Unopened Sticky and Non-sticky tapes wanted for research at the Library of Congress

[The Ghost of FM]

Ghost, I dont know anything more about the OP than do you. But from the beginning, at least four of us were quite prepared to accept he was genuine, and four of us questioned the way he was treated by two of us on the forum.

I think your understanding of "in kind' is incorrect. Payment "in kind' means payment in lieu of money. I can only guess that in this case it means payment by way of an equivalent unopened box of tape but a non SSS one. If so, not a bad deal I would have thought. Either way, perhaps we should clarify this with the OP rather than tolerate the rumour mill that seems to have taken off here.

If he didnt provide proper contact information then that's his loss. He will not get any tapes!

"perhaps" he is legitimate? To even suggest now that he is not legitimate is clutching at straws. It's too late for that. He is legit and we all know that. Dont go there, Ghost.

I know what it's like myself to have a secure, well paid Public Service job one day and be left with little the next. You dont know me Ghost, but we may have a lot in common, both in our life experience and our political views. Happy to discuss these issues privately.

Best wishes,

Tim

So, If we agree that he will never receive a single roll of tape from anyone here because he has repeatedly failed to provide contact info, and if we agree that he is offering no monetary payment for those factory sealed tapes, why on earth are you defending this person?

I don't care how many members sided with him or didn't. This isn't a popularity contest with a win by majority vote.

There is nothing further to discuss here, publicly or privately.

Cheers!

 

[sweetbeats]

Sweetbeats you seem to be touchy about the meaning you or perhaps others might assign to your "joining" me. I meant it in a general and obvious sense...I didnt mean to imply that the four of us had discussed or colluded prior to posting (we didnt) or that by saying similar things to what I said you were somehow signing yourself up for some "tribe" or "side" that I allegedly belonged to.

Well when I read what you submitted its pretty hard, imo, to interpret it another way (i.e. other than that you were under the impression that you and I were of some accord) and my main point is for you to understand that your posts are, in part, a source of my aforementioned disappointment. There is a saying used as a guidepost on the recordist.com Ampex List for keeping the tripe factor at a minimum: keep a high signal to noise ratio. Folks there seem to respect that ideology. Its nice.

Here is what you said that specifically triggered my response:

"I called you [miroslav] an idiot because you behaved like one towards a genuine enquirer. Lt. Bob, bdenton and now Sweetbeats joined me in criticising your, and Beck's irrational and inhospitable responses to the genuine OP..."

Your statement clearly demonstrates your lack of understanding that your posts were/are part of the inspiration for my original post expressing disappointment. Now you do.

 

[miroslav]

.... all posted, questioning the harsh words said about the OP, not least the false assertion that he was a fake. He wasnt and isnt a fake.

"harsh words"..."that he was a fake"...?

My god...how you keep twisting things post after post trying to validate your silly position in two pages worth of posts.

There was no harshness toward the OP and certainly no one called him a fake...just basic skepticism about a new member who comes into the forums requesting tapes be sent to him. The same kind of skepticism shown numerous new members who out of the gate are trying to sell or get something to/from the membership.

Why don't you go light a candle for the OP....lay down a wreath or something....

You keep implying that you have some sort of posse, backing your postion...sorry, I'm not seeing it, and you're just further alienating yourself from the analog only crowd by coming back into the thread and re-stirring the pot over and over again...

 

[miroslav]

...I dont know anything more about the OP than do you.

Finally after 57 posts!

...I can only guess that in this case it means payment by way of an equivalent unopened box of tape...

Yeah...guessing really works....why bother asking for confirmation from the OP like some suggested.

...perhaps we should clarify this with the OP

Hmmmm...didn't a few of us already ask for that...several times...and instead got a lot of flack from you?

...If he didnt provide proper contact information then that's his loss. He will not get any tapes!

Wow....no kidding! Isn't that the crux of all the skepticism...NO contact info...?

I'm glad you finally see where us "bad, mean skeptics" were coming from at the start of the thread.
I guess we can go back to our regularly scheduled program now that we are on the same page, but thanks for playing Tim.

 

[Tim Gillett]

Well when I read what you submitted its pretty hard, imo, to interpret it another way (i.e. other than that you were under the impression that you and I were of some accord) and my main point is for you to understand that your posts are, in part, a source of my aforementioned disappointment. There is a saying used as a guidepost on the recordist.com Ampex List for keeping the tripe factor at a minimum: keep a high signal to noise ratio. Folks there seem to respect that ideology. Its nice.

Here is what you said that specifically triggered my response:

"I called you [miroslav] an idiot because you behaved like one towards a genuine enquirer. Lt. Bob, bdenton and now Sweetbeats joined me in criticising your, and Beck's irrational and inhospitable responses to the genuine OP..."

