the silencing of UNC95

[UNC95]

I understand I have been banned from posting poems in the "critical" forums (rather capriciously, I may add), but since then I have disobeyed no guidelines, I have posted no poems, and yet my posts in a completely unrelated section are being deleted on sight with no explanation. Clearly in the omniscient eyes of the moderators, there must be a good reason for this. Yet no such reason has been shared with me or with the other good people of this forum, many of whom have personally expressed regret, distress, and confusion over the way in which I have been treated (which by the way includes all of the people involved in the original incident which had me banned so arbitrarily). I'm not one to stir up trouble unless injustice is ruling the day (kind of like I'm not one to denigrate the government unless it's ... well, unless it's the government we have now), but in this case, certainly good sense is not prevailing and any rational and unbiased views have been tossed to the wind.

[HowardM2]

"We reserve the right to delete posts for any and all reasons and for no reason whatsoever."

In point of fact, your post which was deleted from "Voyage" was deleted because it verged on trollishness and was clearly more concerned with giving expression to your own self-perceived wit than with addressing the subject under discussion.

"which by the way includes all of the people involved in the original incident which had me banned so arbitrarily"--Not according to messages we've received.

You have repeatedly failed to grasp a number of basic facts about how the board operates, not least among them that posting here is a privilege, not a right.


Howard

[UNC95]

trollishness? I look nothing like a troll, nor do I fish ... regarding addressing the topic and my self-perceived wit, well, ok, I'm very witty, which was evident in my deleted post, but it did also address the topic ... it's called satire ... I could find no way more appropriate to discuss a poem which consists entirely of place names than to compare it to a road atlas ... I seriously doubt this would cause offense to anyone other than the poet himself or perhaps a few of his loyal followers ... in fact, I do believe that if you had not already posted in the thread, promoting his work, that if you were, like me, not terribly impressed by the ability to take a bunch of existing place names and put them in a list, then my post would never have been deleted ... you have a personal vendetta against me, which is neither warranted nor mature

regarding what messages you've received, I'm not privy to that information, nor to the veracity of your acknowledgment of such, but the person whom, according to you, I dismissed in such a vile fashion, didn't take it that way at all, and in fact apologized that so much became of what really was not much of an incident at all (which, by the way, in case she reads this, was not necessary ... she has nothing to apologize for ... she did nothing wrong, nor did I ... the whole situation was taken out of both of our hands)

[JohnBoddie]

UNC95 -

You're beating a dead horse here.

If you want to write and post poetry, do so. If you feel that this isn't a site that's conductive to your growth as a writer, find one that is.

In any case, put down the whip and get on with it.

JB

[UNC95]

I would "write and post poetry", except that I'm not allowed to post in the "critical" forums, which really is the only point of posting poems in a workshop of this type. Otherwise, I'm just posting to garner admiration, which is even worse than showing off my "self-perceived wit".

[MEHope]

You are still allowed to post in "General" and the "Chaos" forums, these are all critical forums and good starting blocks for both writing and critiquing.

Good luck. WRITE!

[Harry R]

You know, if you just took your ego out of your mouth for a minute, took a deep breath and resolved to respond graciously to people's comments (whatever you actually think of them), I'm sure you could be a valued member of PFFA. You seem to have a serious interest in poetry, and both the poems you posted were quite interesting. And personally I would have let your post about that Don Paterson poem stay, as well.

Just stop being such a drama queen and concentrate on the poetry.

Harry

[JohnBoddie]

Re:

"I would "write and post poetry", except that I'm not allowed to post in the "critical" forums, which really is the only point of posting poems in a workshop of this type. Otherwise, I'm just posting to garner admiration, which is even worse than showing off my "self-perceived wit"."

In that case the logical course of action is to find another site. pffa isn't the only place to get solid critique on the web.

My suggestion that you move on is nothing personal, it's simply the only reasonable consequence of your evaluation.

JB

[UNC95]

Hope, according to their own guidelines, neither the "general" nor the "chaos" forums are "critical" forums, and to be quite honest, the work and the comments there are a little below the quality I'm looking for. I'm not looking for "good starting blocks for writing and critiquing". My shelves aren't lined with Pulitzers and Bollingens and National Book Awards, but they are lined with dozens and dozens of poetry volumes. I've never been poet laureate, but I am a publishing poet. Basically, I'm neither a beginner nor do I know everything there is to know, which is the whole point of seeking out like-minded individuals with similar goals and a similar level of talent and experience. With all due respect, I'm not going to find that in a lower-level forum of any workshop.

