# Politics and Moderation



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Hi Everyone,

I am speaking on behalf of all the moderators here.

We have really tried to keep Sailnet an open and friendly place to discuss sailing related things. We have also tried to maintain a separate Off Topic forum where members can go to discuss things that are not sailing related or may be too political for the mainstream sailing board. In general, we do not want to play the role of censors and allow as much 'free speech' as possible.

However, if or when the politics begin to seep into the mainstream forum, we have to make some judgment calls. Our decisions do not come easy and are generally debated (or overly debated!!) before we act. We want to be seen as fair and moderate to all the members, and this can at times be difficult as we may have strong opinions on the matters and we _know_ the members have strong opinions. Complicating this is that some discussions which are sailing related are inherently political in nature and bring out strong reactions from those with opposing views.

So we would like to ask all the members to be understanding if we request you to modify your postings or signatures. It is difficult for us to ask this because it is important that everyone sees us as never taking sides, either way. But it is even more important that everyone sees us as trying to keep the board as friendly and inviting as possible to the majority population. If we do reach out and ask you to tone it down or change your signature, please understand we do it reluctantly and out of necessity for all those who participate here. Another favor: If your signature could be interpreted as political in nature, please consider removing it so we don't have to ask or you don't offend others.

We're all friends here.

Brian and the Mod Squad


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

One more point for consideration here:

As I said, we are all friends. We need to make sure in our replies that we are thoughtful about how those comments are going to be received. You cannot inflect tone in an email, so it is important to really read through what you are about to submit before submitting it.

In essence, be respectful and thoughtful to your fellow SN'er. 

Thanks.

Brian


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

I think that some people forget that when they go outside of off topic, their signature goes with them.


----------



## Sabreman (Sep 23, 2006)

Keep up the great work. It is often thankless but for once, I'll say "thank you". SailNet is a unique site in an age of rude, offensive behavior.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Cheers mate. Good reminder.

Hoping margaritas never become political.


----------



## carl762 (Jan 11, 2010)

Great Thread.


----------



## jimgo (Sep 12, 2011)

I'll join in thanking you, Donna, and the others for your efforts. I like this place you help keep in order.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Civility is very important and the mods have done a good job of maintaining it in the regular threads and I support this direction, even though I abhor censorship. 

Discussions amongst people who have differing viewpoints are bound to occur and sometime become heated, but that can be ok as long as it isn't personal and there is no mob rule mentality to the decenters

I agree with continuing the OTH/ POL/ REL threads and I will state again by having a duplicitous way of enforcing civility allows for the aberrant behavior to occasionally leak to regular threads.

If the regular threads are to remain sterile of religion or politics then that should include avatars/ signatures/ sayings etc. This must be enforced without prejudice and favoritism across the board for it to be fair.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

People discuss politics here?
I quit in 2010, and I'm not going back. It got in the way of who I want to invite sailing with me.


----------



## sww914 (Oct 25, 2008)

Thanks.


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

Ohhh.......


----------



## benesailor (Dec 27, 2012)

Two thumbs up, keep up the good work. Good reminder for all of us to be more courteous to our fellow sailors. I know i have slipped up a few times. 
As they say, there is a time and place for everything.


----------



## Gregrosine (Feb 10, 2013)

I think this is a great site and I have been impressed at how civil and elpful everyone has been. Great job!


----------



## Pegu club (Jun 10, 2012)

You mods do a fine job, this is a pleasant place to come to.


----------



## downeast450 (Jan 16, 2008)

Well done. Done Well!

Down


----------



## Strait Shooter (Sep 28, 2011)

Uuuhhhhh, am I the only one being really entertained though?


----------



## OldCreek (Oct 21, 2011)

chucklesR said:


> People discuss politics here?
> I quit in 2010, and I'm not going back. It got in the way of who I want to invite sailing with me.


Exactly right.

I'm on one end of the spectrum and a lot of my friends are on the other...it would make for an awful, lonely place if we let it stand in our way.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

One thing about politics/off topic/gun threads is it makes this forum very USA centric.
That's fine if that's what the Mods want. But if you wish to become more international IMHO the politics tend to restrict it.


Mark


----------



## Lubrdink (Sep 1, 2011)

I support your efforts at walking the fine line of expression and moderation. St. Augustine said:
In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.

Thank you for giving us this great forum to enjoy our passion. Hopefully we can self regulate ourselves so that others don't have to.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> One thing about politics/off topic/gun threads is it makes this forum very USA centric.
> That's fine if that's what the Mods want. But if you wish to become more international IMHO the politics tend to restrict it.
> 
> Mark


I agree. I think the mods should establish a requirement that all political discourse on SN be restricted ONLY to Taiwanese politics.

Those folks know how to throw down:


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

Folks around here become excitable enough discussing anchors.

Posted in a gun thread once that was enough. How y'all wanna run that country of yours over there is up to you to figure out, i'm here for the sailing. Just keep Disneyland open, and your dollar down until I have ordered my new chartplotter from West Marine.


----------



## sidney777 (Jul 14, 2001)

04/22/2013 support for the moderators and not for the wanna be moderators-bosses.


