Suggestion to whistlemakers re: this forum.

serpent · Post by **serpent** » Sun Dec 22, 2002 10:52 pm

On some small level, the charity raffle is about my product. More specifically, however, it is about hungry people. I have no regrets whatsoever about multiple posting to keep it in view of this board. If any of the other whistlemakers out there would care to donate a whistle to the cause, I will sing your praises to the heavens. And I will also continue to keep the thread visible. If this comes across as a challenge, so be it.
Bill Whedon

avanutria · Post by **avanutria** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 12:45 am

Guys, settle down a bit

Dale said straight off in his first post that it was a suggestion. I imagine he just wanted to spark some thought. Maybe there was something in particular that brought this to mind. Maybe not, and it's been kicking around in his head for a while. I don't know. I do know the issue has come up before, though.

Everyone enjoy the holidays and perhaps if you have further questions, as Dale said, take it up in email. And remember that text is not a perfect medium, and take that into account when interpreting replies.

aderyn_du · Post by **aderyn_du** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 1:03 am

And remember that we love whistle-makers... without all of you, where would we be?

Sweet dreams...

Andrea ~*~

serpent · Post by **serpent** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 1:04 am

Oh, Beth, don't sweat it! Umbrage is a good thing, if not taken in excess. And I see that I have, once again, taken myself much too seriously! Been associating with my cats too much - picked up their "It's all about me!" attitude, I guess.

Cheers,
Bill Whedon

Walden · Post by **Walden** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 3:45 am

On 2002-12-22 20:56, Sandy Jasper wrote:
I try my best not to over stay my welcome in any thread and not to push my product. I also feel that it is important for me to retain my freedom of speech and be able to respond to questions and comments as I see fit. I will do so with caution and respect and hope that other whistle makers, vendors and whistle players do the same.

I feel that there are whistlemakers, yourself included, who behave quite responsibly in the forum. And I doubt anyone is suggesting you need reform. However, there have been some rather heated debates at times between makers and others on the forum. I think it is these cases where personal honor come into play that he is suggesting that makers use discretion and step back from a thread.

Zubivka · Post by **Zubivka** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 5:19 am

On 2002-12-22 12:58, sturob wrote:
If a question arises that is directed to the maker, then by all means you should respond, in my opinion.

Stuart

I'll try to be less cryptic.
Disclaimer : excuse me folks; this is definitely not my mother's language, so I sometimes "talk funny"--i.e. peculiar.

So, to Stuart: what I meant was that there can be a very thin line between a question or comment directly addressed to a maker (*1) and a question apparently sent to the forum (*2).

*1 : "Gargle, your whistles suck"
*2 : "Folks, Garglophones suck"

To Dale : is it more clear this way ?

My modest opinion is :
1) I understand Dale's wish, right and duty to moderate this forum. I appreciate he's putting it a level of self-restraint.
2) However, I'm not sure what can have irritated Dale lately. This just a question.
3) One of the things I appreciate here is the direct contact with whistlesmiths. In several instances I've actually regretted they did non intervene in a thread.

Now, a question. Some critics I've read (not lately, though) were on the brink of slander. Or over it. Now, how is the maker supposed to answer this ? Privately, to explain his point of view to one who exposed him publicly with slander ? Then, even supposing the maker manages to convince the original poster, who earnestly corrects his original thread or intervention, what's left? The hundreds of people who read the original post and were left with an unremovable bad impression.

As Beaumarchais wrote :
"Calomniez, calomniez! Il en restera toujours quelque chose...
Or : "Slander, slander. Something will always remain of it" (and please excuse this very approx. word to word translation. Tradutore, traditore...)

Lastly : one may read and wonder why I seem here to take cause for the makers. Just to make it clear, I'm not one; I doubt I'll ever will and become one. But I do have a tendency to defend the makers (i.e. smiths, composers, gen. creators of all kinds) against critics, backseat drivers and all kinds of... wind-mills.

Sorry if I write to lenghtly: I don't have the time to write shorter. And when I do, I tend to be cryptic

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Zubivka on 2002-12-23 06:22 ]</font>

Chuck_Clark · Post by **Chuck_Clark** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 9:44 am

Y'know, I was staying silent because I didn't think I had anything to say - but I think perhaps I do. When does open exchange of information become self-promotion? Some may think Bill Whedon has crossed that line, but I'm not all that sure. I think he's just a garrulous guy.

Newbies (and perhaps others) WILL ask about different brands. What better place? Should we not recommend whistles/makers? And if we dislike a particular brand, should we refrain from saying so and let someone make the same mistake we think we did? Would it be better if this were done in e-mail where the maker can't see what is being said about his prodct and can't be aware of either a problem or the perception of one?