Harry, I'm not the one with the ego running out of control; it's a particular one or two moderators who have nothing better to do than censor everything I say, whether it is offensive or not, whether it violates their interpretation of a guideline or not, and primarily because they feel the need to engage in some sort of cyber-pissing contest with me, something in which I have no intention of participating. I was doing nothing but "concentrating on the poetry" until I was reprimanded and started having my posts arbitrarily moved and/or deleted, though I had, to the best of my knowledge, offended no one else on the forum (for example, if I were to call someone else on here a "drama queen" as you just did, I'd probably have my internet access cut off and wake up with a torn and bloody copy of Billy Collins' "Nine Horses" on the pillow beside me). I don't like confrontation, and I especially don't care for "drama" (unless it's Marlowe, Mamet, or Ives), but in this case I feel I have a very legitimate gripe.

John, thank you for your suggestions. I will take them into consideration. (by the way, the word you wanted to use in your earlier post is "conducive", not "conductive")

[Donner]

Here's my take on this from a moderator's point of view, and one who has to date not been involved in the fray:

I think you have something to contribute, but I also think you have a mouth on you. You have demonstrated that you have an ego (don't we all; if we didn't we'd be little lumps sitting in an institution somewhere) because from where I sit, anyone who comes back and edits in a lengthy "I don't see what I did wrong, but you're going to ban me, so I'll say it anyway" red herring into their response has one--and does enjoy the controversy despite protestations to the contrary. You did tell someone in so many words that their comments were useless, afterall, and not just to them, but in your responses--and that goes against the spirit of the guidelines. So, you're not an entirely innocent party.

Following on the heels of your statements Outside, the deletion of your post about the Don Paterson poem was gonna happen. Think about it--for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. You got pissy (my perception), then posted what might be construed as an "in your face" remark in another forum.

We've seen this sort of thing time and time again. It's your perception vs. our perception--poor new member just trying to concentrate on poetry when Big Brother steps in without provocation and censors said new member. "The moderator's egos are running out of control!" If you really knew our motivations for doing what we do (or at least my motivations; I can only speak for myself), you'd cut out your tongue for such a statement. "I've been silenced!" No, you haven't. Here you are, aren't you? Having your say, unfettered. Imagine that.

What you might consider is taking a step back to look at the problem objectively to see why not just one or two but all of the moderators are a bit peeved with you at the moment. Then, if you still truly think you've been wronged, take it up by PM with me or one of the other moderators. It's not unheard of that we change our minds.

Donner

[UNC95]

that's actually all fair enough, and the most reasonable attitude I've seen so far ... one sincere question though:

"then posted what might be construed as an "in your face" remark in another forum."

In whose face? I hadn't mentioned anything publicly about the earlier dispute and was on my best behavior, I post what (I felt) was a rather light-hearted opinion about a poem, and it gets deleted less than an hour after I post it, and the only explanation I'm given is that moderators can delete any post for any reason and I was displaying "self-perceived wit"(?!?) I assume I'm missing something here, and I'm a pretty smart guy, but I can't figure out what it is.

[Harry R]

And, while you're thinking about it, think about this. This comment is exactly the kind of thing that makes people unsympathetic -



John, thank you for your suggestions. I will take them into consideration. (by the way, the word you wanted to use in your earlier post is "conducive", not "conductive")

Cheap point-scoring and nit-picking isn't going to win you any friends.

My thoughts on the overall dynamic of this particular fiasco: the original incident was just a storm in a teacup. Ruth's post was distinctly unhelpful, and your response was, while not in tune with the prevailing etiquette here, not particularly dreadful. everyone would have forgotten about within a couple of days.

But every one of your posts on the subject since then has been well-judged to dig you in deeper, get the moderator's backs up more, and generally escalate the situation.

Harry

[Donner]

Originally posted by UNC95
... one sincere question though:

"then posted what might be construed as an "in your face" remark in another forum."

I assume I'm missing something here, and I'm a pretty smart guy, but I can't figure out what it is.

Sometimes it's a matter of bad timing. You get snarky (I'll use that term for the sake of argument) and within an hour you post something that could be perceived as continuing that trend, regardless of your stated intentions. By itself, no big deal--pretty witty observation, in fact. Put together with your responses in Outside, you gain a rep.

Donner

I've had 2 teenagers, I'm not easily duped.

[UNC95]

honestly, I'm getting extremely tired of talking about this, much more so than you guys are ... after all, there about 5 of you and only 1 of me

but really, if you go back and look at all the posts, you will see a variety of derogatory names and adjectives used toward me by a variety of moderators, and you will see none directed back toward them by me, only an attempt to reach a resolution of the issue in a somewhat mature fashion (ok, plus a couple of nit-picky comments regarding poor word choice on their part ... I'll cop to that, but I don't find it nearly as serious as baiting someone by referring to them as "egomaniacal", a "drama queen", or a "self-defensive whiner")

the original incident was indeed a tempest in a teacup, I agree, in fact that's the point I was trying to make all along, but I'm not the one who was dumping in the cream and blowing on the tea (wait, you don't put cream in tea, do you? whatever, you get the analogy) ... there would have been nothing to forget about within a couple of days if certain people had used some restraint and common sense and not talked down to me as if I were a child peeing on the floor instead of a thinking and rational adult ... this is what I found particularly offensive, not the fact that a certain level of decorum is expected and there are moderators to maintain it, and certainly not any comment that anyone made about any poem I wrote