----------



## HeartsContent (Sep 14, 2010)

It's great that there's a place that the poor folks that use tillers, and haven't learned that the Rocna anchor has the best holding of any out there and have not moved up to the pure pleasure of a roller furling main, refrigeration, air conditioning, radar and AIS on a fast and comfortable modern production boat rated for global circumnavigation and the paper charts have been replaced with electronics can feel comfortable posting.




Yah, I think I'm pretty funny, image what happens when you feed me beers!


----------



## misfits (Dec 9, 2011)

Thank you!


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

I appreciate the light touch moderators use here on SN (moderation in moderation). It's easy to avoid "fight club" threads (politics, guns, anchors, etc.), and objectionable people can always be put on your ignore list. That said, when people cross the line into outright personal attacks, or when they start spouting truly extreme positions, then mods do need to step in. 

I take part in CF as well, and while I appreciate that forum, I think their approach is a bit too heavy-handed at times. I think SN has, in general, found a better balance -- so thanks.


----------



## akavishon (Apr 29, 2007)

Is it still ok to bash stinkpotters?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

akavishon said:


> Is it still ok to bash stinkpotters?


It better be. :laugher


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

Can we discuss the politics of margaritaville?


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Now just wait a damn minute Brian. 

Are you suggesting sailors can be opinionated?

:laugher :laugher :laugher :laugher :laugher :laugher


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

chucklesR said:


> People discuss politics here?
> I quit in 2010, and I'm not going back. It got in the way of who I want to invite sailing with me.


Last year I declared our boat a "politics & conspiracy theory free zone".

Some people just can't help themselves, but eventually everybody got it and things were much happier as a result.


----------



## deltaten (Oct 10, 2012)

Someone once said "Don't discuss politics or religion in polite/mixed company".
I try to adhere to that edict.
This board is as "free" as one or two of the other, differing topic boards I visit regularly; due mostly to the philosophy of the Admin and moderators.
I fully support the "light touch" exhibited here. 

Thanks SN.... Well done!


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

On this one I am fully with Brian. The signature should be something that has to do with the profile of the poster, not a political statement unless this one is truly a very generically one and universally accepted.

The argument that they are displayed in sailing forums is a decisive one to veto political propaganda or political statements made that way on all forums.



I agree that this is a lot more fun, They are really enjoying themselves and I wonder who really cares, not about this but about what each one chose to put in his signature, even if it shows bad taste (that falls on the subscriber).


----------



## arf145 (Jul 25, 2007)

I appreciate how literally the moderators wield their title here. SN is a great place to hang, and both the citizens and the sheriffs are the reason.


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

I appreciate that the moderators of SN sometimes agonize over their responsibility, and I believe that they do an excellent (and usually thankless) job of maintaining civility.

The nature of all internet forums is that we are all faceless, can be somewhat anonymous, and our only presence to the wider audience is the ideas that we take the time to type for all to see.

A consequence of posting to a forum, as opposed to email or PM, is that posts are visible to anyone that views that thread. Thus, the posters are reaching a wider audience than simply the person to whom they may be responding. This one to many relationship tends to attract trolls. Quoting Wikipedia;


> In Internet slang, a troll (pron.: /ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is someone who posts inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.


*Any *part of a post can be considered disruptive, this includes the avatar (and I can think of a few examples), the custom user title, the body of the post, and the signature line. Any part of a post can detract from an otherwise valuable insight. I believe that other posters respect, and value constructive contribution. That is THE reason that I am here. My signature line (and I don't always include it) is a statement of my SAILING credentials.

I appreciate that there is an Off Topic thread, in that it gives the gun lobby, pro-life, abortionists, religious and political fanatics, and all their opponents rest a place where they can vent. Although, I believe that there are other forums, on other sites, where their contributions would be more appropriate. Kudos to SailNet and the mod's. for allowing this.

If someone takes offense to any part of my posts, please let me know in a PM. If I continued to offend, I expect that I would eventually be banned from the site.

The bottom line is that SailNet is supposed to be about *Sail*ing. If someone takes offense to a signature line, an avatar, the custom user title, or the body of a post, then chances are that it _is _offensive, and I believe that the moderators are doing the larger SailNet community a service to police them.


----------



## SimonV (Jul 6, 2006)

I always hit New Posts no politics, I did go there once or twice but its all US, I have no Idea what is going on so just like the rest of those there I have an opinion and my opinion is correct.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

chall03 said:


> Folks around here become excitable enough discussing anchors.
> 
> Posted in a gun thread once that was enough. How y'all wanna run that country of yours over there is up to you to figure out, i'm here for the sailing. Just keep Disneyland open, and your dollar down until I have ordered my new chartplotter from West Marine.


I Love your signature! Just for that, you get a FREE BANANA BREAD RECIPE!

Brian


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

JimMcGee said:


> Now just wait a damn minute Brian.
> 
> Are you suggesting sailors can be opinionated?
> 
> :laugher :laugher :laugher :laugher :laugher :laugher


Problem is that you people just don't understand I am always right. How many times do I have to keep telling you that!??? (smile)

Brian


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

PCP said:


> On this one I am fully with Brian.