Members WILL criticize what they see as a poor individual whistle or bad service, although I think they should at least first do so privately with the maker and not dump it here. Still, when someone does slam a maker here, should not the maker have the chance to present his side in a civil manner? His reputation has been potentially damaged - and while I think it shoule be civil, he should at least have a chance to fix some of the damage.

The real onus should be shared here. It's incumbent (or should be) on us non-makers to be fair to the folks who make our whistles, and resolve disputes in a way that should not force them to defend their reputation publicly (i.e. e-mail). When a maker is criticised publicly, I don't think it unreasonable to make ONE civil response stating his side if there is one or publicly acknowledging a problem and the intent to fix it. Without public interchange we wouldn't have the full knowledge we need to make good desicions - just keep in mind the golden rule - threat others like you think you should be treated.

sturob · Post by **sturob** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 9:47 am

Zubiv, thanks for your reply explaining yourself. Je comprends et je te remercie.

As for the rest of us, maybe we should just stop. I apologize for responding to what Dale had initially posted. It's turning into a free-for-all that's losing sight of his intent.

Stuart

serpent · Post by **serpent** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 11:00 am

Garrulous? Moi?

Oh, what the heck. fagiddabowdit!
Happy Holidays, all!

Serpent The Verbose One (TM)
AKA "Serpie-Pie"

by those who know...

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 3:43 pm

Sandy's declaration that he wishes
to exercise caution and respect
in getting involved in threads
about his product is precisely
in the ballpark. There is no
issue here.

This isn't about rights--even if
something is my right, that doesn't mean
that doing it is a good idea.
Suggesting that something not
be done isn't attacking anybody's
rights.

[Indeed, if I may take
the matter to its logical conclusion,
people sometimes have the right
to do immoral things--so I have
the constitutional right to
advocate that minorities be
liquidated. It's wrong to
advocate such things, even
though we have the right to
do so. In pointing out that
such advocacy is immoral,
I'm not attacking anybody's
rights.] Best

blackhawk · Post by **blackhawk** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 3:55 pm

On 2002-12-23 16:43, jim stone wrote:

This isn't about rights--even if
something is my right, that doesn't mean
that doing it is a good idea.
Suggesting that something not
be done isn't attacking anybody's
rights.

It's not about rights, certainly, but I think it's really over-the-top to tell someone they shouldn't even say "thanks for the kind words." And for that matter, I think Sandy (who is a she, not a he) has been a class act in all regards. To tell her to not post in any thread where her whistles are discussed, even to say thanks, is really, really odd, to say it as kindly as I can. Btw, Sandy, since you aren't allowed to post here, let me just say you make truly wonderful whistles. For that matter, if you continue to be asked not to post on threads where your whistles are discussed, I will now go way out of my way in any of those threads to tell everyone just how great your whistles are.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: blackhawk on 2002-12-23 16:57 ]</font>

JessieK · Post by **JessieK** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 4:00 pm

Sandy is a woman.

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 4:39 pm

Sorry, Sandy! I agree with Blackhawk
that it's 'over the top to tell
somebody they shouldn't ever say thankyou'
in a thread for kind words said about their whistles. Also I agree that it's at least a little odd 'to tell her not to post in any
thread' involving her whistles.

But nobody's done that. Best

serpent · Post by **serpent** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 4:47 pm

Sandy is, indeed, a woman, and a bang-up great whistlesmith, as well!

I don't believe Dale's intent is to censor whistlesmiths, except for me.

BSF, I'm not 100% certain exactly what he was getting at, and he hasn't come back to elucidate, so I think I'll chalk it up to a bit of sour oatmeal, or perhaps insufficient sleep. God knows I get liverish enough once in a while!

Dale!! Dude!! All is forgiven!! Come back, lad!!

Just me garrulousness and verbosity taking the forefront for a bit! :roll: Yep, I got me knickers in a knot earlier on, but then I remembered that it's not my style to do so, aside from the fact that washing knotted knickers is somewhat onerous.

Dale, you're spending too much time reading the writings of The Zoobster -- you're beginning to sound like him! Be careful - the next step, you have to move to France!

Happy Holidays everyone!

An Unabashedly Chatty Serpent!

P.S. (should I add a P.S.? haven't I bored enought people with the original S.? It's a big decision! Wait! Energy! Get away from me with that trout! **SPLAT**!!...)

Sandy Jasper · Post by **Sandy Jasper** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 5:21 pm

I do not believe Dales comments to be a personal affront to whistle makers, just an attempt to tone some stuff down. I just felt the need to keep the door open to posting when appropriate by whistle makers as what often starts as a suggestion can be taken up by the lynch mobs as gospel!!!

In the spirit of Christmas, let us all enjoy peace and good will towards all men,women and elves,

Merry Christmas all,

Sandy,
Elfin queen of Olympus,
(whom is indeed of the female persuasion!!)