inn threads have now been archived, and what remained (threads on literature, et cetera) was merged into Stuff and Bother.



How does one access archived material?

Barley


----------



## Ithrynluin (Jun 3, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> How does one access archived material?
> 
> Barley



By going to the Archives?


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jun 3, 2005)

Ithrynluin said:


> By going to the Archives?



Brilliant! (I knew that...)  

BTW old thing, thank you for posting the URL of *Project Evil* at the entrance to the Forsaken Inn (now forsaken indeed)! Now: could you please take it _one step further_ and make it an actual link? Thanks again,

Barley 

EDIT: Wow — a further change — No more Forsaken Inn at all!!! The Forsaken Inn has been forsook! So — would you make a link out of the PE URL at the entrance to Stuff and Bother — thanks!


----------



## Ithrynluin (Jun 4, 2005)

There, I've made a whole new clickable category for it under Flotsam and Jetsam.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jun 4, 2005)

Ithrynluin said:


> There, I've made a whole new clickable category for it under Flotsam and Jetsam.



Wow! Stop by at the Pony — I've a whole case of proper 1420 for you! 

Barley


----------



## Walter (Jun 15, 2005)

_If_ there has been one thing haunting TTF from the day i joined (some years ago, by now) it was discussion about politics and religion. The air and tone in which such discussions sometimes were led has caused more than one member to turn his/her back - temporarily or permanently - on this board, me being one of those.

What IMHO made things in that area even worse was and is the lack of clear moderating policy leaving moderators in the awkward position to make certain decisions as they see fit, which resulted - again IMHO - in the fact, that not always the best decisions were made.

I've seen decisions to ban those religious and political topics from TTF come and go, only time will tell if this one will be permanent...

While it is true that this is David Pence's site and that he can proceed with it as he wishes, I was never altogether happy with it - neither with the fact per se, nor with this way to look at things. IMO the true assets of TTF - just like of each and any other discussion board - are the members and their good on topic contributions. And David always seemed to know and regard this fact and thus was willing to listen to what the members had to say - if it was sound and reasonable, that is...

But nothing is more frustrating for a member who makes - or made - quality contributions to a certain site, than having to fear the contributions or - as a worst case assumption - the whole site could be going down the drain just because someone can push a button or two and make it all vanish. 

Only part of the members are making contributions just to kill time, out of boredom or vanity and thus don't give a damn if such contributions don't persist. There are at least some members who spend time and energy on their contributions with the intention - or hope - that these contributions will last permanently (as far as this is possible) as an aid, information, encyclopaedic knowledge, food for thought, etc., etc., for others treading a similar path. There are at least some members who don't like to suffer the arbitrariness of decisions made "as they were seen fit" by someone else and such lack of policy...

To make the long story short, personally I don't think that the recent decision regarding politics and religion is enough, heck I'm not even sure it will last (what if the general interest in TTF drops even further than in this post movie times, wouldn't it be possible for someone to come up with the idea to open up more controversial, attention-drawing discussions just to keep the members active?). I always thought - and still do - that this place needs a crystal clear policy and a few hard rules to live by - carved in stone and not subject to the disposition or the sensitivities of any one single person...

But that of course is only my subjective and personal point of view...


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jun 15, 2005)

Walter said:


> _If_ there has been one thing haunting TTF from the day i joined (some years ago, by now) it was discussion about politics and religion. The air and tone in which such discussions sometimes were led has caused more than one member to turn his/her back - temporarily or permanently - on this board, me being one of those.
> 
> What IMHO made things in that area even worse was and is the lack of clear moderating policy leaving moderators in the awkward position to make certain decisions as they see fit, which resulted - again IMHO - in the fact, that not always the best decisions were made.
> 
> I've seen decisions to ban those religious and political topics from TTF come and go, only time will tell if this one will be permanent...



At last, someone willing to speak out on this! I know of a number of other Tolkien sites that have _always_ had a legitimate place for the discussion of topics that have nothing to do with Tolkien, subjects that appeal to the "grown-up" side of the clientele — never mind age — are controversial — and by that very token _welcomed and valued as a part of the site._ They still are. I believe the creation of Project Evil was entirely unnecessary, and even though I greatly appreciate it, I believe that to cut the subject matter discussed there from the main body of TTF is ultimately a poor "solution" to the "problem". I don't even see that a solution was necessary: nothing was wrong in the first place!