Hang on... when have you and I ever disagreed????? (snicker)

Brian


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Thank you everyone for the very nice comments. Most of the thanks should go to the other mods as they have really been taking the brunt of everything as I have been travelling a lot (and will continue to).

The key point of all of this was that we may have to ask some of you to make some signature or post modifications. If or when we do, it is not that we agree or disagree with you. We are doing it because we feel it is the best thing for the forum as a whole.

Thanks again everyone.

Brian


----------



## Skipper Jer (Aug 26, 2008)

First off, a great big thanks to the moderators who keep the peace, Thank You.

Also I want to thank Al Gore for taking the initiative in creating the internet. I have developed thick skin since his creation has spread, Thank You Al Gore.

I have only complained once and PMed a poster once over what I considered an offensive totally off topic comment in a somewhat delicate thread. Since then my skin has grown another layer or two.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Cruisingdad said:


> I Love your signature! Just for that, you get a FREE BANANA BREAD RECIPE!
> 
> Brian


It was to be expected. Is signature is a *POLITICAL* one. You show reprehensible double standards in what regards Politics and this site

Regards

Paulo


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Thank you everyone for the very nice comments. Most of the thanks should go to the other mods as they have really been taking the brunt of everything as I have been travelling a lot (and will continue to).
> 
> The key point of all of this was that we may have to ask some of you to make some signature or post modifications. If or when we do, it is not that we agree or disagree with you. We are doing it because we feel it is the best thing for the forum as a whole.
> 
> ...


Brian,

I recently removed a signature similar to Slow and Steady's that was placed just to tweak him.
Some have accused me of being a troll or trolling. My present avatar is my attempt at a little humor. If you think it is offensive, I will remove it.

Paul T


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

I don't mean to speak for CD, but I find dabnis' avatar funny. You gots water and a boat!


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

eherlihy said:


> I don't mean to speak for CD, but I find dabnis' avatar funny. You gots water and a boat!


Well, thank you!!, that was my intent. The boat is virtually identical to one my Dad and I owned in our commercial salmon fishing venture, one of the dumbest things I have done. Luckily we got out of it alive and just about broke even after all the dust settled.

Paul T


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

PCP said:


> It was to be expected. Is signature is a *POLITICAL* one. You show reprehensible double standards in what regards Politics and this site
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


Bwahaha! Good one Paulo!!! Got me on that one!!

Brian


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Cruisingdad said:


> Problem is that you people just don't understand I am always right. How many times do I have to keep telling you that!??? (smile)
> 
> Brian


Umm, you live on a boat surrounded by water and you own a dog that swims like a cinder block.

I think we can say your judgement is questionable.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

dabnis said:


> Brian,
> 
> I recently removed a signature similar to Slow and Steady's that was placed just to tweak him.
> Some have accused me of being a troll or trolling. My present avatar is my attempt at a little humor. If you think it is offensive, I will remove it.
> ...


You're good Paul. But if you really want to get in my good graces, you will put:

CD IS THE BEST LOOKING AND SMARTEST MALE MODERATOR

in your signature. Plus, you get a free banana bread recipe!

HEHEHE!

Brian


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

JimMcGee said:


> Umm, you live on a boat surrounded by water and you own a dog that swims like a cinder block.
> 
> I think we can say your judgement is questionable.


HAHA! Plus, I am doing it with two kids. THat makes my judgement even MORE questionable!! I am the best looking and smartest moderator. I never said I had any common sense!!

Brian


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Cruisingdad said:


> HAHA! Plus, I am doing it with two kids. THat makes my judgement even MORE questionable!! I am the best looking and smartest moderator. I never said I had any common sense!!
> 
> Brian


I don't know Brian, I think there's one or two folks on here that wouldn't mind living your version of insanity. Give the pooch a scratch for me.


----------



## johnb23 (Apr 23, 2013)

Cruisingdad said:


> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I am speaking on behalf of all the moderators here.
> 
> ...


Thank you Brian for posting this. I am new here, but strong political opinions and other rhetoric and the sometimes angry even hateful responses wreck any forum for me. Much of it is based in ego and arrogance and it has no place among friends. Friendly is good. That is why I am here. 
thanks, 
johnb23


----------



## jfurlong (Apr 16, 2010)

While I hold some pretty strong political views, there are forums for that type of thing. This forum is for people who love sailing, a common bond that overcomes political disagreements. If one wishes to argue politics that are a multitude of forums that would welcome the discourse.


----------



## johnnyquest37 (Feb 16, 2012)

I'll echo all the others' praise of the moderators. This is one ofthe few sites that actually has decorum. The posters tend to police themselves, as is expected in polite society. When that fails, the moderators are quick to step in and do so in reasonable way. 

Asking folks to remove inflammatory signature lines is more than reasonable, IMHO.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Cruisingdad said:


> HAHA! Plus, I am doing it with two kids. THat makes my judgement even MORE questionable!! I am the best looking and smartest moderator. *I never said I had any common sense*!!
> 
> Brian


FINALLY. Your head is starting to come down out of the clouds. Let's hope your ego catches up.

