Suggestion...

[mshilarious]

I have signatures blocked because they are annoying. My professional affiliation is in my profile. The only way to implement your suggestion is to require all users to be non-anonymous (nonymous?), which I highly doubt will ever happen here.

Therefore, I would not be in support of it. If somebody is pimping or spamming, I will smack them hard, signature or not.

 

[kojdogg]

Therefore, I would not be in support of it. If somebody is pimping or spamming, I will smack them hard, signature or not.

I have tremendous respect for you in regards to this and know that you walk the talk. I still think that there is an inherent conflict of interest in this as you can shape the way that some of your competitors are portrayed and perceived-- though I do understand that this only applies in situations where they "break the rules," however you are have significant latitude in interpreting and enforcing the rules. Again, I don't think that you're abusive with this, but to me, IMHO, the conflict is there.

 

[mshilarious]

I have tremendous respect for you in regards to this and know that you walk the talk. I still think that there is an inherent conflict of interest in this as you can shape the way that some of your competitors are portrayed and perceived-- though I do understand that this only applies in situations where they "break the rules," however you are have significant latitude in interpreting and enforcing the rules. Again, I don't think that you're abusive with this, but to me, IMHO, the conflict is there.

I agree. In fact that is pretty much what I said when I told them I should not be a mod. Nevertheless, they wanted someone to address these issues, and few others volunteered. It's a dirty job, but somebody's got to do it . . .

Really though, the signature rules are so lenient that any manufacturer that feels like it can de facto spam by just posting helpful-but-neutral stuff in the body of their post, and having their big fat commercial signature right underneath. Totally 100% permissible. That is one reason I don't tolerate commercial speech inside the body of the post; that's just getting greedy. That's also why I don't want a signature myself; it would destroy the sliver of credibility I have left.

Anyway, just because somebody else sells (or more to the point, mods) a mic, I don't think that makes them a direct competitor. I have zero interest in modding mics, and the modded mic products end up at a much higher price point than me, literally 10x more. Until I have to start moderating Behri or Samson or Nady or Karma reps, I think the conflict is minimized.

And in that case, I would ask the other mods to review the post in question and act according to their judgment. For all the major issues, we reach a consensus in advance of action already.

 

[kojdogg]

My point about disclosure of signatures is that it is something that seems to have worked in other places with great success in the ways I described above. If the Audiofanzine folks want to keep this an inherently different place, that is, of course, their prerogative. When I read their open call for moderators, it seemed like the spirit of what they wanted to control was the kind of spammers who are pushing ED meds, human-goat pornography, and discount consumer electronics from SE Asia, but of course, I have had no personal interaction with them on this or any other matters of concerning this board. I don't know of any other board with similar focus and content that has vilified and outlawed manufacturer participation the way it has been here.

I can certainly understand that the moderator role creates some uncomfortable situations and that you can't control when those situations arise. The only thing someone could hope control in those cases are whether they get involved or not.

In any case, I appreciate you weighing in. Thanks for allowing me to share my thoughts on this.

 

[mshilarious]

Well I don't think it's quite that open on other boards. I believe GS requires that manufacturers buy banner ads in order to have free rein on posting. That's probably not 100% correct, but there is some policy there. PSW requires all members to be non-anonymous. Taperssection has a retail forum, and generally tolerates manufacturers pitching their wares elsewhere on the site. Still, the most blatant of the vendors draw criticism.

The ethos against spam here comes from the members, not the mods or the owners. I could have suggested allowing manufacturers to post in the manner they do on GS. I didn't, because I think it's inappropriate. But even if I had, I would have been tarred and feathered by the members. And I personally can't do the hard sell anyway.

 

[gecko zzed]

If this is truly your perspective, then I think you might find yourself in the minority in this kind of a board and indeed in a Western Capitalistic society in general.

Here, many people logon to ask advise on what kind of equipment might yield better results. They might dislike something about the sounds they are getting, but often they are getting better results than they probably imagined were possible, or at least results that are good enough. In any case they are striving for better results that sound more like they hear on their favorite recordings or in their "mind's ear." It's not just about equipment. Folks also read about new techniques for mic positioning, mixing, etc. which may lead them to try new things that they haven't thought of even if they're happy with their results to that point. They may post mp3's of songs that they have recorded and mixed for both praise and constructive criticism. Even when they are satisfied with the results they got, they may incorporate suggestions they get into a reworking in the hopes of getting even better results. All very relevant examples of seeking to improve things that aren't broken.

Also, unless you are a Communist, Socialist, Rastafarian, I have to think that your home and daily life are filled with conveniences that would contradict what you stated about not wanting to improve things that aren't necessarily problems. Are you still using the first guitar, microphone, etc. that you ever got? Do you have a cable modem, DSL or wireless internet in your home? Do you have a cell phone-- if so is it the most spartan, bare bones model that they offer? Why would you even need that? Have you ever upgraded from one computer to another before the first one broke down? etc. etc. It's the American Way.

I have a feeling you may have misread what I wrote.

In summary I was saying:

We make changes mainly to fix things or prevent them from happening (i.e. problem solving).

Sometimes we make changes even when there is no apparent problem (i.e. upgrading, improving etc).

I assert that this desire to achieve something better is a manifestation of another sort of problem, the itch of curiosity or dissatisfaction with the status quo. It is our attempts to resolve this problem that pushes us all forward.