Something I should reiterate is the issue of just moving on. If someone posts something that severely impinges on your personal values, yet is not disallowed on this forum, move on. I vaguely recall those posts that obviously distress you - I’m sorry for it and don’t mean to rehash it.I had a, “WTF is kevin doing?” moment when reading it, but at the same time - as I mentioned before - this side of kevin is the one that reminds me of the guy at the bar - I’ve been subject to far worse. The context of those comments relative to this forum’s focus is not appropriate, no doubt. Whether I agree with the post or not, it’s there and unless those running the show do something about it, I just need to keep going - kinda like real life.
That is such BS Port Check your shit . The week of 11/15/ 15 . Not every month .
There was one one month before also. I provided the link. Check yours.
Then check CH and Google Mastro’s Penthouse and notice similar discussions in the past down to how many “roses” it costs.
And this is the crux of it.
Honestly I was under the impression that he had memory problems because he would always ask the same questions on the same topics over and over again. And back then I was more tolerant and would repeatedly answer him because I thought they were genuine questions.
Then he wrote and posted a few magnificent pieces and that’s when I realized he was just fucking with me.
And that’s when I ignored his posts.
I found the F bombs and punctuation annoying but I never complained to anyone about that.
It was the constant where to find certain girls at Mastro’s Penthouse Beverly Hills that was absurd.
And looking at those threads and looking at the vegan thread and several others, all of which I am guilty of, you wonder just maybe if the CH mods were right in being fine with letting a certain subset go. Myself included.
1 Like
I googled Mastros . Scrolled seven pages . Nothing stood out . No harm no foul . Just seemed to be a problem only for you .
Okay buddy.
Here is the Oct 15 thread. Literally 1 month to the 11/15/15 date you mentioned.
Here is a 10/15/2013 discussion once again and you can see Wayno’s response of just having had a discussion 2 weeks ago about the same topic:
1 Like
Same to you buddy .
But at every bar there is a point where even the best bartender or owner recognize that too many customers get annoyed by this one immature, loud guy and that they loose customers if he continuous to be as obnoxious. And so they ask him to be quieter or leave. Everything afterwards is just the decision of the guy and nobody else to blame (even though some people always try to create the impression that the guy is the poor victim)
Think of “bar” as a euphemistic metaphor. Whether it’s a bar, a sandlot football game, a pack of cyclers, a poker game, or hanging out in the backyard nursing cold ones where a bunch of guys are shooting the breeze, joking, lobbing put-downs at each other, etc. In this setting, kevin is rated PG.
And if you want to stick purely to a bar scenario, I can’t imagine this kind of stuff going on at the Polo Lounge-type places, but most other bars are so loud a frenetic that no one’s voice carries further than two feet. And kevin doesn’t seem to be the guy who to dismiss a bar keep’s advice and have himself removed. A person who walks away from FTC to avoid further conflict twith others doesn’t ring of thug, hooligan or trouble maker.
I don’t think kevin views himself as a victim. And if pro-kevin posters seem to be portraying him as a victim, maybe there is some truth to it. There are other posters who have a propensity to be acrid, snarky and disrespectful, making presumptive remarks. Yet they continue on. Is it the way they state it? Is it because they’ve laced it between substantive body? Is it because this forum is far more loose with restrictions? Whatever the case, no repercussions. And that’s fine, because it shows a level of restraint and tolerance that is sorely lacking in today’s society, particularly online.
Personally, I feel I can differentiate between someone who is just being a bit adolescent and someone who is being snarky and mean-spirited. kevin never posted in a way to directly snark, insult or demean another poster. Those insulted by what he stated seem to be more bothered by his violation of puritan-based ethics and social standards. I get that. At the same time, where do we draw the line? Do we eventually whittle down the group of posters to the Pope and archangels and then have them go at it to gain the “Holier than thou” trophy?
Determining who and what is inappropriate can be a slippery slope. I also think attempting to achieve a certain homogeneity makes things far too boring.
Compromise is the way to avoid conflict and reconcile differences.
An all or nothing approach only works if you hold all the cards.