:laugher


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

DRFerron said:


> FINALLY. Your head is starting to come down out of the clouds. Let's hope your ego catches up.
> 
> :laugher


Why is everyone so mean to me?? I am simply the most humble, nicest (and best looking and smartest) male moderator on this forum.

When I read something like that, it makes me want to post something nasty in TDW's signature line while he is asleep.

(evil laugh)

Brian


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Cruisingdad said:


> Why is everyone so mean to me?? I am simply the most humble, nicest (and best looking and smartest) male moderator on this forum.
> 
> When I read something like that, it makes me want to post something nasty in TDW's signature line while he is asleep.
> 
> ...


Wait. I say something mean to you and one of the *other* mods pays the consequences? Nice. I'd have aimed some darts long ago had I known.


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> You're good Paul. But if you really want to get in my good graces, you will put:
> 
> CD IS THE BEST LOOKING AND SMARTEST MALE MODERATOR
> 
> ...


Brian,

So noted

Paul T


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

DRFerron said:


> Wait. I say something mean to you and one of the *other* mods pays the consequences? Nice. I'd have aimed some darts long ago had I known.


HAHA!

Ya never know when I might just sneak one in on TDW. THe poor fella lives in fear of me, FEAR I SAY!

Brian


----------



## canucksailorguy (Mar 2, 2006)

Some good laughs in this thread... Having recently been both a sinner and a saint in the mods' opinion in a controversial thread, I truly appreciate how they handle difficult issues here. Compared to CF, where the mods believe they can do no wrong, and ACT THAT WAY, SN is a much more enjoyable place to hang. Special thanks to Faster, for whom I have apparently been more than a handful in my last couple of outings. I promise I'll try harder. [edit: I don't promise I'll succeed].


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

I've yet to understand the thinking that "off topic" means one can, and should, ignore manners, civility, and general decorum.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

Mods,

I believe, in vBulletin, you can easily fix any problem signatures by clicking on the users name. When the drop down appears you should see BAN, EDIT SIGNATURE etc... Simple as that... It would be nice if members would do it on their own, to avoid issues, but that does not always happen.

Thanks for all you do, I know the pay is not commensurate...


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

PBzeer said:


> I've yet to understand the thinking that "off topic" means one can, and should, ignore manners, civility, and general decorum.


How true. Maybe there should be a category for the uncouth posters. What should it be called?


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

dabnis said:


> Brian,
> 
> So noted
> 
> Paul T


This is what I tried to do

Paul T


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Just wanted to weigh in with 'thanks' for the thanks... by and large we have a very good group here on Sailnet... it's the only sailing forum I need. 

Uh... Paul/Dabnis.... about that signature. It's provocative, perhaps libelous and just wee bit too much suck-up.. I think it's gotta go....


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

dabnis said:


> This is what I tried to do
> 
> Paul T


Why the well you want to announce you are a troll

I guess you will be better without the advertise

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

> Maybe there should be a category for the uncouth posters. What should it be called?


Let the one's who call it a sewer, have one.


----------



## paradiselostparrot (Apr 16, 2013)

Some of the Mods at in the past have very strong opinions and many of those opinions would not be called centrist or moderate by any means. Something you might want to discuss among yourselves.I have only recently come back to this site after a long long absence. Your "rep" is poor. But I have come back to see for myself. Certainly Sailnet has lost much business over the years because of this. Dont shoot the messenger. I am am just repeating what I hear constantly on other boards.

Good Luck


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

Faster said:


> Just wanted to weigh in with 'thanks' for the thanks... by and large we have a very good group here on Sailnet... it's the only sailing forum I need.
> 
> Uh... Paul/Dabnis.... about that signature. It's provocative, perhaps libelous and just wee bit too much suck-up.. I think it's gotta go....


So noted, gone. I had to bribe Brian so I wouldn't get blown off the air.

Paul T


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

paradiselostparrot said:


> Some of the Mods at in the past have very strong opinions and many of those opinions would not be called centrist or moderate by any means. Something you might want to discuss among yourselves.I have only recently come back to this site after a long long absence. Your "rep" is poor. But I have come back to see for myself. Certainly Sailnet has lost much business over the years because of this. Dont shoot the messenger. I am am just repeating what I hear constantly on other boards.
> 
> Good Luck


Meh. We're doing just fine.

BTW - SN rocks.


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

I think the guy promoting gun control with every post, should have that part deleted.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

Actually, this thread (for the most part) strikes me as group think. I consider a signature to be like the ads on the side of forum or blog or a bumper sticker; read them if you like, or don't. It's not a person coming up to you and saying "I think...."

Is our collective skin grown so thin that we're offended by non-profane bumper stickers? Certainly any political sticker would be improper, by that measure.


----------



## T37Chef (Oct 9, 2006)

CD post these things once in a while just so folks will say thanks, makes him feel good after looking at himself in the mirror every morning.

While you're doing all this thinking ...could you rename the off topic P&R section the "sewer"? Call it what it is


----------



## Brent Swain (Jan 16, 2012)

T37Chef said:


> CD post these things once in a while just so folks will say thanks, makes him feel good after looking at himself in the mirror every morning.
> 
> While you're doing all this thinking ...could you rename the off topic P&R section the "sewer"? Call it what it is


Does that mean that nothing else he sees in that mirror will make him feel good about himself?