[UNC95]

"snarky" is fine ... I've been called worse (though never as frequently and with as much malice as in the "outside" thread over the past few days), and I admit that I'm not one to back down and just take it when people start calling me names or talking down to me for no particularly good reason, though instead of calling them names back (which I find rather immature), I tend to pick apart their argument (maybe not much more mature, but definitely more clever and more fun) ... but I honestly still don't see how the John Paterson post could be perceived as offensive or inflammatory to anyone, and I still don't fully understand on what grounds it was removed (I don't care so much about the post being removed, it was just silly and fun, really ... what I want to know is what was offensive about it or what legitimate "guideline" I broke so I don't do it again and get totally banned (something a little more specific than "moderators can remove any post for any reason" would be helpful))

[JohnBoddie]

You'll note that your dead horse isn't running any faster.

JB

[UNC95]

see, that's the kind of comment I'm talking about ... what does that really add to a discussion that was being conducted in a civil manner?

[Donner]

Here's my suggestion: forget about getting any further explanations, because at this point we're starting to go around in circles here. As I said, it wasn't that the post in and of itself was offensive, it was the timing of it that got it deleted. You'll have to live with that for the time being because if you continue you're only going to need a bigger teapot. Just think "big picture" before you press "submit". (I say that as a fellow-smart mouth, having self-edited myself on numerous occasions.)

Post your work to any of the non-critical forums--many of the better reviewers find their way down into the hinterland, and if your work warrants a more complete review, you'll get it. (You've certainly made your presence known, and those *on your side* will probably seek your work out. Gee, what a surprise.) As I said, your participation from here on out will determine whether our position changes. That's the deal, take it or leave it.

Donner

[JohnBoddie]

What it adds to the discussion is a timely reminder that your continued attempts to obtain clarification of the situation in terms to your liking is not progressing.

You've already noted that there is no avenue for improvement available to you at pffa. Perhaps it's time to act on that conclusion.

JB

[mindsweeper]

I've just come across this thread. To clear up any confusion about who said what to whom, here are my P.M.s on the subject. I don't wish to wrongly prolong the incident, but I do hope for a fair appraisal all round as it seems that I was the unwitting and unwilling instigator of this mess.

To Scavella

"I'm really incredibly sorry that I initiated the move of UNC95's poem to Outside. I was not offended by his response to my crit - I had already admitted my ignorance. I was surprised to see it moved to Outside. I wasn't trying to be prickly, just straight, up-front honest. Maybe I'm just naive, but I thought it may be useful to him to understand that he'd lost a certain sector of his potential audience - i.e. people like me who do not have any training or specific education in English literature and the analysis of poetry. I was trying to be helpful...not pick a quarrel.

I do wish you could reinstate him to the critical forums. I'm sure he would be a valuable contributor. At least, that's my feeling, but I bow to your better understanding of the site.”


"To UCN95 (sic)

I'm really sorry that my crit caused your poem to be moved to Outside. I didn't take offence at your comment to my crit and was really surprised to see that the Mods had moved it. I thought my crit was fairly balanced - I found the writing and images good but felt I couldn't make sense of it as a whole because I am unfamiliar with the poet to whom the piece was addressed and therefore, I guessed, I must be missing a lot of the allusions. I even owned up to being ignorant.

I'm really sorry at this outcome. It isn't at all what I wanted. You are obviously a far more accomplished writer than I. I hope the matter can be resolved and that you will hang around the board.”



BTW, Harry, I didn't mean my crits to be "distinctly unhelpful". Admittedly ignorant but not wittingly unhelpful. I know my history doesn't always plead my cause, but I hope you will accept that in this instance I was trying to be the very opposite of unhelpul. Once again, I apologise to all for any misfounded crit and for any ensuing aggro.

Ruth

[Scavella]

Ruth, I'm going to share my answer to your PM. Here it is, very slightly edited for clarity (edits in italics).

While your post was a catalyst for our decision to ban UNC95 from the critical forums, it wasn't the reason we did so. The reason was all his; he could not leave the subject alone. Instead of chalking up the fact that his poem had been moved to the Outside as experience and moving on, he kept going back to it. That led us to conclude that he is not willing to participate in the workshop aspect of PFFA in good faith, and that was why he was banned from the critical forums.
In short, it's not all about you. You made a bad choice, not on what you said, but the way you said it. That choice had unfortunate consequences. Suck it up.

UNC95 also made a choice, a series of choices. Perhaps they were a result of your choice, perhaps not. His choices had their own consequences.

Them's the breaks.

Cheers.

[mindsweeper]

Thanks, Scavella, just wanted tp get it off my chest. I've been feeling burdened....

Didn't want to quote your reply - wasn't within my remit to do so, but I'm glad you completed the picture for the record.

Ruth