Town Pub

[mosy]

The "Am I invisible?" aspect is something that tended to happen during the pronounced A&B show or B&C show but to be fair the effort and time I'll spend to engage in intellectual arguments depends hugely on the topic. In other cases, I don't need to have my miscellaneous posts acknowledged from politeness, but find it does help if I add "What do you think?" as I'm genuinely interested in the views of others because, not just those of people who agree with mine..

As to subject topics, anyone is welcome to start their own thread that interests them, so there's really no excuse for moaning about subjects that are posted yet not broadening the scope with their own is there?

The Pub did get silly when more posts were about sniping than the thread topic, and worse that they revolved on the Town Centre pick up reel, so if The Pub does "go public" again, I'd prefer that Pub posts weren't scrolled there - they're largely irrelevant to Sydenham as a rule.

[stuart]

What is starting to make me feel very sad indeed, not to say a little embarrassed, is how much time I wasted on a part of the forum that is held in such contempt by the administrators ..

Rod, I don't think so. Is that any comfort?

Stuart

[_HB]

Yeah, I always value your input Rod. You and Robin's contributions tend to be the common denominator in the better quality discussions.

[Robin Orton]

To pick up Maria's and Chris's points, I don't think it's only postings in the Town Pub that cause upset. I know some people who were involved in the Sydenham Centre (Naborhood Center as was) mosaic project who were extremely hurt by the tone of some of the very negative and unconstructive comments that were posted anonymously in the Town Hall.

[Rachael]

To pick up Maria's and Chris's points, I don't think it's only postings in the Town Pub that cause upset. I know some people who were involved in the Sydenham Centre (Naborhood Center as was) mosaic project who were extremely hurt by the tone of some of the very negative and unconstructive comments that were posted anonymously in the Town Hall.

I remember that discussion. Was any of it aimed at the organisers of the mosaic personally? If so, that would be unfair. But if it was about the artistic merit of the mosaic, I think that's fair game, and if you are going to impose something on the public realm you have to be prepared to fight your corner.

[Robin Orton]

But if it was about the artistic merit of the mosaic, I think that's fair game, and if you are going to impose something on the public realm you have to be prepared to fight your corner.

You may be right, Rachael. But perhaps the clue is in the word 'game'. I was merely trying to point out that what to some people is robust and frank criticism can feel to others, who are not used to it, like a personal attack. That may put them off from having anything more to do with the forum.

[stuart]

I was merely trying to point out that what to some people is robust and frank criticism can feel to others, who are not used to it, like a personal attack. That may put them off from having anything more to do with the forum.

There was a quote I heard recently on Radio 4 on the use of language:

"The British are too polite to be honest, the Germans are too honest to be polite"

Thankfully the national stereotypes may be disappearing but an honest critique can be lost if its wrapped up in sugary doublespeak. If your opinion is that is a poor piece of art than you should say it - and why. The problem with that event was precisely as you say - the criticism was taken personally.

Now my mum loved Mantovani. I can hate Mantovani and still love my mum. I can think that piece of art is poor and still be grateful that people took time to collect money and devote time and effort into trying to improve the Naborhood Centre.

I was shocked to hear the criticism was taken so personally. Are we all to walk on eggshells all the time in case someone somewhere is offended by any criticism? We would have lost the basis of free speech and honest discussion. Which frankly is more important than art.

What worried me were the intermediaries who critiqued the discussion rather than help the offended to come to terms with the principles and benefits of public debate. Robust doesn't mean rude or personal. AFAIR that discussion wasn't.

Stuart

[_HB]

Good points stuart. I mostly agree. Whilst some of the back and forth in the pub can occasionally cross the line (and yes, I know I'm guilty as much as anyone) there are occasional contributors in the pub who are very poor at accepting any kind of disagreement or dissenting view without it producing a major flounce. This is also counter productive to generating good discussion.

[Pally]

[quote="

I was shocked to hear the criticism was taken so personally. Are we all to walk on eggshells all the time in case someone somewhere is offended by any criticism? We would have lost the basis of free speech and honest discussion. Which frankly is more important than art.

What worried me were the intermediaries who critiqued the discussion rather than help the offended to come to terms with the principles and benefits of public debate. Robust doesn't mean rude or personal. AFAIR that discussion wasn't.

Stuart

I have not seen the thread on the mosaics.

I agree that free speech and honest discussion are vital components of good debate! And as you say robust does not mean rude or personal. And therein lies the problem I think! As you know I have in the past critiqued a discussion ....but only when I percieved that rudeness, personal comments or boring nit picking repetition were killing the debate! I have been told Im too sensitive but that is most definitely not my motivation! On occasions I have watched potentially good debates die because of approaches, some of which clearly come from understandable frustration!

My sense is that some enjoy the rudeness and baiting but I could be wrong on that one! Either way, there seems to be a general sense that the tone of some debates is putting off a wider audience ...a shame!

The solution seems still to lie with the posters!