Your statement clearly demonstrates your lack of understanding that your posts were/are part of the inspiration for my original post expressing disappointment. Now you do.

But we were of some accord. We (myself, Lt.Bob, denton and yourself) expressed separately our concern at the way the OP had been spoken to. That's a matter now of public record.

I quite understand that you were disappointed partly at some of what I posted. No surprises there. Yes I said that as a Moderator Miroslav behaved idiotically towards the OP. I stand by that. If it was idiotic behaviour then it was only fair to call it what it was. Sometimes speaking the truth can be a good, cleansing thing, but hopefully we rarely have to be that blunt.

The irony is that a few regulars here have few scruples about not only speaking bluntly but telling lies about people which they know very well are not true. But do they get called to account for their behaviour as well? No, it's a very selective kind of justice here. That's the larger concern.

"All are equal... but some are more equal than others..." or so it seems.

Cheers Tim

 

[Tim Gillett]

Finally after 57 posts!



Yeah...guessing really works....why bother asking for confirmation from the OP like some suggested.



Hmmmm...didn't a few of us already ask for that...several times...and instead got a lot of flack from you?



Wow....no kidding! Isn't that the crux of all the skepticism...NO contact info...?

I'm glad you finally see where us "bad, mean skeptics" were coming from at the start of the thread.
I guess we can go back to our regularly scheduled program now that we are on the same page, but thanks for playing Tim.

Miroslav,
Lets assume that the OP really was a scammer as you and Beck suspected. Lets suppose that his intent was to steal tapes from innocent people. What would have been the best way to deal with it?
Wouldnt it have been better to play along with him for a while? Ask innocent sounding questions of clarification. Seek out as much information as you can, while you can. Conceal any hint of your suspicion so that he eventually reveals his contact details enough for him to be traced. Then when he took the bait, pass his details onto the Police for them to investigate.

Why blow your cover right at the beginning? If he had really been a scammer he would have run a mile long ago and someone else would have eventually been their target..

To me the approach just seems so ham fisted.
In dealing with scammers we need to be more than just skeptical. We also need to be subtle, and, in brief, smarter than them. I didnt see that happening here.

Tim

 

[chuckduffy]

homerecording deep cover ops

 

[Tim Gillett]

homerecording deep cover ops

No just common sense.

 

[miroslav]

Why blow your cover....

<<< cue James Bond theme music >>>

This is not a sting operation....put your Jr. Detective's badge away...you've been watching too many crime dramas on TV.

I'll say it one last time...maybe it will finally sink in, but I'm doubtful.
In the case of a new member who comes in immediately "requesting" something from the membership in his very first post...it is up to the member to provide whatever credibility/info is lacking.
You wanna play CSI all over the Internet about someone...knock yourself out.

If the thread hadn't run for a bunch of posts right away, I would have deleted it pretty quickly when the OP failed to come right back into the thread to respond or provide more info, because that's usually a sign of a spammer/scammer, one-time poster.
That's the way it is on most BBS forums due to the excessive spamming/scamming that goes on every day.

Yet even after the thread dragged out a bit and the OP came back...he STILL did NOT post anything more regarding contact info, where to send, is there any reimbursement, some more specific info about who/what/where...etc...
...even AFTER reading that there was some skepticism about him and his request!?!?
So IMO, it's really not all that important to the OP...and certainly not as important as you've been blathering on and on and on about it for the last couple of days....talk about "idiotic behavior".

Oh...and speaking of the OP....
If he doesn't come in tomorrow (allowing for the weekend...most gov workers don't do weekends) and provide more detailed info about who/what/where/when...etc....this thread is done, as it's now totally off-topic and serving NO purpose to anyone, certainly not the OP.
Like I said earlier, I will assist him if needed for him to properly post his detailed request, though I would think he should know what the entails by now...but if there is any lack of Internet forum savvy on his part (yes, some folks rarely go to Internet forums), I will gladly guide him.

 

[chuckduffy]

No just common sense.

im sorry Tim, I'm afraid I don't have that.

 

[bdenton]

Miroslav,

It is you who is way out of line here, and I hope the owners of this board will reconsider your moderator status.

I have been in IT for 22 years. I was on the old "dialup" bulletin boards back in the mid-80's. I was "on" the Internet back before it was "the Internet", back when it was still NSFNET. And I have been a member of this board since 2001.

Trust me, I have seen just about every sort of spam one could imagine, and have received more than my share.

I have also been around my share of scientists (although I try to avoid spending too much time with them, since unless they are discussing their field of expertise, they tend to be somewhat boring and lacking in social skills...). The OP's username is "Breitung1" and he included "(see IRUG 2012, Barcelona, Breitung abstract)", a very common method of scientists referring to each other and their recent or seminal work, in his post.