----------



## Rezz (Oct 12, 2012)

First, a thanks for the original post.

Second, I can appreciate the reason for having a politics/etc forum. I don't, however, think that it is necessary. This is, first and foremost, a sailing forum. This isn't a politics, gun, war, ethnocentric, or religious forum. The problem lies in the differing of opinions and ideas that, by their very nature, are prone to cause dissent. While we may be passionate about certain beliefs, there is a time and a place for those beliefs. When discussing sailing, only factual references to a region's politics and how it affects sailing would be acceptable, including reputable sources cited for information. Comparing that scenario to "I heard that island is run by fascists, and they confiscated my boat last time I was there and strung me up by my toenails and beat me like a pinata because I came from a wealthier country" is unacceptable.

I have been on other forums where politics, religion, and other sensitive topics are verboten. If a post crosses that line, it is automatically deleted and a warning is issued. It has worked very well, and I continue to love that forum. Don't get me wrong - opinions can still run strong, and conversations can become heated, but at least that happens about the original purpose of the forum.

That being said, who do catamarans like flipping over spontaneously, and why are monos only half a real boat?


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

T37Chef said:


> While you're doing all this thinking ...could you rename the off topic P&R section the "sewer"? Call it what it is


I don't think its necessary to ridicule, demean, or make the people on SN who like to occasionally post in the Politics/ Religion and Other threads feel less than for doing so

It is your right to refrain from reading or posting there but believe you have some sort of superiority or "high road" by creating a caste system singling out as posters as "less than" by designating the place people share opinions a "sewer" is unnecessary.

My friend you and I will respectfully always disagree about this and because we don't agree doesn't mean I have to go to the "back of the bus".


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

Resolute_ZS said:


> Second, I can appreciate the reason for having a politics/etc forum. I don't, however, think that it is necessary. This is, first and foremost, a sailing forum.


I participate in the off topic and politics forums and I don't agree with what you said. This site is about more than sailing, and it is nice to have a place where people can just talk about whatever they want, discuss the days events, etc. Even the arguments foster a sense of community in my opinion. Besides, without the politics forum a lot of people would never understand how wrong they are.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

Resolute_ZS said:


> Second, I can appreciate the reason for having a politics/etc forum. I don't, however, think that it is necessary. This is, first and foremost, a sailing forum. This isn't a politics, gun, war, ethnocentric, or religious forum. The problem lies in the differing of opinions and ideas that, by their very nature, are prone to cause dissent. While we may be passionate about certain beliefs, there is a time and a place for those beliefs. When discussing sailing, only factual references to a region's politics and how it affects sailing would be acceptable, including reputable sources cited for information. Comparing that scenario to "I heard that island is run by fascists, and they confiscated my boat last time I was there and strung me up by my toenails and beat me like a pinata because I came from a wealthier country" is unacceptable.
> 
> I have been on other forums where politics, religion, and other sensitive topics are verboten. If a post crosses that line, it is automatically deleted and a warning is issued. It has worked very well, and I continue to love that forum. Don't get me wrong - opinions can still run strong, and conversations can become heated, but at least that happens about the original purpose of the forum.


Just clicking like isn't good enough. +1



wind_magic said:


> I participate in the off topic and politics forums and I don't agree with what you said. This site is about more than sailing, and it is nice to have a place where people can just talk about whatever they want ...


I don't agree. This place at least should be about sailing. The emotions and disagreements that develop in OT/Pol/Rel do demonstrably effect the discussions in the main sailing forums.

There are plenty of other places for political discussion. Why should SailNet provide another place for those conversations? I continue to believe that the best thing SailNet can do to secure it's place in the big four sailing fora is to delete OT/Pol/Rel.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Its one of life's irreconcilable disagreements, to have or not to have OT. I had a couple of discussions in there years ago, but its clearly for those that find those issues to be sport, not open minded discussion. The really clash isn't between two opposing views that find it to be sport to disagree, its between one that finds it to be sport and another that is trying to be rational. Boom.

I have a member on my ignore list that posted a factually incorrect statement that I challenged until they eventually admitted it was wrong. However, in their admission they wanted to continue the argument over something else and I refused to engage beyond the point I wanted to clarify. They went apoplectic when I wouldn't continue the fight. It was sport. I avoid OT like the plague now.

There is no doubt that it spills over into the sailing threads. Occasionally, someone will post a scathing retort to an actual sailing topic and suggest all kinds of stubborness, etc, that isn't in the thread. It had to come from previous sword fighting elsewhere.


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

Brent Swain said:


> I think the guy promoting gun control with every post, should have that part deleted.


The precipitating cause of this thread.


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

pdqaltair said:


> Actually, this thread (for the most part) strikes me as group think. I consider a signature to be like the ads on the side of forum or blog or a bumper sticker; read them if you like, or don't. It's not a person coming up to you and saying "I think...."
> 
> Is our collective skin grown so thin that we're offended by non-profane bumper stickers? Certainly any political sticker would be improper, by that measure.


