I'm a Newbie here...just a place to share some musical or literary or pop culture tastes I may have. Don't expect people to take me too seriously but it seems like a "Nice" place.Cheers

as far as I can see. But then I'm only on occasionally, and not for very long, usually just delving quickly into topics based on their subjects.

I think you're reading the wrong posts. This has coem up before and every time it seems to be after a couple of rather vitriolic posts in the middle of an otherwise calm discission... I always seem to miss those posts and wonder what all the fuss is about.... of course it could be me that people complain about!! Surely not.

Like the rest of life there is bound to be a little cut and thrust now and again even in this haven of sanity. Hopefully no lasting scars though.
We'll restore your faith on Friday Gav. There is nothing like a quick fondle of Beany's nuts to put life back on an even keel.

This is still a lovely place, just pick and choose which threads you read / participate in. As JohnW says, this has been coming up time and again, I can remember a thread from 2008 going on about how things have changed here!

Sure, I find the occasional threads dispiriting and frankly jaw-dropping, but they're completely in the minority. As long as it stays that way, I'm staying here too.

BTW are you going to be at the NW mingle on Friday night? I am so excited about it, it's actually quite ridiculous. Really looking forward to see all of you lovely chaps.

Often the posts that generate anger - and they've always been there - are the ones questioning behaviour on the site, like this one. Some forums have very specific Fight Club-style "don't talk about Fight Club" rules for this very purpose, or they'll have a specific section, away from the main discussions, for debate regarding in-house matters.

..this is still the most civilised place to discuss this kind of thing there is.
I don't know how this works for everyone, but I try not to type anything I wouldn't say to a person's face.

don't gaze at your navel, just take what you needs and don't feed the trolls

is the support and good vibes I've received in my recent hour of need elevates it to a higher plan of fora.

There's been recent concern about female objectification, categorisation of artists by their race and the increase in gratuitous swearing. This usually provokes a hubbub of mild chastisements and the 'ups' show what the consensus is. It's almost like a Council of the Elders, who have a good old mutter and make sure everyone steps back in line. In fact, I think that shows how well we work as a community. It fascinates me how that works, given that most of us have no physical contact with each other.

Perhaps the problem is the old thing that, in a conversation, as much is communicated with face and hands as by the words themselves. I've seen a few posts where meanings have been taken all the wrong way, but wouldn't have been if, face-to-face, we could have seen the tongue firmly in cheek. One (very regular) poster really went off on one after he misinterpreted a one liner witticism as a personal attack, when it surely wasn't meant that way. I guess that's what all those punctuation smiley emoticon thingys are all about.

One rule I apply to myself is: Never come back from the pub and start posting - read the blog, yes, but never post. One of the main reasons I like this blog is that much of it is pithy yet measured and well written. It deserves better than me rolling in at midnight and being verbally incontinent all over it. One particular night I came in and read a post that really demanded correction. If I'd written my reply there and then, I would have been patronising, insulting, offensive. In the morning I did a bit of research, thought through my arguments and made a post that got a lot of 'up' support.

Fear not WholeHogg (funny name for a vegetarian), you are still among friends.

It had been a long day, I'd had a whisky and settled down to catch up on things; in hindsight it maybe not the best circumstances to read argumentative threads. From what everyone is saying, my choices had been bad 'uns and that's reassuring.
Yes, I'll be at the mingle on Friday and looking forward to seeing lots of you there. Have even taken the day off work to finish off my CD comp today - how's that for commitment?
In the words of Fountains of Wayne, "...peace and love, peace and love, that's what I'm thinking of bay, peace and love".

I'm always inclinced to compare this to the comments sections on the Guardian's website - a receptacle of vitriol and spite that belies the image of the paper's readers (although I'm sure that many are actually Daily Mail readers who go on there as a wind up).

I always enjoy this blog as an online alternative to talking with mates in a pub, except always accessible and much cheaper. Long may it continue.

I did a course in NLP a while back.*

One of the things that really struck a chord was one of the "presuppositions", which said "the meaning of the communication is not simply what you intend, but also the response you get."

