How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Give And Get in Poetry   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ]
 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Give And Get in Poetry

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


75 posted 03-31-2009 03:53 AM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam


quote:
As for your comment about not critiquing poems you don't like I'm afraid I just don't get it? "

Oh my Beamer, I hope we're not starting to back slide, so let me tell you about my comment about not critiquing poems I don't like;

I would never critique a poem that was detrimental to my country, mental disorder, alcoholism, race, poverty,just to name a few. I may write  a rebuttal poem, but that is just about it.

Oh no Chops, not backsliding at all, I was really interested in trying to understand what you were saying.  I think most animosity springs from misunderstanding.   And online where you can't see expressions I have found that you have to be particularly careful about what you say, especially the short pithy comment, that can be misinterpreted.  That's probably why I ramble so much,  

Thanks for explaining what you meant, and you see, now I see what you are saying and sympathise.  

What you are talking about is the poem's message, what I was talking about was the poem as a totality, i.e. everything about it, perhaps especially the way it was written.  

So if I read you correctly and you saw a poem where somebody was trying to convey a message that you agreed with or liked, but which had problems with syntax or diction or whatever, you be happy to try and give your views.

Sorry if I misunderstood.

Best.
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


76 posted 03-31-2009 03:57 AM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam




quote:
The suggestions seem to me to be that we try it again with pretty much the same rules and hope that it ends up differently, but without any explanation for what would actually make that happen short of divine intervention.


Some of the suggestions have been that Bob.  But not mine.  That's precisely what we need to avoid, imo.

Haven't got time now to paraphrase all I've waffled on about over the last week.  Will try to do so later.

Regards

M
chopsticks
Senior Member
since 10-02-2007
Posts 870
The US,


77 posted 03-31-2009 07:27 AM       View Profile for chopsticks   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for chopsticks

“I think the folks who want it or something like it back would need to GIVE something to sweeten the pot here “

Now I know why the subject of the thread is called ~ Give and get in poetry ~

What could we possibly GIVE to sweeten the pot ?  The only thing that I know of that we could possibly GIVE is rhetoric. With the possible exception of Grinch, I don’t think we have done a good job at that. I think we should make Grinch our spokesman and ask the court for mercy.

I make a motion that we ask Grinch to plead our case, do I hear a second .


Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


78 posted 03-31-2009 12:02 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Moonbeam et alii

I understand your opinions.  But I don't think most of those negatives are unique to Critical Analysis.  Most of them are just difficulties that come about in most forums.  The unique one here, I think, and the one that ends up getting us in trouble is a tumour of expectations among people of meeting some kind of critical prerequisite or standard.  I am guilty of contributing to that tumour as well.  Why did such a tumour come about in Critical Analysis, but not in a forum such as Philosophy 101?  People in Philosophy never assail someone with suggestions that they are not living up to some standard of Philosophicalness and responsiveness.   Since the philosophy forum is a forum about expressing opinions and philosophy, judgement, about any topic, but doesn't have the same problem, I think we should follow its example when expressing a judgement in respect to poems in Critical Analysis, without the kind of expectations mentioned above.   We can also take examples from the Poetry Workshop on how to approach varying abilities respectfully.  Perhaps some are also influenced by the manner of other critical forums out there that have segregations such "advanced" "less advanced" etc or demands of how many poems a day or how many responses, etc.  Without some clarification about the the openness of our "Critical" people influenced by other critical forums may be much more likely to speak inappropriately here.  Something needs to be made clear right at the door that the manner of Critical Analysis is an open one, not one that excludes based on abilities or amount of participation.   If we set up lines such as that, I think the problem itself could be removed instead of the forum.

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


79 posted 03-31-2009 12:36 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam



quote:
What could we possibly GIVE to sweeten the pot ?

Chops

I think we get it that you agree with Grinch here , but I think that Bob is making the point that in a new forum giving would be as important as getting, and I agree with that.