> ...nothing is more frustrating for a member who makes - or made - quality contributions to a certain site, than having to fear the contributions or - as a worst case assumption - the whole site could be going down the drain just because someone can push a button or two and make it all vanish.



THANK YOU for saying that. That statement certainly represent _my_ feelings and I daresay reflects the sentiments of many of those participating in Project Evil. With no proof whatever, I am of the considered opinion that The Powers That Be caved in to the pressure of a vocal few who are of a conservative nature. Here on TTF, as in the "real world," when the majority gives in to pressure from a loud strident minority who want to force their agenda on everyone, nothing good can come of it.



> ...There are at least some members who spend time and energy on their contributions with the intention - or hope - that these contributions will last permanently (as far as this is possible) as an aid, information, encyclopaedic knowledge, food for thought, etc., etc., for others treading a similar path. There are at least some members who don't like to suffer the arbitrariness of decisions made "as they were seen fit" by someone else and such lack of policy...



I often wonder what became of those posts on non-Tolkien subject matter that I spent _so much_ time and energy organizing and thinking about and working over before I put them up as posts. It _is_ a shame that they've been archived. I think it's arbitrary, and I think it's a shame that the decision was made to bifurcate the Tolkien from non-Tolkien subject matter, and to have been _banished_ (that's really what it is, you know) to a side area which no now contains no more than thirty people. Did we _really_ make that much trouble on the main site, or was it just the loud protestations of a certain few who really have no more say in the running of things than anyone else?



> To make the long story short, personally I don't think that the recent decision regarding politics and religion is enough, heck I'm not even sure it will last (what if the general interest in TTF drops even further than in this post movie times, wouldn't it be possible for someone to come up with the idea to open up more controversial, attention-drawing discussions just to keep the members active?). I always thought - and still do - that this place needs a crystal clear policy and a few hard rules to live by - carved in stone and not subject to the disposition or the sensitivities of any one single person...



You put your finger on a new thing that seems to be happening: the general clientele of the main site — now that the adults have been separated out — has gotten much younger, and there is a definite shift in the quality and subject matter of the posts on the main site. As a result I find myself making drastically fewer posts in TTF, and almost all my posting over at Project Evil. I don't know if this is temporary, whether it's the result of the movie fury dissipating, the result of the loud protests of a few, or the result of putting up Project Evil as a place where the older faction goes. Time will tell whether Project Evil needs to be kept separate, or whether IMO reason will prevail and everything that's over there will be properly brought back over here, and the Forsaken Inn reactivated. _I certainly hope for the latter._ I cannot for the life of me see any reason to forbid controversial subjects on TTF, especially just to please a vocal few.

Barley


----------



## Confusticated (Jun 15, 2005)

Yeah Barliman I'm sure you put tons of thought into copy and pasting all those articles.

I try not to post much of what I would consider quality in the book disussions, and have taken this approach for a few months, I realised it was never appreciated is why. So unless temptation really gets me I stay away.

It seems I have always been nothing but trouble to TTF o ver the last three years, though whats it matter to you Barliman? ...my contributions were no doubt not up to your high standard, and were no doubt not adult enough for you... or any one with such a saddening lack of imagination and original thought.

I'll do the site a favour and leave, as I said I would do long ago... why did I return? Doesn't matter... but you needn't worry it will happen again. I have a feeling that this time I will not miss any aspect of the place, and nor will it miss me.


----------



## Hammersmith (Jun 15, 2005)

Woah, woah, woah! 
Nom! Unless some of what Barley said was tongue-in-cheek aimed at you specifically, I think you're going slightly over the top. Your posts are very much valued here, and I'd be sorry to lose you. If you find others' posts to be offensive, just don't read them, and be thankful that you don't even _know_ the person. This is a message board, and our skin should be proportionally thick.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jun 15, 2005)

Nóm said:


> Yeah Barliman I'm sure you put tons of thought into copy and pasting all those articles...It seems I have always been nothing but trouble to TTF o ver the last three years, though whats it matter to you Barliman? ...my contributions were no doubt not up to your high standard, and were no doubt not adult enough for you... or any one with such a saddening lack of imagination and original thought.
> 
> I'll do the site a favour and leave, as I said I would do long ago... why did I return? Doesn't matter... but you needn't worry it will happen again. I have a feeling that this time I will not miss any aspect of the place, and nor will it miss me.