Unfortunately on these blogs, we only get to see the part of the response that gets put into writing.

I find it a very helpful perspective to consider.

*I am not a born-again, NLP-er. I have doubts about it, but I also think it has a lot to offer if you can negotiate the sales pitches that you get from some of its proponents (e.g. Paul McKenna).

the 'mingles'.

Friendships and cliques have formed and a decree of righteousness has been established. And if anyone (like that chap in the Jacqui Smith thread) goes outside that norm, then he is set upon. Set upon generally by the people who attend the 'mingles' confident in the knowledge that their friends will support them and 'up' their comments. And it IS a form of bullying: "We don't want your kind here."

I must stress that I don't think the 'mingles' are a bad thing at all and look a lot of fun; and although I will never attend any, I don't personally feel excluded on the blog because of it.

it becomes too easy to get a bit worked up when something seems out of step with the usual tone. Unfortunately, as we saw the other day, it can lead to a degree of unpleasantness and I was also uncomfortable with much of the thread and twitter stuff (which is why I said very little about it). As mentioned above, in writing it can be much more difficult to interpret tone.

As a general rule, I actually think it's best just to let things slide (I mean the odd comment, not than the board overall!) and leave them to the moderator's discretion, because arguments on websites are usually more about letting off steam than anything else. It also could appear off-putting to new members when these become the most popular threads, and it certainly makes me a bit paranoid that I might post something without realising I could be taken the wrong way. For this reason, I now must add that I don't want anyone in particular to think I mean their posts specifically were problematic. I suppose in essence that's an agreement with the OP suggesting that the easy-going atmosphere slips at times (hi WholeHogg, I'm a vegetarian too), but it is far from gone and even when one problematic tread is running, there are still dozens of fun ones in progress.

I had an idea for an album-based thread the other day, think I'll just go and start writing it...

Is it really such a nice place? If you subscribe to the received and approved set of Word beliefs perhaps. If, like me, you don't, I have to say, it can be a fairly frosty place.

that I might be alone in this view, but I have to say I sometimes find it quite entertaining when it all kicks off.

It reminds me of a story my wife told me about her grandfather. Whilst in his retirement home he was found in the early hours of the morning brawling with another gentleman - both thought the other to be a burglar in their house. Distressing and sad of course, but the spectacle was, apparently, undeniably funny in its own way.

I'm sure I'm v much in the minority, but as someone whose politics don't chime with those of the Guardian/BBC, the oft-repeated presumption that people on the right, or God forbid those who read or write the Daily Mail are somehow morally inferior or don't hold their beliefs out of any intellectually valid reason (as opposed to racist/Little England/reactionary/heartless/snouts in trough selfishness) always sends me scurrying.

My bad I know. I should have studied Music not Econometrics.

But I've read the blog for a while, and I don't think that the quality of the environment has declined.

Every now and then there's a thread where it feels like someone has left a door open and a bit of the Internet proper has got in, but to be honest that stuff is never completely avoidable, and those rare exceptions only serve to reaffirm the general quality of the remainder.

As far as cliques and suchlike go, I've never been to a Mingle, nor met anyone from this site (and probably never will do if I'm honest), I hold several views which I know to be contrary to the local orthodoxy, to the extent that one exists (most glaringly, re: a certain Scouse beat combo), and I've never felt that to be a problem.

I've yet to experience being rounded on by the great and good in numbers, but I like to think that if I were I would either (a) consider my position, realise I was wrong/had caused offence and offer some form of mild and possibly even sincere apology; or (b) conclude that I can live with a dozen or so complete strangers on the Internet disagreeing with me.

The proviso attached to all of the above is that disagreements should be civil. It's not weight of numbers or friends defending friends that would bother me, it would be someone getting glaringly Anglo-Saxon or ad hominem on my ass. Beyond that, I tend to think that people can take care of themselves. The Jacqui Smith thread was unpleasant for many reasons, not least that people were actually saying nice things about Jacqui Smith (albeit in their own way), but I never got the sense that the OP was incapable of holding his own or giving as good as he got.