The quality of the posts is at least as important as the quantity, no wait, cancel that, is far more important.  A good well thought out intelligent comment which has had a deal of effort put into it, even though short, is, imo, in a discussion forum worth any number of quick-fire poems or off-the-cuff witticisms.  And I am not saying that these don't have their place, but they are the icing on the cake, the levity that brightens the day, they are not the meat and substance that keep the forum alive and attracts new, intelligent, thoughtful, dedicated, willing to learn, people.  

Ess mentions Philosophy as being an example of a forum which works, and here we are in the Alley, both of these forums have far more work put into them by posters - far more giving than CA did latterly.  Look at the number of passionate, intelligent, thought out responses you get in Philosophy and the Alley, and compare these with the lightweight banter and often personality based cattiness that typified CA.  

Ask yourself why those people who were prepared to write reams and reams of stuff in the Philosophy threads wouldn't do so in CA, and you might move nearer to understanding the problems of CA and what would be needed to rectify them.

And Ess, your points about those problems are not entirely without foundation imo, but you still aren't focussing on the main difficulty imv.  May I e-mail you please?

Thanks.

M

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


80 posted 03-31-2009 01:18 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Moonbeam,


I don't use e-mail.  Please just unlock your thoughthoard here.   If it is "the main" difficulty it probably ought to be spoken at large anyway so we may all weigh it against our experiences and consider how to prevent it in the future.

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


81 posted 03-31-2009 01:36 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Oh, Ess, you used to back in 2006 I think, we exchanged a word or two I seem to remember.

I don't ask lightly but simply because it is not possible to say what I want to say to you in public.  If you don't do e-mail then I guess I won't be able to say it.  No problem.   As for the "main" difficulty, I've already said several times what I think this is.  My e-mail would have simply sought to convince you with evidence and examples, but never mind.

M

PS Can you comment on/answer this:

"Ask yourself why those people who were prepared to write reams and reams of stuff in the Philosophy threads wouldn't do so in CA,"
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


82 posted 03-31-2009 01:52 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

And also Chops, I confess once again to being a bit confused by your comments.  In the continuing spirit of detente I wondered if you'd clarify a point or two for me regarding what you just said .

Firstly:

When you said the only thing we can give is "rhetoric" I assumed you meant in this thread.  Now I wonder whether you were talking about CA generally?  Perhaps you could enlarge on the comment and explain a bit more?  

And secondly:

You referred me to Grinch's post 41 when I asked you about what you meant by Grinch having the only sensible solution.  Post 41 made some statements about possible causes of problems in CA and proposed an "ignore" button as a solution.

Is your solution to all CA's problems an "ignore" button?  Or have I missed other things that Grinch has proposed?

Thanks in advance.

M
chopsticks
Senior Member
since 10-02-2007
Posts 870
The US,


83 posted 03-31-2009 01:53 PM       View Profile for chopsticks   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for chopsticks

“ I think that Bob is making the point that in a new forum giving would be as important as getting, and I agree with that “

Beamer , I agree with that too, but if GIVING always trumped GETTING, we would not be talking about getting a new forum. The same laws of love that applied when the first CA was started apply now., so I suggest that we  have a game plan along with love when Grinch makes his pitch..... I seriously suggest that we let Grinch get a proposal together and present it.

This is almost as much fun as that other place, what was it called.
chopsticks
Senior Member
since 10-02-2007
Posts 870
The US,


84 posted 03-31-2009 02:17 PM       View Profile for chopsticks   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for chopsticks

“Firstly:

When you said the only thing we can give is "rhetoric"

That is the only concrete thing that I know of that we can give.


Is your solution to all CA's problems an "ignore" button? Or have I missed other things that Grinch has proposed.

You missed other things. He started off his post by saying why he thought that CA failed and I agree with him. He had other good ideas in his post if you wanted to see them.

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


85 posted 03-31-2009 02:51 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Moonbeam

quote:
Oh, Ess, you used to back in 2006 I think, we exchanged a word or two I seem to remember.


