Re: Rules for the Forum.

[jjrpilot-admin]

Hi all, I just wanted to let you know that the rules have been updated.  I've never done this whole forum/website thing before...so I'm just getting my feet wet.  Some more common sense rules have been instated...rules that I hadn't thought about before.  So once again, please be patient as we establish/set the tone for this forum.

I want this to be the friendliest, most welcoming "unofficial" Taylor guitar forum there is.

Thanks!

[cotten]

I don't think you'll have any problem with people being impatient. Building a great community doesn't happen overnight, and you're off to a fine start.

cotten

[flaggerphil]

Every thing sounds good to me!

[cotten]

You might also want to think about the "no price discussion" rule for a moment. Should that apply to everything including strings, straps, capos, picks, amps, PA equipment, recordings, etc., or to guitars only? Concerning guitars, is it all guitars or just new ones? Trust me, such questions will come up, and it's easier to anticipate them and have a consistent policy in place early on.

Personally, I always liked being able to discuss prices of non-guitar items, even when the AGF did not allow guitar price discussions.

cotten

[Edward]

Great seeing you here, Cotton!!!

I concur that pricing for all non-guitar items is ok ...accessories are fine, even amps.  But I will put forth my $.02 that all guitar pricing, new and used, should be limited to private messages and not be allowed on these public threads.  I just think it keeps discussion from being potentially tainted with costs and interests.

Edward

[michaelw]

You might also want to think about the "no price discussion" rule for a moment. Should that apply to everything including strings, straps, capos, picks, amps, PA equipment, recordings, etc., or to guitars only? Concerning guitars, is it all guitars or just new ones? Trust me, such questions will come up, and it's easier to anticipate them and have a consistent policy in place early on.

Personally, I always liked being able to discuss prices of non-guitar items, even when the AGF did not allow guitar price discussions.

cotten

imho, i think that if someone wants to pass along a 'killer deal', a link would be ok
(no public discussion on actual price is needed, as it's easy enough to click on a site) -

it would be nice, however when the time comes where it is possible for dealers to
be able to reveal products available here, that one would consider supporting them
or a local shop ... i can't help but think that those 'black Friday' deals were rough

[not darth]

You might also want to think about the "no price discussion" rule for a moment. Should that apply to everything including strings, straps, capos, picks, amps, PA equipment, recordings, etc., or to guitars only? Concerning guitars, is it all guitars or just new ones? Trust me, such questions will come up, and it's easier to anticipate them and have a consistent policy in place early on.

Personally, I always liked being able to discuss prices of non-guitar items, even when the AGF did not allow guitar price discussions.

cotten

imho, i think that if someone wants to pass along a 'killer deal', a link would be ok
(no public discussion on actual price is needed, as it's easy enough to click on a site) -

it would be nice, however when the time comes where it is possible for dealers to
be able to reveal products available here, that one would consider supporting them
or a local shop ... i can't help but think that those 'black Friday' deals were rough

I pretty much agree w/ the above.  I don't think it's gonna be a problem if someone posts a link or a price for a deal on a Snark or 10-pack of strings, or even an amp for the electric guys.  But, I still like the idea of keeping guitar prices on the DL.
It's just courtesy.  At AGF, and probably here already, there are guys with a million bucks on tap and others that are basically tapped out, and when people are throwing prices around it can just turn into one stroking their own ego.  (Not always, but I've seen it on gun forums, motorcycle forums, and photography forums - all of those attract millionaires and blue-collar souls - and sometimes the pi**ing matches get ridiculous.  Even though, you know, we're all supposedly adults, on the internet it's junior high all over again.)
That plus it helps avoid dealers undercutting others by a few bucks and people feeling buyer's remorse just because they could've spent a tad less elsewhere and they forget that they have an awesome guitar.
$.02, -K

[jjrpilot-admin]

It's more of an extention of a rule than a new rule per se...but here goes:

"No direct solicitation of posting members by dealers."

We don't want our members to be harassed etc; we want our members to be able to post freely knowing that they won't be pressured to buy from any particular source.  Most people know how to do their homework when it comes time to buying their new Taylor etc.


PS...we're up to 72 members!!!

[DennisG]

You might want to consider whether or not to allow discussion of the more difficult non-guitar related topics of politics and religion. Even among trusted friends, these can be tough. And some guitar topics, such as the Lacey Act and raids on Gibson, can attract lots of political opinions. Don't ask me how I know...

cotten

I respectfully disagree with this. I believe that a forum should aspire to being able to 'self-moderate' people to become mature enough to have polite discussions about religion and politics (e.g. If one member is being particularly forceful with their opinion, other members may reply saying: "It's fine to say what you believe, but it would also help the message you want to get across if you wrote your opinion in a more considerate way, such as..."). Often debates are good as you can sometimes learn from reading other peoples' insights.

