Where is everyone? — Page 7

It's a good thing Lea Michele doesn't tweet about this board! There have been how many threads dedicated solely to topic of dragging her, both professionally and personally?  

The moderation on this board has always been spotty, questionable, inconsistent, and opaque. They bristle at negativity toward performers with social media following but defend the right of members to post inflammatory, racist garbage that derails every topic it enters. When conversations turn to politics or controversial topics, they lock them down.

The board has lost a great deal of its veteran posters- often people with years and years of experience as Broadway fans or industry people- and it allows aimless non-discussion like requests for recommendations or where to sit or other busywork threads to grow.

This board is unique in that it was a mix of people who knew Broadway intimately, as insiders or just dedicated fans for decades, and new folks. It's an old board, too; it is probably as old or older than many new members, with folks who have been here for most of that time. There is a sense of having earned their stripes and having seen it all, and a sense of familiarity and culture akin to a bar with a set of regulars.

Honestly, the people who can be coldest here are also generally people who know what the hell they're talking about.

 

 

 

JSquared2 said: "vanbrig said: ""Sometimes the mods can't catch everything" aka inconsistent. Basically exactly what myself and others have been saying. I agree that people should stick up for others, but if the mods say they’re going to do something, they should actually do it (and with fair an even hand). Sometimes they are fine, other times they are nowhere to be found, and other times they're going overboard protecting the sensibilities of actors. It's a mess."



Vanbrig I think you really need to pause, take a deep breath and think about what you're saying here. By the logic you are using, should society just throw in the toweland say "Well, we can't possibly catch EVERY pedophile online, so we might as well make it legal." Would you prefer a board where every post has to go through a committee before it can appear online --- or would you rather keep the current system that includes a mixture of the moderators, members self-policing themselves, and other members notifying the mods in the event a bad egg or two slips through the cracks?

"

I can’t speak for Vanbrig, but my issue with it was the motivation behind it, as well as the execution.

When someone’s name in a thread pretty much gets a post deleted, it’s not just being done because it’s a violation of the terms, there’s more to it. And the mods have pretty much confirmed this as well saying that there are things we don’t and never will know about it. It’s selective.

And the execution was incredibly flawed, it’s one thing to lock thread which is usually the case and that’s ok, but threads were simply deleted. A whole preview thread for a show vanished, a thread that had a lot of information on the show. How can anyone that cares about this website and it’s content/information be ok with that? It’s one thing to delete random posts, a whole thread, quite different. Like I said in an earlier post, it would be similar to the King Kong production asking the NYT to erase their review because it wasn’t to their liking.

LxGstv said: "JSquared2 said: "vanbrig said: ""Sometimes the mods can't catch everything" aka inconsistent. Basically exactly what myself and others have been saying. I agree that people should stick up for others, but if the mods say they’re going to do something, they should actually do it (and with fair an even hand). Sometimes they are fine, other times they are nowhere to be found, and other times they're going overboard protecting the sensibilities of actors. It's a mess."



Vanbrig I think you really need to pause, take a deep breath and think about what you're saying here. By the logic you are using, should society just throw in the toweland say "Well, we can't possibly catch EVERY pedophile online, so we might as well make it legal." Would you prefer a board where every post has to go through a committee before it can appear online --- or would you rather keep the current system that includes a mixture of the moderators, members self-policing themselves, and other members notifying the mods in the event a bad egg or two slips through the cracks?

"

I can’t speak for Vanbrig, but my issue with it was the motivation behind it, as well as the execution.

When someone’s name in a thread pretty much gets a post deleted, it’s not just being done because it’s a violation of the terms, there’s more to it. And the mods have pretty much confirmed thisas well saying that there are things we don’t and never will know about it. It’s selective.

And the execution was incredibly flawed, it’s one thing to lock thread which is usually the case and that’s ok, but threads were simply deleted. A whole preview thread for a show vanished, a thread that had a lot of information on the show. How can anyone that cares about this website and it’s content/information be ok with that? It’s one thing to delete random posts, a whole thread, quite different. Like I said in an earlier post, it would be similar to the King Kong production asking the NYT to erase their review because it wasn’t to their liking."

 

No, the KING KONG scenario really would not be at all similar.  A similar situation would be if Ben Brantley and Jesse Green traded jokes about the mental health of Christiani Pitts or repeatedly claimed that she is an unreliable person.  That's what was happening with Frozen,, and if you can't see the difference, then you're either "trolling" yourself, or you are being willfully ignorant of the facts.  I'm sure your precious "missing threads" will come back some day with the offending posts deleted. Until then, will not having them available at your fingertips really be life altering for you?