I used to use e-mail, but I stopped using it after too many bad experiences.  Just be true and open right here.  There is no need to hide anything.



quote:
Ask yourself why those people who were prepared to write reams and reams of stuff in the Philosophy threads wouldn't do so in CA



Well, we can't expect critiquing poetry to be put on the same level of attention as national, worldly and everlasting questions.  As important as art is and cultivating one's judgment of it, things such as human rights, religion, law, etc, in general still have much more importance to people and therefore people talk and care about them much more.   I think it would be a mistake to measure the success of Critical Analysis by how much it gets the the kind of attention those forums may get, for those forums deal with issues more common to everyone, while CA deals with poems individually and issues specially oriented to those interested in the art and studying it in a more indepth way.
 

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


86 posted 03-31-2009 03:01 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Chops

I don't have any problem with Grinch or anyone "getting a proposal together", who finally does the typing and posts it or e-mail's it to Ron is however imv irrelevant.  The point is that it's pretty pointless to put a single individual's view unless there is broad consensus supporting that view.  Perhaps Grinch would like to submit a summary of his proposals here for us to see, and I'm sure from what I've read that Bob's would be really good too.  Plus Ess has some good points, and Jenn too.  

I don't understand the point you are making about giving and getting.  I never said anything about "trumping"

On "rhetoric" - ahh, so you are talking about this thread?  Well I disagree with you strongly in that case.  I think everyone who has contributed to this thread has done marvellously well.  You don't think anyone else apart from Grinch has done a good job in this thread?  I think it's kind of sad you think that. Am I misunderstanding?

Chops this is the post you referred me to:

"The problems occurred because when people saw what they perceived as posts that didn't match their idea of type two posts. Instead of ignoring them they decided to ignore the type one requirements and reacted with posts that were clearly outside the sites requirements. When that happened the Moderators were given no option but to either edit or delete any post that clearly breached the type one requirements or, based on their own type two requirements, ignore the site requirements and Moderate based on their own standards. This left the Mods out on a limb, they had rules they had to enforce which seemed bent on allowing the type of posts that, in many cases, they didn't agree with.

From the point of view of a lot of members some of the posters that they saw as being disruptive were allowed to continue to post while anyone confronting or criticising them was censored for breaching the type one requirements. In frustration they either blew a gasket and got bounced or packed their bags and walked. The Mods, sometimes just as frustrated, were put in untenable situations too.

You can see from the requirements the quandary Ron finds himself in, he can't abandon the type one requirements without excluding some people and he can't exclude some people without having a clear definition of what a type two post actually is. If Ron doesn't believe that my replies are of a good enough standard does he delete them? Does his standard match Brad's, or Pete's, or Moonbeams?"

All the above deals with possible reasons for its failure, but no proposals.

"You could try to build lots of rules to define a standard but the best you're ever going to get is a whole heap of borderline cases and grey areas leading to inconsistent moderation."

This is a reservation about more rules but no proposals

"The issue, as far as I see it, was that for some reason people couldn't simply accept that all types of posts are inevitable. At the same time, for some reason, they couldn't just ignore the posts they believed weren't type two posts. They saw them as some sort of an affront and reacted like the proverbial bull faced with a red rag."

This is more reasons for failure but no proposals

"Perhaps the answer could have been as simple as giving those people a little help to ignore the red rags.

Why couldn't there have been an "Ignore Poster" list for each member, similar to the library but in reverse, where, if you found someone so annoying you couldn't stop yourself from reacting to their every word, you simply added them to your ignore list and all their posts were magically removed from your view.

If that were in place moderating would have been made easier - if the members had a process to deal with people that annoyed them they'd have had no excuse for breaking the type one requirements to voice their annoyance. An added bonus is that this solution reflects real life, if you don't like someone you generally ignore or avoid them, confronting them at every opportunity isn‘t generally an expectable way to go.

Out of sight is out of mind?"