They apparently feel that they can't trust us to discuss guitar prices like adults, so what makes you think they'd trust us to discuss politics and religion?

[michaelw]

You might want to consider whether or not to allow discussion of the more difficult non-guitar related topics of politics and religion. Even among trusted friends, these can be tough. And some guitar topics, such as the Lacey Act and raids on Gibson, can attract lots of political opinions. Don't ask me how I know...

cotten

I respectfully disagree with this. I believe that a forum should aspire to being able to 'self-moderate' people to become mature enough to have polite discussions about religion and politics (e.g. If one member is being particularly forceful with their opinion, other members may reply saying: "It's fine to say what you believe, but it would also help the message you want to get across if you wrote your opinion in a more considerate way, such as..."). Often debates are good as you can sometimes learn from reading other peoples' insights.

i respectully agree with this & with a good bit of the following post that you made, Taylor -
it seems that there any many more diplomatic & tactful ways to convey
an idea without having to 'beat someone over the head' with it, imho

with so many members here, at some point, there will be instances where it will have to ok to 'agree to disagree' -
there are some questions with answers where there are no 'right or wrong' & where there may be some areas
that are more 'black & white', there is mostly likely going to be quite a few varying shades of 'gray' as well

i think that as this forum continue to grow that everyone here will learn new things -
not everything can be addressed at the very beginning & sometimes part of the learning process
is to monitor the direction & course that the forum is taking & then make a few 'tweaks' here & there

i can understand that there are some areas that might be best to leave alone & i'm completely 'on-board'
with & all decision made on rules & requests from Josh out of, if nothing else, pure respect. period. -
he created this place & shared it with us & i firmly believe in 'house rules' ... try to keep the place 'tidy'

self-moderating is a great idea, provided it does not turn in 'micro-moderating' -
in cases where one is unsure if a response, any response, may be taken as 'overbearing',
then i believe it would be best to bring it to the attention of a moderator for review

many times, in another time & another place, i would compose a post that i thought would convey my thoughts, then i'd look it over -
if it was a particular long post, there were usually a few more responses that popped up in the interim & more often than not,
i would either edit, sit & wait for a while, or i would delete it completely because after more deliberation i found it was a 'rant'

i'm glad that there is the lounge, because there are so many other things to discuss that aren't 'things' -
i agree that there are areas that should probably not be explored, much less un/self-moderated, because in
some topics there would be no 'neutral ground' & deeming something approriate where something else is
not would be interpreted as 'biased' or  being able to share what is going on with one personally (birthdays,
health, family, pets, loss of a loved one, etc) & to 'vent' (rough patches, difficult employment situation or loss)

sometimes it's best to let things be & see how they go & other times may be it's best to leave an avenue 'unexplored' -
i'm leaving that up to Josh because i'm confident that whatever he decides will help keep this forum running smoothly

i haven't found anything yet that has shown there's a 'they',
although i have found plenty of instances to know there's an 'us'

[jjrpilot-admin]

Rules updated.  Please check out the very 1st post for updates.   


PS...spammers are driving me nuts!!!  Ok...I'm done...back to our regularly scheduled program...

[LindaLoo]

If this were my forum, which clearly it isn't so the point is moot, I would give up on the rules thing and keep just the one rule of "Be respectful".  That's all that is required IMO.

I would let everything else go.  So, I would permit users to talk about prices, discuss religion, discuss politics, express opinions on all manner of topics and even swear a little (gasps!) if necessary (but not to excess).  Let's be adults.  I find many of the 'censorship' rules of discussion forums frustrating, puritanical and patronising.

This is NOT aimed at Josh who has very kindly and generously taken the time to get this place up and running and neither is it my intention to be hurtful or offensive...it's just my rather exasperated view on forums in general.

[Jack Sparrow]

If this were my forum, which clearly it isn't so the point is moot, I would give up on the rules thing and keep just the one rule of "Be respectful".  That's all that is required IMO.

I would let everything else go.  So, I would permit users to talk about prices, discuss religion, discuss politics, express opinions on all manner of topics and even swear a little (gasps!) if necessary (but not to excess).  Let's be adults.  I find many of the 'censorship' rules of discussion forums frustrating, puritanical and patronising.

This is NOT aimed at Josh who has very kindly and generously taken the time to get this place up and running and neither is it my intention to be hurtful or offensive...it's just my rather exasperated view on forums in general.

Exactly how I feel as well.

[andyi5]

Agree with LindaLoo. Incidently, one of the great things about the old forum (which all were happy with before it got subsumed) was this very thing - people could largely express what they wanted to as long as they were generally respectful. If what was said was idiotic then there'd be a dozen replies shooting it down in flames, if it had an element of truth then there'd be the basis of an interesting debate.

[michaelw]

just a suggestion that 'direct promotion' of one's business or another's business,
whether it be an address, phone #, directions, signature website link in a post
should not be allowed as well, as there are no 'unofficially official' sponsors here