@bulavinaka you want to discuss on a philosophical level at what point you draw the line (again with this black vs white, all or none, crossing a certain line thinking). It’s a basic individual vs community argument. The extent and limits of individual expression in society. What happens if everyone were just allowed to do what they want? A basic question discussed in a basic college philosophy course.
Kevin is free to come and go as he pleases. As is Servorg. As is JJ. As is you or I. He values his personal expression more than this community. That is his right and decision as a free individual.
But he seems to be the guy many people in bar roll their eyes and try to avoid and he is the guy many people who haven’t meet but heard about “help” them to make the decision to not visit the bar at all in the future.
Not a thug but as a person who is not interested in compromises when intetacting with other people. Bartender Ipse never asked him to leave but just asked him why he is so loud in this bar and Kevin decided to walk out - no big loss.
There are other disrespectful posters and everybody reacts differently to them - personally I can’t take their food related contributions ever serious if I can’t take other parts of their personality serious.
I assume the line is when Ipse gets the impression due to feedback that the benefit of poster like Kevin doesn’t outweight the disadvantage of his style to attract new people to this community. I don’t think FTC will survive for very long if it is just a small LA focused board with very few regular posters.
2 Likes
I don’t know if it is so much philosophical. The point has played out in this topic by kevin choosing to leave on his own accord (which is black and white where he holds no cards). People voiced their opinions, he probably felt it was better to not interface anymore based in the brooding conflicts, and everybody moved on.
So who do we voice up against next? That is my question. Sure, Popes and archangels push this into philosophical debate, but my feelings are, if kevin gets time under scrutiny, why don’t we do that to each and every person who is perceived by others to be rubbing others the wrong way? I’m a jerk for blathering on and digging my heels in. Person B is a jerk for bias and snark. Person C is a jerk for digging up little snippets from long ago that really seem meaningless and are only meant to be a petty, “I told you so.” Target me. I just can’t shut up. Govts do it all the time. Why don’t we behave in kind?
I think you overstate the issue of kevin in a bar. Again - consider it a euphemistic metaphor. If you are a bar keep or bar owner, you me feel otherwise, but dwelling on this seems pointless to me. Only those that have spent time with him could give a definitive answer.
Your second point is answered by your first point. Bar keep ipse couldn’t even get to the point to ask him to leave. kevin felt it better to leave so as to not create any more of a scene - by our overreacting to something I see as so trivial - consider it a preemptive strike. If you see kevin as being uncompromising, that’s your prerogative. I see his move as diffusing something he probably felt pretty bad about starting in the first place.
I guess we agree on folks who show little or no respects directly towards others. That’s a personal perspective and we all our own peeves. I can’t shut up and tend to be long-winded - I’m sure that’s a peeve to many.
Whether this community, this forum, has legs depends on factors which the founder of this site feels are important. It’s his ball, and he seems pretty open about sharing it with others. I can’t speak to the threshold as far as what numbers are needed and what-not to stay afloat. If singling out an individual and rehashing ad nauseum what happened how many months ago is going to attract more posters…
1 Like
Discourse’s flag system is the polite way to complain about disruptive posts. Based on the admin reports, in the past two months we’ve had only one user who regularly pissed people off to a significant degree.
I’d impose moderator post approval on such users if Discourse offered the option, but @codinghorror thinks that’s a bad idea:
I think this topic comes to life now and then due to the people who would like @kevin to post again, not because anyone particularly wants to rehash old discussions.
1 Like
Generally speaking, I think the Site Feedback category should have little or no effect on whether new people take part in the site proper.
Based on my 25+ years participating in and moderating online discussion systems, I think it’s important that regulars feel that they can express any opinion about the site. That’s the main purpose of this category.
2 Likes
Action, reaction, blah blah. 
This is a particularly snarky lot and everyone as received and delivered some degree of snark.
Not everyone has decided to pack up and leave.
I would even say most people self moderate so as not to generate another heated exchange.
That’s what people in a community do.
2 Likes
Agree on all points except…
Self-moderation is the key to being part of a community. That Japanese proverb/simile, “The nail that sticks out will be hammered” is too extreme in my thoughts. However, conforming within certain bounds certainly helps.
3 Likes
True, those that enjoy conflict do not self moderate.
That’s why I said “most” and not “all” 