And this is a proposal for an ignore button

I hope you won't mind if I repeat my question from above again:

Post 41 made some statements about possible causes of problems in CA and proposed an "ignore" button as a solution.

Is your solution to all CA's problems an "ignore" button?  Or have I missed other things that Grinch has proposed?


I've tried to see the other things in this post Chops, I still can't see them.  Can you help me out?

M
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


87 posted 03-31-2009 03:08 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Ess

~sigh~ I'm sorry, it's not a question of not being true and open, my comments might cause some personal offence and that, even if I was prepared to risk it, is against PiP rules and I can't do it.  Your other point deserves a proper reply and I don't have time right now - hope to be back later.  Thanks for discussing this Ess .

M
chopsticks
Senior Member
since 10-02-2007
Posts 870
The US,


88 posted 03-31-2009 06:10 PM       View Profile for chopsticks   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for chopsticks

“On "rhetoric" - ahh, so you are talking about this thread? Well I disagree with you strongly in that case. I think everyone who has contributed to this thread has done marvellously well. You don't think anyone else apart from Grinch has done a good job in this thread? I think it's kind of sad you think that. Am I misunderstanding?”

Beamer, you like to type hundreds of words and turn things around. That is  OK with me, have fun .

I think everybody has done a good job in this thread. What I said before you turned it around with your words is “AS FAR AS I KNOW, ALL WE HAVE TO OFFER IS RHETORIC .”  There may be something else concrete we can offer, but I’m not aware of it. Maybe we could do some kind of community service for the forum ? I don’t know.

It could be that I understand things different than you do. That said I will try not to confuse myself any more , but if I do, feel free to throw hundreds of words at me. After I post this I will cut and paste the part of Grinch’s post that I thought was spot on, to use a little down town jive..

I think Grinch is a very fair person and would do a good job on a proposal. Back when CA was going full blast I have heard Grinch say, that all poets were welcome at CA. I never heard anybody else say that under the same circumstances. . Grinch I hope I haven’t embarrassed you .This is my last post and now Beamer I am truly out of here .

If you wanted to undertake an autopsy of the CA forum Bob it wouldn’t take a member of CSI to spot the root cause of it’s demise. You can distil it down to an incompatibility of types.

Here’s the site requirements:

1 anyone can post a poem within the general rules of the site
2 anyone can post a reply within the general rules of the site

You can call those type one requirements and here’s the requirements of the people using the forum:

1 only poems of a certain standard should be posted
2 only replies of a certain standard should be posted
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


89 posted 03-31-2009 09:28 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Autopsy is not something that I think would work here, Chops.  I do understand the frustration.

     The temptation in situations like this is to get all rational (I do this myself, and sometimes it's helpful, certainly); and to look at the past (which is also helpful at times, but probably not here and not now.  Autopsies end up fixing blame, I find, which is fine for legal stuff, but not so great for friendships.  

     What I'm looking for is something on the order of what I can do differently to make the outcome different next time.  "Next Time" doesn't need to be  the next iteration of CA.  Next time, in this case, is this time I'm talking to you or this time I'm talking to Essorant so that I don't get in my own way and make things more difficult for you in talking with me about the poetry and technique that seems to matter to all of us.  In terms of Ron, if I listen to him, at least one thing that I heard was that he and his crew had to work hard in keeping the discussion going in a way that they felt was respectful and productive.

     If I want to give something to Ron and the moderators, this might be something I'd need to address.  I'm not sure how to do that at this point except to try to police my own large mouth and to address the large mouths of the people I I talks with at times.  With myself, that means that I have to work on being more aware of when I'm actually crossing lines that don't fit with the forum.  I have to give not simply rhetoric, but my attention to myself and my intention to bring myself into clearer compliance with the mores of the joint.  And where not to my liking, I need to find some decent way to discuss this without trying to make anybody else feel lousy.  

     It seems to me that these are things that I can at least work on giving to the forum and the members.