OK..... I can come up with a myriad of "signature lines" that I would like to use that express some of my political, secular and religious viewpoints. I do believe that if I used them however, I would likely be on the receiving end of "letter bombs" to say the least.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

Speculation on my part, but I suspect that SailNet administration (not the moderators) provide OT/Pol/Rel areas because that increases traffic and user accounts, which in turn helps them sell ads. I offer that if OT/Pol/Rel is deleted SailNet can make the case to advertisers that the audience is more likely to include those that will click through and buy products. 

Instead, OT/Pol/Rel generates a hostile environment that drives away people that will buy and encourages people that don't.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

I tend to agree with Resolute and Auspicious.

There are people on this forum, who don't contribute to sailing discussions at all, and live exclusively in the OT forums. Brenda Walker is a prime example of that.

If you want to have OT/Political/Religious discussions that do not relate to sailing, there are forums specifically for that, plus you can have these OT discussions via PM, _and_ the live chat feature now available on Sailnet.

I know the real purpose of the OT forums: It's a place to contain the "static", from those people who simply can't help themselves from engaging in these kinds of discussions, because moderators don't want to drive traffic away from the forums, or alienate some people.

It doesn't help that taxes and politics (two very inflammatory topics) do tend to affect the sailing community. That's how our otherwise productive discussions tend to get de-railed. I don't mind discussing taxes and politics _as they pertain to sailing_, but once we get off that path, I just vacate the forum and find something else to do.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

I enjoy the OT forum and view it as sport, just as debating and trials can be viewed as sport.

Sailors are by and large a fairly intelligent and successful group, so I especially appreciate the divergent, articulate viewpoints. You cannot always find that on other forums. It also helps to know some of the other members here better through their worldview and politics. At least we all share an interest in sailing, so we can't be all bad.

It is no big deal to me. I am friends with most opposing counsel in my trial work. Most of us accept the fact that you can have a difference of opinion and heated arguments without being personally adversarial.

Some posters should probably stay out of the OT forums because they have too much invested in their viewpoints, have thin skin, or take everything too personally. Those persons veer too far into personal attacks and every dispute becomes personal instead of substantive. You can tell they are seething behind the language in their posts.

Since SailNet is overall fairly highly moderated and civil, it helps to have a subforum where we can blow off some steam at each other. The OT forums add to, rather than detract from, SailNet.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

This is the "Sailnet Community". How do I know this? It says it right on top. Communities are composed of many, and diverse, folks. Some here, it would seem, have no interest in life if it doesn't relate to sailing. And that's all well and good. I'm certainly not going to demean, denigrate, or otherwise put them down for what seems to me, a very narrow focus. That's merely ... and only ... my perception. There's nothing that makes it the "right", or "correct" perception. 

The point being, not everyone who likes sailing, is the same. Some are more invested, some less. Some enjoy talking about things other than sailing, with the people they "know" here on Sailnet, rather than go off to a different single interest forum. That's why there's an off topic forum. If you're a single interest, sailing only person, off topic is something you have to go out of your way to get to. Something you don't even have to deal with, unless somebody with more emotion than sense, drags it into the sailing area.

Evidently ... no, let's be blunt, obviously, there are those here, who don't want anyone in the community that doesn't think like they do about what constitutes a community. How that differs from the "hostility" they cite in off topic is a mystery.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

jameswilson29 said:


> I am friends with most opposing counsel in my trial work. Most of us accept the fact that you can have a difference of opinion and heated arguments without being personally adversarial.


James, I enjoy a good discussion with others who feel as you do. But as we stumbled toward last year's election it became harder and harder to have debate without rancor. I was taken aback at some of the positions and conspiracy theories I heard from otherwise intelligent people.

These days I choose carefully who I engage in philosophical and political discussions. The boat is a "politics free zone" and I'm in the camp that would like to see SailNet go that way. But given the traffic that OT gets and the financial reality of running an online business I can't fault the folks at SailNet for keeping it around.

PS. My political statement is in my signature.


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

PCP said:


> Why the well you want to announce you are a troll
> 
> I guess you will be better without the advertise
> 
> ...


Just did it to tweak Bent, from Australia. He sometimes refers to me as "a crazy old man". He may be right.

Paul T


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

On political threads, I try to use this as my policy.


"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death, your right to say it."



And, it is easy to get sidetracked from the reason we come here, sailing.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

BubbleheadMd said:


> I know the real purpose of the OT forums: It's a place to contain the "static", from those people who simply can't help themselves from engaging in these kinds of discussions, *because moderators don't want to drive traffic away from the forums, or alienate some people*.


I just want to comment on this for a moment so there is no misunderstanding:

As a moderator, it is our job to keep the peace. It is not our job to increase or decrease traffic. That is up to the ownership, and indirectly up to the members. As moderators, we have zero financial interest in Sailnet. Nothing. Notta. We get zilch - not even a red cent. We do this as a way to give back to the community we are all passionate about. As a plus, though, I do get to harass my fellow moderators which is worth millions to me.

Brian


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

T37Chef said:


> CD post these things once in a while just so folks will say thanks, makes him feel good after looking at himself in the mirror every morning.