Anyway, I think a fairly good barometer of matters is Bob's own contribution to this thread. He tossed out a post that was a bit curt, a row ensued from which he swiftly extricated himself and the entire event has bothered him sufficiently to consider his own behaviour and take a time out.

Nowhere else on the information superhighway will you see a reaction like that, ladies and gents.

I think it causes a bit of bother. Sometimes on here it's like two blokes are having an argument in the street, then one blows his whistle and all his mates appear from nowhere with baseball bats.

Fight your own battles, is what I'd say.

Despite being on it for about a year, I've never really got the hang of it. I get benefits by following some information links and indeed some sporting and social links that interest me. I also see the benefit of following various media types and celebs for entertainment purposes.

It does have a potential for a darker side though. It's not subject to the same standards and guidlines as we enjoy(genuinely enjoy)here. Can't help thinking that the word blog gets blamed for unrest that takes place elsewhere.

I don't think I like twitter very much, but then I'm not really a social network type of person. I still think the letters to the editor page in the Radio Times was a step too far.

I only moved into the area six weeks ago and on the first day I found this lovely little pub. Everyone was very welcoming. A couple of people bought me a pint. I was allowed to join in their chats about all sorts of things. Not everyone agreed, but nobody seemed to fall out.

One day, though, sitting in my usual corner, I heard a kerfuffle above me. Turns out there was an upstairs room where some of the regulars went to have a proper row. The thumping from the ceiling was a bit disturbing, but I got on with my pint and read my paper.

Some days later I was in the pub again, having a ploughman's, and it kicked off on the first floor like before, but this time a few of the regulars came tumbling down the stairs and started jostling each other in the main bar. Then a few more. Soon, fists were flying. Well, I can tell you I was shocked. The landlord tried to calm them down, but to no avail. Before you could say "Massive", glasses were being smashed and bottles shoved into faces.

Well, I just sat there in my corner, watching this with my mouth open. I didn't like to say anything. The ploughman's was nice, though.

Try not to rise to every thread/comment you may find that doesn't say things quite how you would. People come here primarily because of the magazine and the music but we all have different backgrounds, different experiences and perspectives. What may seem to you as going a bit far will not to others.

Occasionally certain posters say things I think a bit off. I try to restrain the urge to call them to account - all it does is create a bit of uncomfortable 'flaming'. Better to ignore and move on to add something more to your own taste elsewhere and seek common ground rather than conflict. There's all kinds here and there will always be clashes of thought on what is acceptable. Basically following the FAQs works I think.

It's the approach I try to follow.

Twitter bitching (twitching?) is not helpful.

Considering the strong opinions held by many there is much more love and peace when people are feeling knocked down than arguments and bitching.

I think threads on internet message boards which are about threads on internet message boards should be banned from internet message boards.

we are here to pass the time and for a bit of entertainment aren't we?

I have been at the wrong end of a bit of up-arrowing for some of my views from time to time. But hey that's because some of my views are probably not mainstream (ferinstance, I think Richard Harris was a much better singer than he was a actor).

but William Faulkner said something like 'When the world ends the final sound will be the last two people standing by a homemade rocket arguing about where to go'
We're doing what people do. We're alright really.

...people go on Twitter to talk about an Internet message board. And as someone who is, ooh, 4000+ miles away from the nearest mingle, I do feel a whiff of envy on reading about them...

Who is better
The Human League
or
Heaven 17?

“The former begat the latter –
Man can never be
superior to God,”
you pontificate
from the dreary Catholic
parlour of your mother’s house,
where you reside
in priestly abstinence,
despite turning 40 last year.

“Man killed God” I retort,
archly paraphrasing Nietzsche
from my secular bedsit
in Mitcham.

“Besides, Miley Cyrus is better than Billy Ray.”

Our battle, which
can be weighed in decades,
has waged across
a galaxy of fanzines -
their tattered photocopied carcasses,
abandoned in mass graves
in the unvisited corners
of forgotten attics.

It has crossed borders
into the letters page of The NME,
repelled by curt editorial in black type:
“You’re both dicks,” pronounced Tony Naylor.

