The Logic Off Topic list

I would just like to say that I believe Jeremy is right.  Politics should be
discussed elsewhere.   I think that all topics should at least be loosely
linked to music in some way.

Hector.

From: Hector <hector@...>
> I would just like to say that I believe Jeremy is right.  Politics should be
> discussed elsewhere.   I think that all topics should at least be loosely
> linked to music in some way.

Logic Users,

I was extremely offended by some of the basically anti-Semitic comments made
on this list recently. Stating that Israel and its "Thora  (Torah) reading"
Jewish population are nothing but unethical barbarians whose collective
behavior is far worse than that of any other country on the planet is a
point of view based on highly biased perception rather than fact. The way
one particular post was written gives the very strong impression that living
in Israel, reading the Jewish bible, having some beliefs about its content,
and being a murder are all one and the same thing. Such grossly skewed,
unbalanced, and ignorant opinion looks to me like a return to the old
European view of the Jewish person as a subhuman demon. This is,
unfortunately, a very persistent way of looking at the world.

There is a vast and complicated history to the Middle East conflict spanning
at least 100 years that can not be discussed effectively when it is reduced
to such a simplistic and hateful level. There is neither room nor time on
this list to present the points of view of the various parties in a
meaningful, balanced, and truthful manner. All we will experience is a
series of short, nasty, angry emails where people blast out their variously
informed opinions, but make no effort to listen or learn anything or change
their views of particular groups of people. We have to remember that some
people who work in music and use Logic are both Jewish and Palestinian and
this stuff is very upsetting for them to deal with, especially when dealt
with in a shallow manner. As well, Waves, one of the most important
companies involved in audio production, is located in Israel. I do not think
anyone has the right to presume that the people who work in and run that
company are a bunch of murderous unethical barbarians since we are in no
position of know what any of their own individual political points of view
or behaviors etc. etc. are. Yet, based on the comments of some members of
this list, we must presume that the members of this company, since they are
citizens of Israel and might also read the Torah from time to time, as well
as make great plug-ins, are in fact a group of unethical murderers. I do not
like seeing such unmodified stereotyping being accepted as part of the
normal activity of discussing Logic Audio on the net. Although this is an
off topic Logic list, I did not sign up for this sort of thing when I
subscribed. 

Regards

-- Paul Nicholls
New Traditions Media
#421-6450 East Boulevard
Vancouver BC
V6M 3V9
604 269-9202
paulnicholls@...

I must add my name to the list of people dismayed by the decision to
moderate the OT list and censor political discussion - as long as posts are
not aggressive / abusive then we should be able to talk about absolutely
anything - that's the whole point of an OT list.

I've been a subscriber to the LUG for over 3 years and feel it's a real
overreaction. It's a recipe for bland and an insult to the intelligence of
list participants.  Plus anything that can get Dennis and Henrik to agree
has got to be bad. :)

best wishes,

pk

At 0:56 Uhr +0200 22.10.2002, The Pupkid wrote:
>I must add my name to the list of people dismayed by the decision to
>moderate the OT list and censor political discussion - as long as posts are
>not aggressive / abusive then we should be able to talk about absolutely
>anything - that's the whole point of an OT list.

Hi friends,

I agree to the above statement. But it talks about a OT list. What we have
ist L-OT, and this is different. All this talk about moderation, politics
and so on ignores the fact that we simply needed a L-OT list for
help/discussion with logic related topics like audio, computers, music etc.
that have nothing to do *directly* with logic.

A lot of us didn´t want a T-OT (totally ...) list as a replacement for our
local pub.
So again my suggestion: Make this (T-)OT list for that purpose (of course
unmoderated) and keep L-OT what it should be - a tool for people that are
working with logic, doing audio, creating scores, worrying about damaged
HDs or discussing the mastering process.
You could call the new list L-Pub ;-)

Yours,

Tobias

PS: I don´t want to discuss what OT etc. usually means! I only want to
focus on the real needs of users.

Thoughts from the mind of The Pupkid, 21-10-2002:

>Plus anything that can get Dennis and Henrik to agree has got to be bad. :)

ROTFLMAO!!! :-)))  Yeah, right... :-)))



-- 
Hendrik Jan Veenstra  <h@...>
Omega Art: http://www.ision.nl/users/h/index.html

Tobias wrote:
>At 0:56 Uhr +0200 22.10.2002, The Pupkid wrote:
>>I must add my name to the list of people dismayed by the decision to
>>moderate the OT list and censor political discussion - as long as posts are
>>not aggressive / abusive then we should be able to talk about absolutely
>>anything - that's the whole point of an OT list.

>I agree to the above statement. But it talks about a OT list. What we have
>ist L-OT, and this is different. All this talk about moderation, politics
>and so on ignores the fact that we simply needed a L-OT list for
>help/discussion with logic related topics like audio, computers, music etc.
>that have nothing to do *directly* with logic.
>
>A lot of us didn´t want a T-OT (totally ...) list as a replacement for our
>local pub.
>So again my suggestion: Make this (T-)OT list for that purpose (of course
>unmoderated) and keep L-OT what it should be - a tool for people that are
>working with logic, doing audio, creating scores, worrying about damaged
>HDs or discussing the mastering process.

