Worldpress Photo...

[CookOfTheHouse]

Dude, you're completely mental!!
Is there anyone on this forum who hasn't been insulted in anyway by John B Sails? Don't be annoying. Try and keep it down, don't make a scene everytime someone says something you don't agree on. We know there's a lot of stuff you don't like, you''ve made it perfectly clear, but something almost every member on this forum agrees on is you're always bothering or posting offensive stuff. You know this isn't the first time you've had this kind of trouble, just try to change, try to be nice.

[Adam Walker]

While I appreciate the sentiment that banning members goes against free speech and all the Airplane stood for, I have no problem banning certain individuals who make our forums a drag to visit. The warnings I issued today are the last chance for certain members to play nice or go away. Adam Walker, Jefferson Airplane Inc.

[Ensign]

I'm re-posting this here.
While I heartily support freedom of speech, in general, there are limits. Sometimes the limits are brought about by common sense (not yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, etc.) and sometimes they are brought about by the rules of the situation, in this case the Forum. Did our Administrator not say, "Having fun is good. We like fun. Please keep it positive and polite. We may take action against posts and/or topics that could cause unrest in the community beyond a civil and polite disagreement."? By objecting to racist and intolerant posts I am just trying to follow the rules of this forum, and I expect others to do so as well. (I know, that is probably naive...) Racist comments, about Moslims or anybody else, do not belong here, in my opinion. Posts that call others "stupid" and homophobic do not belong here, either. Therefore I do believe that a certain amount of surgically-applied censorship is called for. There are other places on the web, as well as out in the streets, where one can say whatever one feels like, even if it's nasty and false. I hope this doesn't turn into a place like that. If it does, I'm outta here. One more thing, and then I'm off my soap box: "self-censorship" is not necessarily a bad thing. It just may describe "restraint" and "civility" and "politeness". Isn't the legacy of Jefferson Airplane a generally positive one? Shouldn't the official web site be positive as well?

[redrabid]

A short reaction:
The problem with demands that this forum should be fun or positive is that I think that is very hard to define what that means.
For me a heated debate, flaring tempers is fun. Something said may be "negative", but it may lead to a good discussion, a clarification of viewpoints, a better understanding of what makes the debaters tick and what the differences between them are. A positive outcome in my opinion. "Fun" and "positive" or "non-offense" are too vague, too personal as criteria. Criteria like these stiffle any discussion, they are contrary to what a forum should be (ever read Livius?). "You're not civlized" is too often uttered by those who don't want to be confronted with bad news and try to silence the messengers. I don't like it that my freedom of speech is limited by persons or groups with the greatest personal and ideological sensibilities.
To me this forum shouldn't be a digital "gated community", nor a 60s paradise out of which Adam and Eve can be banned.
But my opinion doesn't mean much: God may not exist, but the Administrator does. (You do allow me this litlle joke at your expense, don't you Mr Administrator?)
And did have JA a positive legacy? Musically certainly. Regarding their advocacy of endless drug taking one may hesitate to answer that question.

And now I'm going to watch "The Big Bang Theory", my favorite sitcom. Sheldon is my hero.

[Ensign]

redrabid, I like your spirit. Here's some spirited discussion for ya': You said, ""Fun" and "positive" or "non-offense" are too vague, too personal as criteria." Sorry, not buyin' it, in this case. Calling someone lazy, stupid and homophobic is not fun, is negative, and is offensive. Same with putting down an entire religion in one fell swoop. No way you can call that fun, positive, or non-offensive. You may, indeed, like that type of stuff, but let's call it what it really is.

[redrabid]

Obviously, Ensign, we don't agree on what is funny. That doesn't surprise me. It depends too much on personal appreciation and interpretation. It may be a cultural difference. I don't know where you live, but I live in Europe, where humor (not really the same thing as "fun") is appreciated when it is raw, hard hitting or even offensive. All those immensely popular American Late Night TV Shows die a quick death over here. We watch in amazement. Such lame jokes. Same thing with American comedy movies. We prefer "Life Of Brian".
I don't think that the meaning of words like fun, positive and offensive are as hard defined for me as they seem to be for you. Considering those differences who will make the rules on right and wrong? (In this case I know the answer: The Administrator. It has a nice 1984-flavour, don't you think?) For instance, is a statement outlawed, when it is meant to be offensive (if that is possible to judge) or when it is felt as such by whoever.
When I say: "Jahweh/God/Allah doesn't exist" (presuming that it is the same god, though he seems to have changed his mind a lot), is that offensive?. It is not very positive as it seems to deny the heart felt "truth" of believers. Lots of fanatics find such a statement intolerably offensive. But when I say: "Only Jahweh/God/Allah exists", then that is very positive. All monotheistic believers would applaud. But isn't this last statement very offensive to all followers of the Hindu faith? (I don't mention Thor, Zeus or Ashera, god's consort according to the Bible, as those gods seem to have died with their believers.)
Did you ever listen to JA's "Long John Silver"? Then you know that there are some songs on that record with very explicit lyrics. Would it be possible to write the same words in a post on this forum? Or are those words only allowed because they are sung, part of an artistic effort? Should RCA have forbidden the release of those songs, as they are negative and offensive, just not "fun"?
There is a contradiction there. I can live with it.
I think it is very funny.

