Thin-skinned Moderators

[MisterEd]

My thread on the "Ancient Wine" book by Patrick McGovern was closed. This is a second thread of mine that has been recently closed. If we are unable to carry on adult discourse about various subject matter in the General Chit-Chat forum then why even have it? There was nothing disrespectful or injurious said by anyone in the thread. Is an unwavering desire for "political correctness" the overriding factor used by the moderating staff? It seems to me the moderators are actually the ones who are stepping out of the boundaries.
I doubt I will stick around much longer as the fog of PC is getting much too thick for me to safely navigate. So everyone stick to talking about egg nog and bad weather during this holiday season. Boredom reigns supreme.

Am I alone in this summation?

 

[BernardSmith]

With respect, I am not a moderator but I don't think the issue is about being "politically correct". The issue is if a discussion looks as though it is becoming or has become ad hominem (directed towards someone) and not directed towards the substance of the argument or discussion itself, then personally, I think that it is perfectly alright for moderators to close the discussion. A forum such as this one works only when members engage in conversations and discussions that do not attack or even question the bona fides (the good faith) of others in the group.

 

[marino]

Seems to me that the conversation stayed and came back to wine, no one was assaulted, and people had a chance to discuss perspectives relevant to "ancient wine"--it seems reasonable that a discussion about the nature of how old "ancient " is would take us into religious sources and competing ideas of the history of the earth and humans who fermented little round grapes into this wine we spend so much time talking about.

I think we're all good enough at measuring sulfur and stinky off flavors. That conversation was fermenting right along: some heat, a few bubbles, but within acceptable parameters to give us wine in the end. And it did.

 

[JohnT]

(Sigh),

Three things that you should never debate on this site..

Religion, Politics, or the Great Pumpkin.

I saw that this thread was turning into a debate over creationism and the validity of the bible. This is not the place for that. I already made my apologies, but will I close any thread that debates a person's religious beliefs.

This is not a matter of being thin skinned. I am from the NYC area and one can not survive without having a thick skin. My goal is to keep this site a place where everyone feels comfortable.

 

[marino]

As a moderator, those decisions are at your discretion, but the conversation came back to where it started, which shows the participants were able to have that discussion just fine. Seems like (almost) everyone was comfortable enough.

 

[Floandgary]

With respect also, I see the advent and proliferation of "Social Media" as a root of much disrespect and confrontation these days. As Mr. Smith suggests, sticking to the subject at hand in this forum produces little or NO angst. There's a time and place for ideological combat ,,, just not here. Your input regarding winemaking will always be welcomed ,, without personal criticism (the other PC)

 

[marino]

Right, I agree with you [floandgary] but where was the **personal** criticism, exactly?

 

[MisterEd]

Your perspective is a very reasoned and reasonable one!
Peace.
Ed

Seems to me that the conversation stayed and came back to wine, no one was assaulted, and people had a chance to discuss perspectives relevant to "ancient wine"--it seems reasonable that a discussion about the nature of how old "ancient " is would take us into religious sources and competing ideas of the history of the earth and humans who fermented little round grapes into this wine we spend so much time talking about.

I think we're all good enough at measuring sulfur and stinky off flavors. That conversation was fermenting right along: some heat, a few bubbles, but within acceptable parameters to give us wine in the end. And it did.

 

[MisterEd]

A forum such as this one works only when members engage in conversations and discussions that do not attack or even question the bona fides (the good faith) of others in the group.

What thread comments could be construed as targeting a specific individual? I see none.

 

[MisterEd]

Who exactly was made uncomfortable? Did someone specifically mention this to you? If the moderators on this site have a goal to avoid any inkling of controversy outside of winemaking then you are doing a very good job indeed. As adults we can and should be mature enough to realize that dissenting positions should not be equated to personal 'ad hominem' attacks. This attitude of avoiding any possibility of controversy flies in the face of spirited conversation and makes for rather uninspired dialogue. Social media is certainly having a profound effect on our abilities to have lively conversation, while still respecting one another's difference of opinion.

(Sigh),


This is not a matter of being thin skinned. I am from the NYC area and one can not survive without having a thick skin. My goal is to keep this site a place where everyone feels comfortable.

 

[MisterEd]

General chit-chat is the only forum on this site where off topics are supposed to be allowed. Evidently there are many subjects that are still considered taboo even in the chit-chat arena. I believe the members of this site should be considered mature enough to maintain the proper sense of decorum required for interesting responsible dialogue/debate.
Peace.
Ed

There's a time and place for ideological combat ,,, just not here. Your input regarding winemaking will always be welcomed ,, without personal criticism (the other PC)

 

[BernardSmith]

Speaking only for myself - There are topics that one can discuss with the idea that when points are made those who disagree with the points can change their opinion and adopt the position that they had previously held as valid because of the preponderance of data or evidence but there are other topics where discussion is not in fact based on data or evidence or where the evidence and data are not used to convince another that their position is wrong because the positions being held are not in fact based on evidence or data but beliefs. While some folk might enjoy the entertainment that such debates over beliefs provide it is not obvious that a site devoted to wine making is the locale for such an activity. To participate either actively or passively in critiquing and challenging the beliefs of members of this site is not something, I think, that most members agree is acceptable. That has nothing to do with "dissenting opinions" and everything to do with the mission of the site. And I write that as a Scot, a Skeptic, and a social scientist.

 

[Julie]

This thread is just turning into nothing but a whine fest for you MisterEd, it seems this is the type of conversations that you enjoy. So why don't you fine a debate forum and chit chat to your heart is content! MisterEd take this as your only warning, you will be banned if you continue to want to whine about something.

With that said, this thread is now closed