By unspoken consensus
we abandoned the printed page
and took flight in virtual worlds,
only to be jointly banned from
the vampire chatroom
on Compuserve
and the pool at Habbo Hotel.

I paid a student in China to spam
The Human League message boards
with photo-shopped images of
Susan Sulley shooting
the Arch Duke, Franz Ferdinand,
With an Uzi.

You have tutored the parrot
at your local garden centre
to say “Heaven 17 sucks”
in Klingon and five other languages
and have posted
the footage on You Tube
where is has acquired
4010 views,
15 thumbs up
and 1 thumbs down.

The top-rated comment states: “Crazy bird”

This morning I received in the post
a letter jointly signed
by Glenn Gregory
&
Phil Oakey

It read:
“Will the pair of you
please shut the fuck up.”

In the silence
that must follow
know that I remain
your enemy.

chortle. Thanks B7. Now, back to the ward with you.

Surely it's all just a microcosm of human life?

Some people get on, some don't.

Some have "unorthodox" tastes and opinion, others don't.

Some people meet and chat outside of "work", others don't.

Some people like a gossip and a bitch, some don't.

Some people are generally more forthright/aggressive, some aren't.

I don't see any great bullying going on here to be honest.

I'll admit to not posting much on the more cerebral threads, other than the occasional smarty pants one liner. I know that I can't even begin to articulate as well as many of the regular posters on here so I don't bother.

I do think there are a lot of occasions where people grab hold of the wrong end of the stick (not Stick) but on almost all occasions the argument usually deflates in an exchange of mutual apologies.

This is still a nice place to play, even if occasionally some of the boys get a bit rough and someone gets pushed over.

Let's not get carried away.

Three friends all going through cancer treatment at the moment, rather worryingly they're all called Ann(e). Probably the world's worst coincedence, but they're all at various stages for different sized tumours in different areas, but I now have an ever greater understanding of just how malicious it can be. Especially in the smaller things that we all take for granted like going to the loo properly or having eyelashes is cruelly robbed by something we can only just attempt to fight.

As people have said it does put messageboard winge-ing and bickering into a healthy perspective.

For myself, I on the whole find this to be a nice place where everyone is allowed a difference in opinion regarding music, film, tv and literature, it is only the moment that talk shifts onto politics and religious affairs that waters can get somewhat choppier around these parts. Same rules as a pub or dinner conversation. Never mention religion or politics, it will only end awkwardly.

I'm very open around these parts of the fact that I'm a devout Christian who works as a church Worship Leader part time. In some threads this has meant that I seem to be one of very few who put across the somewhat controversial opinion that actually people who believe in God might not actually be insane or talking to themselves, and that the Bible's key commandments are to love God and love each other.

I have also offered inclinations that I occasionally read the much detested Daily Mail. This doesn't make me a certain type of person. Just because I read a paper doesn't necessarily mean that I hold a certain type of views, a fact that I had to discuss at length with someone on Saturday night (not here, I hasten to add) who seemed to be fitting into some pre-conceived ideas about readers of another more "liberal" paper. Sometimes it seems that stereotypes do exist. Luckily though I haven't found any here.

And after that somewhat shambolic stream of consciousness, is sort of the reason I still cherish the Massive. Not because of Mingles (been to one, got on well with everyone, had a few drinks, got sweaty to catch the train back). Not because of similarities in personal opinions (I'm Christian and vote conservative simply because feudal monarchy is unlikely to become an option any time soon) Not because I enjoy similar forms of entertainment (Mos Def, Tom Waits and Icelandic is where its at, not Richard Thompson), but because for every different opinion there is a person behind it, the proud dad who loves metal, the staunch liberal who does charity work, the amazing home cooking skills of Hannah, the bootleg obsessive of DFB, the music geek dentist from Portsmouth or any other combinations that make this place great.

The Massive aren't stereotypes. We're so much more than that. We're individuals kept together by chance and a desire to chat rubbish with our fingers. And are all the more beautiful because of it.

Amen.