     I used to study aikido when I was younger, and the tradition was that when entering the practice hall, you were supposed to bow twice, once to the picture of Morihei Uyeshiba, who was the founder, and a second time to the mat.  One day I asked the Sensei, the teacher, about this.    "I can understand," I said, "About bowing to the picture of the Founder.  It's a matter of simple respect.  But why the mat?"

     The sensei said, "We bow to the mat that keeps us from breaking our backs."

     The basics of PiP, it seems to me, deserve respect for somewhat the same reason.  And I don't think it would hurt if we made a point of trying to let others know in a gentle way, a gentle way, if perhaps they were asking for criticism they weren't willing to return, or if they were posting more stuff than seemed appropriate or whatever.  That might be somewhat helpful, though only if we could do it gently, and without encroaching on administrative prerogatives.

     That's one thought of some things I might do that might make things easier rather than more difficult in dealing with stuff.  

     What about other folks in terms of getting and giving?  Perhaps I'm being too personal here, and other folks have more general thoughts.  Those seem useful as well.

     Sincerely, Bob Kaven

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


90 posted 04-01-2009 03:14 AM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Chops, sorry; I'm certainly not trying to turn your words around, it's simply that sometimes I find it hard to understand what you are saying, and I think that has led to misunderstandings before.  So here I was simply taking the opportunity to make a real effort to understand where you were coming from. I hope I haven't offended you.  

But, at risk of upsetting you even more Chops I do just want to point out what I mean about being careful about language and meaning in dialogue here in the forums using the example you have just yelled at me  

You tell me that I turned round your words and that what you actually said was:


quote:
"AS FAR AS I KNOW, ALL WE HAVE TO OFFER IS RHETORIC ."

But Chops that is not what you said at all.  It might have been what was in your head but it's not what you wrote.  What you wrote was:


quote:
The only thing that I know of that we could possibly GIVE is rhetoric


All I did was ask what you meant by that because "rhetoric" can have a pejorative meaning.  I sincerely don't mean to twist your words, I was just trying to understand whether you meant that in the context of this thread or a new forum.  

[This message has been edited by moonbeam (04-01-2009 08:42 AM).]

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


91 posted 04-01-2009 06:05 AM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Bob

I don't think you're being too personal, and I agree gentleness is one of the keys.

But I don't agree with you about not trying to understand what went wrong.  It seems to me that if you want to stand any realistic chance of  as you say: "making the outcome different next time" you have to know what you are making it different from and why.  Medical autopsies are carried out for several a good reasons, one of which is to try to understand and prevent illness in the future.

Sure, there is a chance that a rational discussion may bruise ego's, may even damage friendships, but what do you think those so called friendships were founded on if they are so fragile that they can be damaged beyond repair by an honest exchange of views?

I was brought up to believe that when things go wrong that's the time to have a full and frank exchange about why they went wrong.  Not simply brush the issues under the carpet.  That way surely results in any new edifice simply being built upon the resentments and errors of the past.  To be honest I'm finding it slightly frustrating here that I can't be more outspoken without risking infringement of the PiP rules.

Also in this vein I think that online misunderstandings can be even more perilous than in "real life".  I guess that's why I try to take the trouble to explain myself, and why sometimes this results in what Chops calls hundreds of words of rhetoric.  Many many problems arise in my experience from the quick quip, the ill-thought out witticism, the joke at the expense of what someone else has written, the implied criticism of others by the praise of one.  People are very quick to take offence when they can't see facial expression, and a large part of why CA was quite successful to begin with was that a good deal of trust and respect was generated between members so that the stock of goodwill and understanding was at a level which could withstand the occasional  faux pas.  For any forum to work I think that level of trust has to be present in a good proportion of the regulars, and frankly if one or two of the members are periodically, or even continually, throwing textually ambiguous bombshells into the mix then it eats away at the trust reserve and makes for an atmosphere which is hostile to serious discussion or even fun.