By the way, I love soapboxes. But that is nothing new, is it?

[redrabid]

Well, that is one soapbox less, I suppose.
JohnBSails latest posts seem to have been erased, deleted.
By whose action is a bit unclear, as some of his contributions are still to be found. Does that mean he is gone?
As I wrote in a recent post I am uncomfortable with banning persons from this forum, but given its rules I think it may be unevitable. JBS had always the ghost of his former personality Chasin' Destiny hanging over him, but in his latest posts the ghost was taking over. His posts always come/came in an unexpected angle, but sometimes have good information, especially the links. He obviously spends a lot of time on his JA fascination and this forum. Every village has its fool and he is/was ours, I think. Though he is/was quite often a irritating nuisance I'd rather learned to live with him. It is ironic though that JBS tried, quite recently, to get the support of the administrator to silence somebody, who wrote something that he considered sacrilege.
There is a lot of collateral damage. Due the the erasing of JBS' posts a lot of topics lost their cohesion.

[CookOfTheHouse]

Nice words redrabid, and very philosophical. I differ. In my opinion it's always better for a group of people to get along well. We know we have different points of view on a lot of topics but I would never create a topic on how much I want the world to know you are (in my opinion) wrong and I'm sure you would do the same! To make long thing short, I don't give a rats ass about JBS, just glad we can share thoughts and anecdotes about JA or any other band, don't you think? Let's enjoy while we can before he comes back on another incarnation, and let's hope that one is nicer and has learned to behave. Have a nice weekend everyone!

[redrabid]

When He returns we shall know Him.

[Ensign]

Alrighty, I'm back after an intense work session in the last four days which has kept me out of the discussion. Wading back into the fray.... In general, I don't like censorship, but it has its place. I can even appreciate chaos. I like to watch order evolve out of disorder, especially musically. But if you think that statements like you are lazy and stupid and must hate gays are funny, then you are correct, we must be from different continents, or cultural universes, for that matter. I must then ask, do you think there is anything at all that could be put on this forum has the potential to be offensive? Is it OK to write/say anything at all, regardless of how ill-thought, intentionally provocative and hurtful, or insane, it might be, and regardless of whom is the target and how much hurt it potentially carries? "We can be together, my friend" but we have to be respectful of each other, and he-who-shall-remain-nameless is clearly not. Maybe I'm just too serious. I always believed that speaking or writing something is an act. And we must be prepared to be held accountable for our actions. And it's not OK to put it off as a mere utterance of no consequence whatever. I am looking forward to more input from thoughtful and respectful Volunteers!

[redrabid]

Yes, such childish accusations aren't taken as offensive be me, if they are written by somebody who obviously reacts very directly and very emotionally. I am quite tolerant of the shortcomings of human nature. It adds a certain spice to forums like this. Falling back on a higher authority to restrict certain opinions is not my way of countering those ideas. That doesn't mean that I don't get fed up with this kind of st..., uhh, not-very-well-reasoned opinions. But the point is, who defines what is offensive or hurtful? How do you do that: Is it the perceived intention of the writer or the interpretation by the reader of the post? A highly subjective criterium as "offensive" is not workable.
Should "Easter?" have been banned?
I find a discussion like this on a Jefferson Airplane forum very funny.

Regarding what more is funny for me: Lenny Bruce is funny, Jay Leno is not. Nor are Steve Martin or Adam Sandler but Sasha Cohen (Borat) certainly is.

[CookOfTheHouse]

I think the banning was justified. Sometimes we need a higher authority to help keeping things in order. Of course, I get you redrabid, and I'm not gonna lie here, I did find it thrilling to have such a moron member here always trying to screw things up. And it was fun when the discussions started and then he suddenly would change the subject to attacking the church or muslims or meat eaters aso. But it gets tiring.

[psychy]

Wah....wah....waaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh happen'd?????!!!:)

[redrabid]

A witch was burned.

[psychy]

A witch was burned.

Might I dare to ask who the bad witch was????!