JSquared2 said: "Vanbrig I think you really need to pause, take a deep breath and think about what you're saying here. By the logic you are using, should society just throw in the toweland say "Well, we can't possibly catch EVERY pedophile online, so we might as well make it legal." Would you prefer a board where every post has to go through a committee before it can appear online --- or would you rather keep the current system that includes a mixture of the moderators, members self-policing themselves, and other members notifying the mods in the event a bad egg or two slips through the cracks?"

Holy moly, chill out. Don't put words in my mouth. Go back and take just a little bit to read through what I've said more carefully before you jump to comparing ANY of this with legal statutes related to serious crimes. A few things to note:

(1) What's with the "take a deep breath" nonsense? I don't need to take a deep breath, because I'm not offended by any of this, using angry language, etc. (even now, your post amuses me more than anything). I have, however, noticed that you often use phrases like "calm down," "dear one," etc. when debating others. So I'll see your suggestion to "take a deep breath" and raise you one of my own: Take some time to reflect on why you feel the need to speak down to others. 

(2) As far as your question goes: it's really not that difficult. I'd like to moderators to do the job they've said their going to do. Whether they want to make it a free-for-all, exercise a heavier hand, or whatever they choose, they should stick to it and be consistent. None of this wishy-washy "we'll look the other way on posts that have been reported multiple times over the course of a day while immediately deleting others that haven't violated anything." Again, not that hard.

The mods have even recently made a statement that basically acknowledges that this behavior has occurred in the past and making a commitment to change it. So I guess I don't have to think about what I was saying, because there was already validity in what I was saying. 

Updated On: 12/11/18 at 04:44 PM

NYadgal said: "There is, apparently, an ‘agreement’ in place, and the reason the actress reads these message boards is to make sure the agreement is being enforced. According to her Tweet.

It’s a great shame that so much history was deleted.

Sad days for those who care and believe that there is more good here than bad."

Wait...BroadwayWorld made an "agreement" with Patti Murin, and that "agreement" is now what's ruling this board? Wow. I was on BWW's side for all of this until I read that. That is not how to run a website. This is insane. BWW, would love an explanation on that agreement?

Thank you for that clarification.

BUT

Patti Murin’s Tweet “...They made some changes, but not enough.  I read them periodically to see if what we agreed upon is still being enforced...”

If her Tweet is misleading, that’s not fair to BWW.

Updated On: 12/12/18 at 05:36 PM

It's a good thing Lea Michele doesn't tweet about this board! There have been how many threads dedicated solely to topic of dragging her, both professionally and personally?  

They were all started by the same bitter person who has been mysteriously absent the past few days.  Hmm.....Again, how very telling.

I guess now if you make a comment about an employee of BWW--deleted--as mine just was.

No problem, as just learning the new rules. As well as spell check we'll now get a squiggly red line under anything that is slightly contentious--that will be the best and easiest way to keep every one in line.

Like getting tazered.

haterobics said: "GreeneStreet said: "And thats why Im leaving the boards."

Again? "

#CrazyPANTS

Gloaming said: "From my perspective, it was proper and necessary for BWW to shut down "that" thread in its entirety.

But we can rejoice that all 87 "Hello, Dolly" threads seem to have survived unscathed!"

 

All of a sudden I feel like putting on my Sunday clothes.

 

Updated On: 12/11/18 at 06:52 PM

natashalost said: "Hey, while the moderator is taking questions-- Last night Alan Henry (one of the other mods) said he would continue to answer any of our questions through PM if we would like. I messaged him but receivedno response, which is understandable, so I will repeat my questions here.

I just want to connect with other Frozen fans and share my love for this show on here but every time I do that the thread gets locked or removed altogether. I understand this is important in moderating the board and now that some of the users who were the ones who instigated these uncivil conversations have left the site this may no longer be a problem. However, I want to talk about scheduled absences and when understudies are on because I like to spread the love for understudies and I know others appreciate knowing who will be on for the performance they are seeing. How can I do this while avoiding the uncivil conversations that could provoke a moderator to lock a thread?"

I'm sorry, but aside from official announcements saying certain shows have cast alternates (DEH comes to mind), I don't believe an audience is ever entitled to know if a lead is out or not. You pay for the ticket, you come to the theater to see the show, and if a lead is out, that's how it works. You're not entitled to knowing that. I remember this also happening with Audra in Shuffle Along. An announcement was made for her as well as to when she would not be performing, and I think My Fair Lady did this as well. Aside from those exceptions, I'd go into a show with the expectation that I will see a great show. The sense of entitlement that we have developed is really sad. Has anyone considered that actors could get in trouble with the production? Get your ticket, see the show, and be thankful.