You put your finger on it.  We all have to watch our mouths. Think before we make off the cuff jokes, pause before we joke about what someone writes, how much they write, what books they recommend - and even if we don't consider we are making a joke or comment at someone else's expense think about how it might look to them before hitting that return button.  I certainly know I have in the past been too quick to take offence at what I regarded as barbed comments, and I've made a resolution to try and take the time to engage with someone who makes a post I don't understand.

Thanks for listening.

M


Ess

Yes I think you have a point about the worldly appeal of 101 and the Alley.  But I guess that was why I suggested above that any new forum should be a discussion forum rather than a pure critique forum: that all sorts of posts to do with poetry and the poetic world should be encouraged rather than just people posting poems.  Grinch started a good thread right here in the Alley - and look at the good stuff that's being generated there.  And I can think of lots more ideas that would hopefully encourage diversification and a wider breadth of interest and participation.

But then it does occur to me that from the description of Phil 101 (the strap line), all Ron would have to do would be to allow posting of poems for critique there and we would more or less have a forum such as I am describing.  

M

[This message has been edited by moonbeam (04-01-2009 07:37 AM).]

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


92 posted 04-01-2009 12:25 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

I think that is a good idea.  Basically that is what I am suggesting as well, but that Critical Analysis be revived as Critical Analysis#3 for the purpose, with a new "philosophy" and description to clarify the philosophy of the forum. If we improved Critical Analysis along those lines critiquing/discussing poems and poetry would still be the center of the forum. That wouldn't happen, and would seem inappropriate to try to make happen in the Philosophy forum where philosophical discussion about topics are and ought to be at the main.  My point is that Critical Analysis is what we make of it.  And if we make of it something better, it shall be better.  The forum and the name "Critical Analysis" aren't the problem.  The problem seems to be a confusion of what kind of participation is or should be allowed in the forum.  What more would it take but some kind of description or mission statment that clarifies and at this point demands as a rule the hospitable and inclusive kind of "critical" we wan't, instead of the haughty and exclusive kind?

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


93 posted 04-01-2009 12:36 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Why don't we create a thread called "Critical Analysis #3" and use it as the Critical Analysis forum?  We could use the collabrative thread as the forum itself for now and post our poetry and critique therein.  If we give good evidence of being able to maintain a good thread as a forum, not only that, but if the thread is active enough that it is always at the top of Open or else at the top here in the Alley, unrelentingly unsinking and in everyone's eyes, by the fiftieth page, surely Ron's mind might be changed a bit to consider giving the improved activity of "Critical Analysis" in the thread its own "official" forum.     

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


94 posted 04-01-2009 12:49 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I'm still uncertain what you hope to get that would be different and what the different quality of the input would be to make this distinct from the Critical Analysis forum that simply didn't work.

     Do you understand what was upsetting to Ron about it?

     How does your proposal address that?  Does it Give Ron something that makes him feel like the pain is worth it?  Can you specify what that is in seriously concrete terms?

     For those of us who've drifted away from that forum, do you want or need us back?  For what purpose?

     What's going to be different to make the experience worth another try?

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


95 posted 04-01-2009 01:08 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Bob,

The difference is in being clear about what is appropriate and not appropriate in Critical Analysis, so we don't mistreat someone as we did Monk Frost, and so that we encourage an approach that remains hospitable and inclusive and agreeable with the spirit of Passions.  I believe that with such a clarification, then the ambiguity between some members suggesting an unofficial "prerequisite" and Ron expecting us to be accomodating to everyone shall be done away with.

I think a new and improved Critical Analysis may be much more inclusive to everyone and even persuasive to people that drifted away than a closed Critical Analysis that no one can post any new poetry in.

[This message has been edited by Essorant (04-01-2009 02:10 PM).]