It took me all of 10 seconds to Google the gentleman's namYet,e and find his LinkedIn page and various other bona fides.

Yet, due to your inability to understand that not everyone who comes here has spent hours lurking on this board or others, you were prepared to delete the post.

Good moderators perform a tough and thankless job, and in my opinion are an important part of any well-run forum.

But narrow-minded and ham-handed moderators can often deprive a forum of the knowledge that someone who doesn't know exactly how to meet the moderators specifications for an introduction could provide.

Miroslav, you were wrong. You have been called on this by several of the other mature members on this board. You need to step away from the moderator role for a while to think about this thread.

And in fairness, I'm advising you that I am sending a copy of this message to Chater-La, should you decide to delete this message...

 

[stevieb]

My goal is to produce a database of data that can be accessed via the web and used free of charge to non-destructively identify degraded tape before playing on *any* collection. An added benefit will be to identify chemical markers (either general or make/model specific) that can be used to understand and advise treatment, identification, and storage strategies.

Now, there is good stuff- if I read this right, once breitung1's research is concluded and published, anyone who has possibly SSS tape will be able to determine, beforehand, if it SSS or not. Given that tape is becoming more and more hard to come by, this seems to have real potential to prevent tape that is actually usable from being indiscriminately destroyed.

Really, people, am I the only one here that sees this?

 

[Lt. Bob]

Now, there is good stuff- if I read this right, once breitung1's research is concluded and published, anyone who has possibly SSS tape will be able to determine, beforehand, if it SSS or not. Given that tape is becoming more and more hard to come by, this seems to have real potential to prevent tape that is actually usable from being indiscriminately destroyed.

Really, people, am I the only one here that sees this?

apparently ..........

 

[lonewhitefly]

I have corresponded with the original poster, and just to clarify:

He is requesting tape donations for this research project, the results of which will potentially benefit analog recordists by helping to identify problematic tapes prior to treating them.

 

[miroslav]

You have been called on this by several of the other mature members on this board..

You and Tim.....?

Both of you have bounced around the forums in the past nit-picking and starting many a pissing contest....you with acoustic treatment SOPs, I believe....and Tim here in the analog only board with his myopic views of analog-only recording, and it is Tim with his references to forum "history", and you, who jumped on this thread just for the opportunity of a personal attack that has little to do with the OP's post.

There was and is NO issue with the intent of the OP's study...I think that's been stated many times...nor has anyone tried to slandered the OP's rep as a scientist.
There were initial questions on the validity of his request...and based on those handful of skeptical posts, we've now had 3 pages of Tim, and you, crying "foul"...over NOTHING.
The real issue here now has become about Tim's (and your) view of how much skepticism is allowed toward a new, one-time poster who comes into a forum requesting something from the membership.

We mods have been called in the past for NOT reacting quickly enough to spam or certain kinds of spam, and generally the majority of the membership has a very short fuse with ANY potential spam...hence the immediate skepticism toward new posters who leave some doubt, which the OP certainly did.
Feel free to PM Chater with whatever you like...and if she wants a "background check" performed on new posters who come in with vague requests...BEFORE their posts are deleted or any doubt is cast on their request "sincerity"...
...that's her call.
Maybe you and Tim can apply for the job of Profile Investigators or something like that...since you both seem very preoccupied with it and feel that it is up to someone here on the boards to do that rather than for the new member to provide, based on what his/her purpose is here on the forums when they are requesting something from the membership.

This has NOTHING to do with SSS identification & Tape preservation. We are all in support of that.
All that was and is being ask for of the OP was clearer/specific info.
I see some people contacted him...great...but right now, if I wanted to send him a tape...I don't know where to send it???
Why have this semi-vague process that requires each person the need to PM the OP or do Internet research...and THEN have a clear idea of what is wanted and where to send it...?
That is the ONLY thing that was triggering the skepticism on the first few posts....and then 3 pages of Tim and you.

Is a full name & official LOC address for sending the tapes to and/or getting additional/detailed info THAT much to ask for when an official government study is being done..???

 

[The Ghost of FM]

Dear sweet baby Jesus. What a train wreck.

Cheers!

 

[bdenton]

You and Tim.....?

Both of you have bounced around the forums in the past nit-picking and starting many a pissing contest....you with acoustic treatment SOPs, I believe....and Tim here in the analog only board with his myopic views of analog-only recording, and it is Tim with his references to forum "history", and you, who jumped on this thread just for the opportunity of a personal attack that has little to do with the OP's post.