Not entirely true, I post these things once in a while just so folks will say thanks, makes me feel good after KISSING myself in the mirror every morning.

Geez, if you are gonna get personal, at least tell the whole truth!! By the way, how's that Chicago Cutlery holding up, Chef?

HEHE!

Brian


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Well I see all my esteemed friends are lining up on the other side of this

You guys make me laugh too because you display on this one topic the same attitudes and assumptions which can be prevalent in the OTH/REL/POL thread which you rail against. Its just that this time you think you cause is more just so its ok. Your intolerance of others in this instance who dare to have political opinions in your precious space will increase to topics which you don't want to talk about. In this case your intolerance is not even masked behind PC.

It isn't enough that these topics have been given there own special place, now the move afoot is to censor them out of the whole site.

It isn't enough that you can just ignore ad not go in these areas, you make broad assumptions and statements about spillover. So either you are going into these areas ( which clearly you are predisposed to upset you) or you make unfounded statements.

You are displaying the same intolerance you speak against.

You make assumptions and single out that SN only does the OTH/POL/REL thread for money. ( I got news for you the only reason they have any thread is for money). SN will ban any thread which will cause them to lose that ( Tartan for example). Doing things for money is not something new. We all do it. Some of you benefit monetarily from posting on this site by displaying your names and getting them known. No harm in that, but lets not castigate others for doing the same. 

You want to call people names just like they do--- Lets call people who post there the sewer for instance. Now that's grown up and civil as you look down you nose at them as less thans. 

You want to make unsubstantiated statements like there is spillover into the regular forums. Give me examples...specific ones. You are painting with a broad brush here. You paint everyone who posts in the other forum as lepers. 

I see a lot of "assertions" but I see no proof to any spillover. Lots of conjecture and assumption. 

So do you want to remove the topics next which are controversial such as anchors, sailing to Cuba, Active Captain, whose town is the sailing Capitol from these forums.
The Bounty thread was not in the POL/REL/?OTH forum but had many similar nasty personal posts

There already is a site where you can go where there is complete censorship-CF,

I know this next statement will not be popular, but just think about it

So if you think that the attitudes are out of control in the POL/OTH/REL forums point the finger in the correct direction. What is the main difference between there and other threads. Same posters many times in all threads. The difference is the way the rules are enforced by the MODS. By their own admission too. There is no need to get rid of the threads if you have these thoughts of spillover, just ask the MODS to be more consistent.
I really don't want to hear we don't have enough time. Get more MODS if that is the case.

I love the mods here. I appreciate what they do. I can extol them when they do well. But I will criticize them when they don't whether they are volunteers or not. 

The MODS by allowing a double standard on the same site when it comes to civility have helped allow the attitudes in the OTH/POL/REL threads. I don't believe it spills over as I see no proof of that. You cant be inconsistent with your children or employees like this, so how do you think it works here.

I like SN and am passionate. I post a lot on here. I am not a marine professional so I have no benefits other than the friendships and knowledge I have either learned or helped with. I have opinions yes, strong ones sometimes. I can be a prickly poster if you treat me that way. I can be the opposite too if you treat me that way.

It is a sailing forum so you should have to post on the sailing part too ( most do BTW). 

Just because it isn't something you want to do doesn't mean to get rid of it. Just don't go in. Don't ridicule the people who do. All are sailors...so you want to get rid of sailors...or just the ones who disagree with you?


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Cruisingdad said:


> Not entirely true, I post these things once in a while just so folks will say thanks, makes me feel good after KISSING myself in the mirror every morning....
> 
> Brian


EEEWWWWWWW..


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)




----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

dabnis said:


> This is what I tried to do
> 
> Paul T


What happen to that awesome signature line? Faster deleted that, didn't he? Well, you deserve a recipe for trying!!

Brian


----------



## Skipper Jer (Aug 26, 2008)

Think I'll use Group9's latest post as my signature line. 
So, what do you think about that moderators?


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

I agree with the author of the following.

"It's an age old phrase that many people use - "You shouldn't talk about religion or politics." Why is that? The obvious answer is that they can cause conflict. But it doesn't have to be that way. Like most important topics, religion and politics are positions that are held tightly by many individuals who have strong convictions. That's okay. But that doesn't mean that we should ignore these potentially volatile topics all together. Because of their great importance, shouldn't that be more reason to discuss them lovingly and with great respect? Can't we speak passionately and lovingly and come out on opposite ends of an issue and still be friends? 
Maybe people who say that you shouldn't talk about religion or politics are afraid of having their worldview examined. If your beliefs can't stand up to the scrutiny of others, are they really worth holding? If I've done my homework and I am confident in my beliefs, I'm not going to be offended at hearing an opposing perspective. We can ultimately disagree, but neither of us should be offended if we are confident in our position. I suspect that many people have not given a lot of thought about their position, and therefore they feel insecure when someone simply questions them. A thoughtful discussion is a great way to reason through what you believe, the problem is many people haven't thought through the issue because the discussions are not taking place. Instead we desire to be blissfully happy in our shallow conversations about trite topics such as the weather, sports, and celebrity gossip, because heaven forbid, we may disagree with someone. I don't think we should neglect the weightier issues of life and simply stick with lighthearted chit-chat only."