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


96 posted 04-01-2009 04:44 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Ess

I'll be frank with you.  I disagree that the name "critical analysis" is a good idea for the reasons already stated, and I think it is a significant point.  Also I think you're being superficial in your analysis of what was wrong with CA, and that superficiality is resulting in a simplistic solution: "a new CA with a pledge to be nice and not to be haughty; that just isn't going to work Ess".   To be even more blunt seeing as you raise MF again, I'll be honest and say that if another MF came into the forum and did exactly the same again I'd be looking for him to be discouraged and for Pete to post what he did after 5 MF posts instead of 21.    I know, and I suppose Ron knows, that there have been problems in CA for a long time, I don't think he entirely agrees with me as to the reasons, but he's already made it clear that a simple promise to be good boys and girls in the future isn't going to open the door again.  

I don't know if you've read all I've said about why the forum failed in this thread Ess.  If you have, then I can only assume you disagree with me.  If you haven't I wouldn't blame you because I've rambled on and on .

On your idea about a CA thread.  That's intriguing in that it's rather like what Bob and Grinch are doing here in the Alley isn't it?  Why don't you join in with that for now, and see how it goes.

Really Ess I don't mean to be confrontational here, but I just feel like there is no point in pushing this thing too hard or too fast.  Everyone needs a breather imo, Ron is doubtless busy and certainly won't want the pressure of having to make decisions about a new forum, one of the key issues that of moderating hasn't even been thought about, and I for one, feel that a few months of reflection and intelligent discussion wouldn't go amiss.  

Peace.

M
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


97 posted 04-02-2009 01:25 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Moonbeam,

I respect your points, but find you mistranslated my own sayings somewhat.  I meant that I don't think changing the name does much for changing the manners. The manners we ourselves have and uphold behind the name is based on the mentality we put into it in manifold ways, philosophically, socially, individually, etc,   If we establish something better, it shall be better.  That may be done with almost any name that more or less means the same or similar as "Critical Analysis".  But Critical Analysis was already the name and the forum, and people put much time and effort into it.  Why can't that be respected by using the same name and forum, and improving it with a better philosophy behind it, so that it may be continued and made to work better for everyone, and not forsake what was already begun for almost a decade?

Also, I am not suggesting "promise to be nice", but something such as a highlighted "mission statment" or even warning in Critical Analysis, so that people know right at the door how the general rules of the site are to be kept up in the enviroment of a Critical Analysis.  Instead of a promise it would be something such as a declaration or warning.  It would basically be telling people how to make sure to follow the same general rules of the site but in the atmosphere of Critical Analysis.  We found out that it is not as simple as just "don't attack someone", etc. but fell into debates about quality and quantity of participation, how harsh a critique may be, the kind of reception we give to new members, etc. It may sound like an oversimplification, but I do think if there were special instructions to try to deal directly with these things that everyone could see, it would solve the problem we had.  Perhaps a highlighted message on the page where we enter our replies to poetry? Who wouldn't think thrice with something such as warning of what to keep in mind right above the textbox where we enter our responses to a poem?   Some tools need their own special instructions in order for the users to know very well how to use the tool properly and remember and therebeside continue using it properly.  The tool shouldn't be blamed for Passions failing to give the means to itself to establish a "system" by which the users could better maintain a proper use of the tool called "Critical Analysis". We should not blame the tool nor throw the tool away.  Instead I think we ought to give the people the means to better know how to use it properly.  Special instructions won't hurt.  In fact, I think it would heal the most part of the problem of this case.

He may, but I doubt Ron wishes this to be drawn out for three or more months.  He may be more annoyed by the length of drawing it out in such a way more than by us trying to make a strong defense right now and the sooner hopefully have peace and quiet about it.   Anyway, sometimes nature and nurture need a little pressure        

quote:
On your idea about a CA thread.  That's intriguing in that it's rather like what Bob and Grinch are doing here in the Alley isn't it?  Why don't you join in with that for now, and see how it goes.



No,  it isn't as a forum because it determines its subject of discussion, but I think it is a good example of the kind of of wordmeetings we should make.  I am not much for freeverse,  but that doesn't stop me from appreciating a good discussion.


quote:
one of the key issues that of moderating hasn't even been thought about


If they are willing, why not let Pete and Brad?  They have the experience and enlightenment from dealing with old CA behind them, which would make them more fit than anyone else to take on a new CA.