There was and is NO issue with the intent of the OP's study...I think that's been stated many times...nor has anyone tried to slandered the OP's rep as a scientist.
There were initial questions on the validity of his request...and based on those handful of skeptical posts, we've now had 3 pages of Tim, and you, crying "foul"...over NOTHING.
The real issue here now has become about Tim's (and your) view of how much skepticism is allowed toward a new, one-time poster who comes into a forum requesting something from the membership.

We mods have been called in the past for NOT reacting quickly enough to spam or certain kinds of spam, and generally the majority of the membership has a very short fuse with ANY potential spam...hence the immediate skepticism toward new posters who leave some doubt, which the OP certainly did.
Feel free to PM Chater with whatever you like...and if she wants a "background check" performed on new posters who come in with vague requests...BEFORE their posts are deleted or any doubt is cast on their request "sincerity"...
...that's her call.
Maybe you and Tim can apply for the job of Profile Investigators or something like that...since you both seem very preoccupied with it and feel that it is up to someone here on the boards to do that rather than for the new member to provide, based on what his/her purpose is here on the forums when they are requesting something from the membership.

This has NOTHING to do with SSS identification & Tape preservation. We are all in support of that.
All that was and is being ask for of the OP was clearer/specific info.
I see some people contacted him...great...but right now, if I wanted to send him a tape...I don't know where to send it???
Why have this semi-vague process that requires each person the need to PM the OP or do Internet research...and THEN have a clear idea of what is wanted and where to send it...?
That is the ONLY thing that was triggering the skepticism on the first few posts....and then 3 pages of Tim and you.

Is a full name & official LOC address for sending the tapes to and/or getting additional/detailed info THAT much to ask for when an official government study is being done..???

Miroslav,

You are totally in the wrong here...get over it...

Here is your very first post on this thread:

Well maybe he's working on pre-play identification methods...but I'm not sure how to tell if I have sticky tape by just looking at it through the plastic bag...so how does one decide which tapes to send to them?

I guess if you have a case of XYZ tape, and a few reels from it are bad, you could assume the others are too...but, not necessarily.

Just not sure how many folks would send them unopened/unused tapes...without some kind of specific "pre-play" identification method...which is what I guess they are trying to develop.

If additional information was required, and after noting this was his first post, most good moderators would have politely asked the poster for the additional information.

Is that too much to ask for when someone posts something that, to an intelligent person, is not obviously spam?

I'm not trying to start a pissing contest with anyone. I am simply pointing out how many of the responses here were just plain rude, and would reflect negatively on the board as a whole. And that reflection is what those who advertise here see...you know, the guys who pay the freight for this place...

 

[miroslav]

Right...and if you actually quoted those first few posts of mine in their entirety...most were in the form of a question..."?"
So yes....I was asking the OP for clarification, and in none of my initial posts did I *attack* the OP or *call him names.
Yet that was how Tim chose to get into the thread...guns blazing and name-calling out of the gate...over NOTHING.

He's had a chip on his shoulder for several threads now over the last few weeks (most here in the Analog Only forum)...and he obviously has been carrying some baggage from past history with other members here.
This thread was yet just another springboard for him to vent all that out....that's it...nothing more.
You're intent was/is not much different...it's called "piling on", and I've seen you with your own chip with acoustics discussions.
I'm sure Tim will be back sometime later tonight when it hits his timezone (now it's your timezone)...and he will continue to wind and wind on this. You guys are like a tag-team.
Yet both of you are "soooooo upset" that some of us were "skeptical" toward the OP's vague post.

No, sorry...none of this has much to do with any "shock-n-horror" over how the OP was treated. The OP was not treated in any real bad way, and there have been several posts already made asking him to post up full, detailed info, so that his request can be reiterated outside of this now off-topic thread and apart from the prattling you two keep churning out.

So really...both of you...get over it.

You know...as an aside...I would really love to know how many tapes you or Tim end up sending the guy after all this.
Do you even record with tape these days? I'm not really sure, as I don't see you post very often here in the Analog Only board...yet here you are, fanning the fire.

 

[AtoDeficient]

Hi guys. . . haven't been here in a while. . . But it seems you're all doing just fine without my help. . .

 

[AtoDeficient]

. . .Why have this semi-vague process that requires each person the need to PM the OP or do Internet research...and THEN have a clear idea of what is wanted and where to send it...?
That is the ONLY thing that was triggering the skepticism on the first few posts....and then 3 pages of Tim and you.

Is a full name & official LOC address for sending the tapes to and/or getting additional/detailed info THAT much to ask for when an official government study is being done..???

I agree. . . I didn't understand the OP's cryptic reference information, and I didn't really care enough to try and figure it out, or search his background just so I can give tape away "in kind". . .

(If Miro has a fault, it is patience . . . -- He may have others, IDK--. . . But he usually displays a super-human, enviable reserve in the face of much abuse and name-calling, which, btw, is really very childish.)