All I can say Nom, is this: I don't know just what it was about my post that you took so personally, but when I wrote it, you were _not_ one of those I had in mind, and you're still not. Stick around! 

Barley


----------



## David Pence (Jun 15, 2005)

I see we have yet another TTF is in trouble of fading away because _insert problem here_.

Well, let's see (since I'm bored) if I can address some of the assumptions made about my decision to ban political and religious topics on TTF.

For one, I didn't _cave in_ to anybody. In fact, and I think I've said this, the reason I banned political and religious topics, is because they proved to be a constant source of discontent on the site, and after trying several unsuccessful methods to deal with it, I decided to do away with them altogether.

Secondly, the Project Evil site was put up as a lark, and was coincidental to the ban on political and religious topics, but proved to be serendipitous to said decision.

Quickly, Nóm, you've never been a problem here that I'm aware of, and are missed when not here, so calm down. 

And good old Walter, I'm so glad that all these years haven't dimmed your discontent with TTF. I can assure you that political and religious topics won't be allowed here again, so you can put that concern to rest.

Also, Walter, I'd love to see any clear cut and stone engraved rules you'd like to suggest for this site. I'm all for any reasonable measures that would further focus this site on Tolkien's works. Please be sure to PM me your suggestions, or feel free to start a public thread to discuss them.

I think it's time we wrap up this discontent over the ban on political and religious discussions. I'm not bringing them back, there are other places you can deliberate these topics anyway, so get over it


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jun 16, 2005)

dapence said:


> ...I didn't _cave in_ to anybody. ... the reason I banned political and religious topics, is because they proved to be a constant source of discontent on the site, and after trying several unsuccessful methods to deal with it, I decided to do away with them altogether.
> 
> Secondly, the Project Evil site was put up as a lark, and was coincidental to the ban on political and religious topics, but proved to be serendipitous to said decision.



Thanks for the clarification. And thanks for putting up PE.

Barley


----------



## Walter (Jun 16, 2005)

dapence said:


> And good old Walter, I'm so glad that all these years haven't dimmed your discontent with TTF. I can assure you that political and religious topics won't be allowed here again, so you can but that concern to rest.
> 
> Also, Walter, I'd love to see any clear cut and stone engraved rules you'd like to suggest for this site. I'm all for any reasonable measures that would further focus this site on Tolkien's works. Please be sure to PM me your suggestions, or feel free to start a public thread to discuss them.


Well, good David, I wish you were being serious and honest with your post, but unfortunately its tone doesn't quite seem to suggest that ... at least not to me.

Yes, we've had that ban before, didn't we? Why should I believe that this time you are being serious to keep it? I mean I've seen quite some decisions of yours come and go...

My main concern was and is the lack of moderating policy, not a lack of rules. I think that a very few rules to live by here would suffice.

Also, I would like to clearify, that my discontent was not with TTF per se, but rather with how certain issues were handled. It just saddens me to see what TTF once was - and still could be - if management and staff had not decided to close their eyes and/or look for excuses rather than to address certain problems seriously.

But that, of course is just my opinion, please feel free to just ignore it...


----------



## David Pence (Jun 16, 2005)

Walter, this is a very strange method of delineating a list of useful suggestions for me to consider. I must have missed the insult and belittle the Webmaster style of discourse in English class.

Maybe you could dumb it down for me a bit and try again.


----------



## Walter (Jun 16, 2005)

David, we have a saying here that goes: _"Wie man in den Wald hineinruft, so schallt es heraus"_ (roughly transl.: 'the way you shout into the forest is the way it comes back').

I am sorry if indeed I misread your previous post, but the way you addressed me did deem me quite belittling, to say the least. Thus I fail to see that how I was addressing you was any more "insulting" or "belittling" than the way you addressed me...

Anyhow, I think I've said enough here ... or already too much...

If you should be seriously interested in hearing/reading my opinion you can still mail me or PM me...