[This message has been edited by Essorant (04-02-2009 03:17 PM).]

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


98 posted 04-02-2009 04:07 PM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

quote:
But Critical Analysis was already the name and the forum, and people put much time and effort into it.  Why can't that be respected by using the same name and forum,

Because I believe it puts some people off participating before they even participate.  It was a bad name choice.  

And also with respect Ess, because I do agree with some of what you say, I think you are somewhat too attached to a failed system because of the nostalgia you have for it.  You are trying to make it work against the grain.  Yes, bad manners were a symptom of the problems in CA but they were not the underlying cause of the failure.  Bad manners will occur again and again however many assurances you and I and the other few people who participated give to Ron.  That is unless you want to restrict participation in the forum to 5 - 10 of us.
quote:
Also, I am not suggesting "promise to be nice", but something such as a highlighted "mission statment" or even warning in Critical Analysis, so that people know right at the door how the general rules of the site are to be kept up in the enviroment of a Critical Analysis.  Instead of a promise it would be something such as a declaration or warning.  It would basically be telling people how to make sure to follow the same general rules of the site but in the atmosphere of Critical Analysis.  We found out that it is not as simple as just "don't attack someone", etc. but fell into debates about quality and quantity of participation, how harsh a critique may be, the kind of reception we give to new members, etc. It may sound like an oversimplification, but I do think if there were special instructions to try to deal directly with these things that everyone could see, it would solve the problem we had.  Perhaps a highlighted message on the page where we enter our replies to poetry? Who wouldn't think thrice with something such as warning of what to keep in mind right above the textbox where we enter our responses to a poem?   Some tools need their own special instructions in order for the users to know very well how to use the tool properly and remember and therebeside continue using it properly.  The tool shouldn't be blamed for Passions failing to give the means to itself to establish a "system" by which the users could better maintain a proper use of the tool called "Critical Analysis". We should not blame the tool nor throw the tool away.  Instead I think we ought to give the people the means to better know how to use it properly.  Special instructions won't hurt.  In fact, I think it would heal the most part of the problem of this case.

Now I think you are making some concrete proposals that make sense to me, and may help to address the underlying problems.  I think this sort of thing is a move in the right direction.

quote:
If they are willing, why not let Pete and Brad?  They have the experience and enlightenment from dealing with old CA behind them, which would make them more fit than anyone else to take on a new CA.

Great, if they'll do it.  I have a lot of respect for both of them, but don't forget Brad just resigned from 101, he may want a break!  Also two mods is not enough.  Not nearly enough.  The only way this is going to work is if there is a more or less continuous mod or quasi mod (regular members without mod powers but with trusted reporting status or some such) presence in the forum, and a good deal of behind the scenes dialogue between mods.  One of the main reasons CA failed imo was that problems that could have been jumped on and nipped in the bud before they escalated were not, and they did.  Just too much work for the poor mods.

Participation is the key to this, and the only way you are going to get that is if people feel the "Yes!" that Bob mentions below.

Good post Ess  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


99 posted 04-02-2009 04:09 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I'm still stupidly unclear about how your actions will be different from the actions in the discontinued forum called Critical Analysis.  I remain stupidly unclear about what the appeal is for me.  And I have no understanding what difference there will be in the administrative involvement.

     Until the differences are large enough to be felt on more than an intellectual level by all concerned, and unless everybody actually has a sensation of "Yes!" in their guts, I suspect that this won't work.  I mean and actual physical sensation of "Yes" that's palpable a being tickled or stirred to laughter.  Not a concept.

     You, Essorant, seem to be one of those folks who can actually be moved by concepts without necessarily having a concrete physical feeling being tied to them.  This is a gift that most of us do not share.  Practical suasion requires  that you master the skill here, should your aim be success rather than lengthy and fruitless dialogue.  Please pardon my straightforwardness in this,  but I believe it to be true.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Give And Get in Poetry   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors