Some vca bystander 'moppet' 's point of view and
Oxydolfan/Scott, I pretty much agree with 100% of what you said here. I've also been seeing the Endora personality crop up a lot lately, more often than it did in years past when AW.org was just AW.org by itself and not connected to anything, hmmmm. Makes me wonder. Regardless, even though he already left, I would also like to come to Erik's defense here because it sounds like something that I would have asked. As to the 'humanity' of the forum, I don't think archiving or not archiving the posts would have any bearing on that. There have been a few times (such as this), both present and past, where I don't think 'humanity' is even existent here, but I'll just leave that where it is and bring it up where it is important later in my post.
Back to my first message. Ironically enough, the question about archiving/not archiving the Super forum was something that, pre-exile, *I* asked about last Spring when this began! And to add an even further twist to it, I believe Erik/Washertalk left the forum for reasons unrelated shortly before this took place and most likely did not see the post in question. I can fully understand why he would ask something like that (as I did), but I will say that knowing why the Super forum posts are no longer archived and
robots.txt incorporated into the source to prevent search engines, archival bot crawlers, etc. from going here, that I also understand why it needed to be done in the first place. Particularly because of the mostly non-appliance-related discussion that takes place here. Also, as evidenced by this latest thread, the drama. If I had a site with an active forum and found a lot of "dramatastic" threads (flame wars, morality debate stuff, etc.) popping up in site-specific Google searches, I would not find it detrimental to the 'long-term health' of the site either. That's really not something that needs to be aired in public when people are trying to discover their appliance obsession. So in a sense, not having Google's bots scouring the Super forum is a blessing, since you can *theoretically* say what you want. Well, not exactly say what you want, but you know where I'm coming from
From my point of view, it was only a matter of time. First, the pictures in Super posts were eliminated after entering the archives, followed shortly after by the removal of wallpapers from active Super forum threads. However, I am going to say that by eliminating the Super forum archives, there were a LOT of informative threads killed off along with the rest. Threads that, had I known what was going to happen to them, I would have saved to my hard drive. Oh well, live and learn. Enough rambling, now onto what I came here to say.
One of the points you made in this post that I would really like to talk about, however, is the "defending the underdog" idea, especially having been in this position. I think had Erik known that he was going to have his "private email" publicly displayed, and be publicly lambasted for said email, I don't think he would have said anything in the first place. Yes, there were some parts of the email that I did NOT agree with and came across as snippy, but such is life. I feel that this situation could have been handled better by the recipient of this email. There's a fine line between private and public. When people write a private email, they are confident that the recipient is going to
keep it private! I can also understand that people would disagree with some of the things said here, as I did, and with the tone I also fully understand a need to 'vent' where necessary. But that's not the problem here. The problem is that I'm seeing right through the unanimous 'vote', if you can even call it that. What I see is blinded loyalty and utter disregard for the facts. What I see is presentation of ONE side only. When this happens, the real problems begin. I would have left too if I were him, hell, I DID leave (even though I was not the one who removed my profile...). There was (and is) NO excuse for a public lynching, for lack of a better word because that's EXACTLY what it is/was. That's what it was with Chad Miller most recently. That's what it was with ME. Although the last two occasions were far worse than this one here. Was Chad Miller perfect and did he make innocent honest posts on here? Of course not. I'm not saying I've been innocent either in the past year as far as the in-fighting within the 'clubs' go, far from it. I've been involved in a lot. What I AM saying, though, is what happened to just quietly removing someone and letting them fade away? That doesn't take place anymore. Now it is attempted to turn the entire membership against them, so they go down and leave in their own guilt, shame, and embarrassment. In my situation as the "underdog", very few individuals posted in my defense. The majority of the membership (and I'll acknowledge, understandably so) was dead-set against me the entire time. Everyone was taking their turn for a swing at the proverbial piñata. No one thought to stop and look, perhaps take the time to find out that there are two sides to every story, and that there was undoubtedly another side to this one that they did not know about...perhaps the 'problems' weren't as 'great' as they were portrayed to be? Nope. Didn't happen. Double standard rearing its ugly head once again. Thankfully, though, over the passing time (combined with having been active in the club for a, well, *reasonable* period of time), a few fellow members have become privy to this 'other side' and took the bullshit with a grain of salt as it should have been. I've come to realize who my true friends (who I remain in frequent contact with) are through that. Hopefully this will remain the same with Erik. He has always been rather interesting to read, and rest assured MY opinion of him has not changed.
Regardless, a public exile of a dissenter is NOT how it should be, and I'm not saying that from having been the underdog either. But I guess some just feed off drama and/or a potentially "dramatic" personality. Why wasn't Rob Gwisdala brought to light in front of the entire membership last year when he attempted to come back on? Well, because there was nothing dramatic about his terse, annoying posts. Just black & white. If it were brought to attention on a thread, no one would take even the slightest interest in it. There lies the 'problem' so to speak. If it ain't dramatic, it ain't worth bringing to everyone's attention. What's even more ironic, and disheartening, is that threads like THESE generate more attention and responses than a LEGITIMATE post about appliances. Didn't we all come here to either learn, 'drop knowledge' where necessary, or both? What happened?
That brings me to my final point...that's typical Internet behavior for you. Isn't the Internet wonderful? Unfortunately the darker side of the Internet, the perceived anonymity and lack of personal face-to-face communication (with email, and forums being the primary method) rears its ugly head time and time again, bringing out the worst in people, myself included. Those are the disadvantages of a Cyberspace community. I am 100% positive that if this were more of a close-knit 'skin-and-bones' group (as one of the vacuum groups I'm in where we speak to each other frequently on the phone, sometimes daily), none of this would be happening in the first place. It would stop right at the source. Also something to think about: the 'analog' (if you will) gatherings, at least the ones I've been to including this most recent one in St. Louis, have been 100% drama-free. Granted, with a large group such as this, with some being more serious participants than others, close communication is not possible for everyone, but it's still food for thought.
Apologies for the rambling rant, but here is the point I am trying to make (this post took me 2 hours to think about...it can't all be blather, can it? ;-)) for those of you about Erik's situation. There are two sides to every story. Before judging, I invite you all to look at the bigger picture and read between the lines. You might see something.
))