----------



## Ithrynluin (Jun 16, 2005)

dapence said:


> And good old Walter, I'm so glad that all these years haven't dimmed your discontent with TTF. I can assure you that political and religious topics won't be allowed here again, so you can put that concern to rest.
> 
> Also, Walter, I'd love to see any clear cut and stone engraved rules you'd like to suggest for this site. I'm all for any reasonable measures that would further focus this site on Tolkien's works. Please be sure to PM me your suggestions, or feel free to start a public thread to discuss them.





Walter said:


> I am sorry if indeed I misread your previous post, but the way you addressed me did deem me quite belittling, to say the least. Thus I fail to see that how I was addressing you was any more "insulting" or "belittling" than the way you addressed me...



I'd like to know _exactly_ what was belittling or insulting in dapence's rejoinder to you?


----------



## Uminya (Jun 17, 2005)

Nóm said:


> Yeah Barliman I'm sure you put tons of thought into copy and pasting all those articles.
> 
> It seems I have always been nothing but trouble to TTF o ver the last three years, though whats it matter to you Barliman? ...my contributions were no doubt not up to your high standard, and were no doubt not adult enough for you... or any one with such a saddening lack of imagination and original thought.



Hey, dagnabbit, I'm the only person allowed to be despised around here!

I agree with the first line. Go figure?

As for the rest of you lot, I'd venture a guess that the "grouchy old codger" stigma that some of you have probably doesn't help things out. Heck, I don't even look in the book sections anymore. What kept me around here while there was an MERPG was the Forsaken Inn, and now that things have shifted around, the only thing that keeps me here is the RP, and I have ProjEve to satisfy my "serious" moods. Hehe.

Why'd *I* stop posting about the books? Got bored. Same stuff over and over. Only people that talked about anything remotely new were people that were already decidedly ignoring me for some reason, so after a few attempts to get involved in Tolkien discussion again, I gave up. No motivation when nobody responds to you, I guess *Shrug*.

Anyways...you all fighting probably doesn't help either. Walter is always acting like a <inappropriate comment removed by Ithrynluin> (hehe) and he's always trying his best to push Mr. A-P's buttons. This is nothing new, so why don't we just take it as read and not do it, eh? *nudge nudge*


----------



## Walter (Jul 23, 2005)

Ciryaher said:


> Anyways...you all fighting probably doesn't help either. Walter is always acting like a <inappropriate comment removed by Ithrynluin> (hehe) and he's always trying his best to push Mr. A-P's buttons. This is nothing new, so why don't we just take it as read and not do it, eh? *nudge nudge*


Somehow I am grateful for this post...

Ciryaher doesn't surprise me the least bit with it, as he has a long tradition of insulting and offending posts. But IMO the boy is not to blame that he ever so often resorts to some sort of name calling or other insults, and since it is not my place to comment on his education – or a lack thereof – I shall leave it at that. 

Nonetheless this post, which by now remained untouched for more than a month, serves best to illustrate my point that this place has no working moderating policy and that the management has made somewhat inadequate choices of moderators at times.

But what did surprise me, however, was to learn that the webmaster not only tolerates such an insult, but even seems to somehow approve of it and evidently seems to see it as "criticism", probably on the same level as the - IMO - constructive criticism I had to offer alongside with my contributions to this place over the years.

To cut the long story short, I do no longer wish to contribute to a place where the management has no objections towards such insults from moderators (or former moderators, I may not be up to date about Ciryaher's current status) and since the webmaster refused to close my account and delete all my posts, I felt inclined to withdraw most of my on-topic (Tolkien- and mythology-related) posts and bid you farewell...


----------



## Thorondor_ (Jul 23, 2005)

> I felt inclined to withdraw most of my on-topic (Tolkien- and mythology-related) posts


You mean you are going to mess-up those threads by deleting your posts? If that is the case, I think it is rather mean.


----------



## Gothmog (Jul 23, 2005)

Well Walter, I can only apologise for myself for missing that post. This was due to the fact that I had not been closely following the thread for a while. However, I do wonder why nobody at all made use of the "Report Bad Post" button.

I have not edited Cyr's post as to do so would now require also editing yours.


----------