[Robin Orton]

... there are occasional contributors in the pub who are very poor at accepting any kind of disagreement or dissenting view without it producing a major flounce.

Using words like 'flounce' to describe people who retire hurt is, in my view, exactly the sort of language which alienates people. 'I withdraw graciously, you bow out, he flounces'?

[stuart]

My sense is that some enjoy the rudeness and baiting but I could be wrong on that one! Either way, there seems to be a general sense that the tone of some debates is putting off a wider audience ...a shame!

The solution seems still to lie with the posters!

That is too easy. It must be partly shared by us all. When someone is unacceptably rude then tell them (politely?) they have been rude. Accepting rudeness just encourages it. The real difficulty, which I have sometimes succumbed, is to reply in kind. That just helps to lower the discourse one more notch.

I guess its also up to the rest of us to support someone who has been insulted. This does need to be graduated a bit. A newcomer should be fully protected, one of the old lags, rather less so.

Stuart

[_HB]

Using words like 'flounce' to describe people who retire hurt is, in my view, exactly the sort of language which alienates people. 'I withdraw graciously, you bow out, he flounces'?

Well, in some cases the description is apt. In others perhaps less so. But point taken.

[Pally]

My sense is that some enjoy the rudeness and baiting but I could be wrong on that one! Either way, there seems to be a general sense that the tone of some debates is putting off a wider audience ...a shame!

The solution seems still to lie with the posters!

That is too easy. It must be partly shared by us all. When someone is unacceptably rude then tell them (politely?) they have been rude. Accepting rudeness just encourages it. The real difficulty, which I have sometimes succumbed, is to reply in kind. That just helps to lower the discourse one more notch.

I guess its also up to the rest of us to support someone who has been insulted. This does need to be graduated a bit. A newcomer should be fully protected, one of the old lags, rather less so.

Stuart

I agree ..I did not express myself well, I meant all posters- not just Pub ones. However commenting on rudeness has also sometimes encouraged it as well.

[Rachael]

But if it was about the artistic merit of the mosaic, I think that's fair game, and if you are going to impose something on the public realm you have to be prepared to fight your corner.

You may be right, Rachael. But perhaps the clue is in the word 'game'. I was merely trying to point out that what to some people is robust and frank criticism can feel to others, who are not used to it, like a personal attack. That may put them off from having anything more to do with the forum.

Now, Robin, I'm going to get robust here and say that picking up the word 'game' is unfair. In neither senses of the word - hunting game, or making a game of it - were the mosaic organisers attacked. I'm truly surprised to hear people felt personally attacked. I'm sorry that they did, but I don't think it was warranted. It would be cruel, maybe, to say if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen, but imposing something on the public realm is a serious business and if they didn't expect at least some negative reaction, quite frankly they were being naive.

[Robin Orton]

We're all naive sometimes.

[Tim Lund]

I was merely trying to point out that what to some people is robust and frank criticism can feel to others, who are not used to it, like a personal attack. That may put them off from having anything more to do with the forum.

Maybe they should find a university, other than that of Life, where they will be assured a safe space.

[Robin Orton]

It looks as if the SE23 forum have found a gap in the market and are developing their own (openly accessible) version of the Town Pub. They've even found an Eagle lookalike. Take a look at recent posts here. They will make your hair curl.

[Rachael]

It looks as if the SE23 forum have found a gap in the market and are developing their own (openly accessible) version of the Town Pub. They've even found an Eagle lookalike. Take a look at recent posts here. They will make your hair curl.

I'm wondering if chrisbeach is a by-the-numbers troll. It's like he's going through a Daily Mail checklist, cross-referenced with the Tory Party manifesto. I find it hard to believe that anyone is so totally driven by a single political ideology in real life.

If I remember correctly, he posted some anti-immigration and anti-Muslim threads a while ago on the same forum and didn't get much reaction. So maybe he's trying a different tack. Would a young professional working in Canada Water and earning enough to pay over £50K a year in taxes (as he claims) really have the time or inclination to hang around the SE23 forum picking fights?

[michael]

I'm wondering if chrisbeach is a by-the-numbers troll.
Would a young professional working in Canada Water and earning enough to pay over £50K a year in taxes (as he claims) really have the time or inclination to hang around the SE23 forum picking fights?

He is real according to LinkedIn, with recommendations from real people. Fortunately his contributions probably don't take much thinking time, so I'm sure he is able to hold down a well paid job without spending as much time as we do on these wasteful forums.

[Rachael]

I'm wondering if chrisbeach is a by-the-numbers troll.
Would a young professional working in Canada Water and earning enough to pay over £50K a year in taxes (as he claims) really have the time or inclination to hang around the SE23 forum picking fights?

He is real according to LinkedIn, with recommendations from real people. Fortunately his contributions probably don't take much thinking time, so I'm sure he is able to hold down a well paid job without spending as much time as we do on these wasteful forums.

That's slightly depressing. He seems to be possessed of a good job, and good fortune in life, but no soul.