Hi Tobias,

I get the digest for the LUG but for L-OT I get the individual messages.
If I am not interested in an OT post or thread, I don't read it.  This
causes me no pain whatsoever. 

Why do you need to have moderators excluding messages on topics that aren't
relevant to you but which may interest others? What not simply ignore those
messages?

Regards,
Murray

>I get the digest for the LUG but for L-OT I get the individual
messages. If I am not interested in an OT post or thread, I >don't read
it.  This causes me no pain whatsoever. 
Snip

Hiya,

I vote for calling any new list 

Logic- For Unknown Circles (of) Knowledge.... Or L-FUCK

JR

At 0:56 Uhr +0200 22.10.2002, The Pupkid wrote:
>> I must add my name to the list of people dismayed by
>> the decision to moderate the OT list and censor political
>> discussion - as long as posts are not aggressive / abusive
>> then we should be able to talk about absolutely anything
>> - that's the whole point of an OT list.

From: "Tobias Seyb" <tobias.seyb@...>
> I agree to the above statement. But it talks about a OT list.
> What we have ist L-OT, and this is different. All this talk
> about moderation, politics and so on ignores the fact that
> we simply needed a L-OT list for help/discussion with logic
> related topics like audio, computers, music etc. that have
> nothing to do *directly* with logic.

But it would be impossible to enforce. What might be OT to you doesn't
neccesaraly means that it is OT to others on this list. I think this list
should stay completely unmoderated. If it pops up a political discussion
once or twice a year, who cares. The OT list isn't that active anyway,
compared to LUG. And in regard to politics, what would the peace process in
Northern Irland had been without U2. My perception is that politics and
music are closely linked. And hence, Logic, music and politics are linked.
But that's my opinion and as I understand, you disagree with that, fair
enough, but which one of us is right?

Now, this doesn't mean that I encourage political discussions on L-OT all
the time, I just think it is plenty of room for it, along with HD's,
computers, food, cars... or what ever. As long as LUG users want to discuss
it, it's room for it.

I think L-OT is an OT list connected to LUG, not neccesaraly to Logic, if
you see the difference.

Have a good one,

Obi

On Tuesday, October 22, 2002, at 03:09 AM, Tobias Seyb wrote:

> A lot of us didn´t want a T-OT (totally ...) list as a replacement for 
> our
> local pub.

But it isn't that way anyhow - It was just one thread. It came. It 
went. Why anyone got excited about it is beyond me - in truth, I wasn't 
interested in it and didn't read any related articles, so I couldn't 
tell you who was saying what.

If this is a pub - then I just tuned out the loud debate going on at 
the next table. Easy as pie.

As it turns out, I am interested in the "moderation" debate... of 
course, since it has nothing directly to do with Logic - am I to assume 
that messages on this thread are merely being tolerated? or are they 
really "ok"?

Here is my definition L is for logic user - that would be all of us. OT 
is for off topic - which can mean anything.

To refer again to your analogy - if this a pub - it is a private 
members club, the members all being part of "The Great Brotherhood of 
Logicians" - if any member gets ridiculously abusive to other members 
they can be excluded, with fair warning of course. But getting kicked 
out for talking politics now and then - nonsense!


Anyhow: here is a question Jeremy could answer: How big is the L-OT 
list?

 From my observation - this list does not seem to have very many 
members, perhaps much less than the main LUG. If this is the case... I 
would say that fewer participants = less need for moderation.

At 17:01 Uhr +0200 22.10.2002, Murray McDowall wrote:

>I get the digest for the LUG but for L-OT I get the individual messages.

me too.

>If I am not interested in an OT post or thread, I don't read it.  This
>causes me no pain whatsoever.

Ok, but it would be easier if the threads would really keep to the contents
of the mails. If one would strictly delete all mails with certain subjects
he could easily miss something interesting.

>Why do you need to have moderators excluding messages on topics that aren't
>relevant to you but which may interest others? What not simply ignore those
>messages?

Please keep in mind that it wasn´t me who asked for moderation!  I just
asked politely to keep the discussions logic related, nothing more.

Yours,

Tobias

Tobias wrote:

(quoting me)
>>Why do you need to have moderators excluding messages on topics that aren't
>>relevant to you but which may interest others? What not simply ignore those
>>messages?
>
>Please keep in mind that it wasn´t me who asked for moderation!  I just
>asked politely to keep the discussions logic related, nothing more.

My apologies Tobias -- I re-read your original post and while you wanted
people to stick closer to the Logic topic area you weren't advocating
intervention by moderators to achieve this. 

The main thrust of my reply was to suggest that tolerating the diversity of
subjects should not be difficult. I am in the middle of writing something
else and got a little careless phrasing the question above.  Better that I
had simply said -- "Why not just ignore messages that don't interest you."

Regards,
Murray