"Never Talk About Religion Or Politics"


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

knothead said:


> I agree with the author of the following.
> 
> "It's an age old phrase that many people use - "You shouldn't talk about religion or politics." Why is that? The obvious answer is that they can cause conflict. But it doesn't have to be that way. Like most important topics, religion and politics are positions that are held tightly by many individuals who have strong convictions. That's okay. But that doesn't mean that we should ignore these potentially volatile topics all together. Because of their great importance, shouldn't that be more reason to discuss them lovingly and with great respect? Can't we speak passionately and lovingly and come out on opposite ends of an issue and still be friends?
> Maybe people who say that you shouldn't talk about religion or politics are afraid of having their worldview examined. If your beliefs can't stand up to the scrutiny of others, are they really worth holding? If I've done my homework and I am confident in my beliefs, I'm not going to be offended at hearing an opposing perspective. We can ultimately disagree, but neither of us should be offended if we are confident in our position. I suspect that many people have not given a lot of thought about their position, and therefore they feel insecure when someone simply questions them. A thoughtful discussion is a great way to reason through what you believe, the problem is many people haven't thought through the issue because the discussions are not taking place. Instead we desire to be blissfully happy in our shallow conversations about trite topics such as the weather, sports, and celebrity gossip, because heaven forbid, we may disagree with someone. I don't think we should neglect the weightier issues of life and simply stick with lighthearted chit-chat only."
> ...


Hello my old friend!!! I am sorry we never got back together in St Pete. Please tell your beautiful bride we said hi. Enjoyed the talk and beers.

Brian


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> What happen to that awesome signature line? Faster deleted that, didn't he? Well, you deserve a recipe for trying!!
> 
> Brian


No, I deleted it and my avatar myself. TDW is not a big fan of my posts so I was afraid he would blow me off the air!!

Paul T


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

dabnis said:


> No, I deleted it and my avatar myself. TDW is not a big fan of my posts so I was afraid he would blow me off the air!!
> 
> Paul T


Wombats are large rodents. What did you expect??

(HEHE!)

Brian


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Wombats are large rodents. What did you expect??
> 
> (HEHE!)
> 
> Brian


From TDW:

#7 (permalink) 02-04-2013 - Add Post To Favorites 
tdw 
Super Fuzzy Moderator Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 11,498 
Rep Power: 10

Re: Why high performance cars should be banned

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"What a stupid stupid thread. Unbelievable that anyone can post this garbage. "

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/polit...-why-high-performance-cars-should-banned.html

I was not surprised when he said my post was "stupid" & "garbage". Generally, when someone dis-agrees with you they don't offer compliments.

Paul T


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Speaking only for myself, I don't see a problem with requiring all avatars (and the text) and signature lines to be sailing related. It is a Sailing site first and foremost, and users should identify themselves in relation to sailing. (Granted, this could inflict some pain on CD's ego, but that's a small (very small) price to pay.

There are some humorous signature lines that aren't really sailing related, but do reflect a sense of the person's personality (rather than beliefs, etc.), and some discretion would be necessary. But all in all, I don't think it's an imposition on anyone to use the self-identification features in a sailing related way. After all, we all came here as sailors.

Just my 2¢'s worth.


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

chef2sail:1020770 said:


> Well I see all my esteemed friends are lining up on the other side of this
> 
> You guys make me laugh too because you display on this one topic the same attitudes and assumptions which can be prevalent in the OTH/REL/POL thread which you rail against. Its just that this time you think you cause is more just so its ok. Your intolerance of others in this instance who dare to have political opinions in your precious space will increase to topics which you don't want to talk about. In this case your intolerance is not even masked behind PC.
> 
> ...


Yea man, the intolerant shouting down the minority. THAT'S politics at its finest. Why ignore when you can destroy?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

I like short posts.


----------



## blowinstink (Sep 3, 2007)

smackdaddy said:


> I like short posts.


Me too.


----------



## fallard (Nov 30, 2009)

Ditto


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

While catching up on today's posts, all I can say is nothing seems to have actually changed as a result of this thread.


----------



## blowinstink (Sep 3, 2007)

In all seriousness (really???) I have to say (really???) that here on SN we seem to spend more time arguing about what needs to change on the site -- while on CF (where they have all sorts of rules and no OT / Pol section) they wind up arguing over OT / Pol and how to moderate it. So, it seems to me that our biggest problem is that we don't know how good we've got it!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Hey everybody, all joking aside, the point of this thread was not to change anything or get any cudos, though we definitely appreciate them. We just wanted to remind everyone that there may come times when we have to alter sigs or posts that are political in nature and we would appreciate your understanding.

That's all. Now, can we get back to making fun of TDW? That is much more enjoyable!!

Brian


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Hey everybody, all joking aside, the point of this thread was not to change anything or get any cudos, though we definitely appreciate them. We just wanted to remind everyone that there may come times when we have to alter sigs or posts that are political in nature and we would appreciate your understanding.
> 
> That's all. Now, can we get back to making fun of TDW? That is much more enjoyable!!
> 
> Brian


That would be fun, but he has the big desk

Paul T


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

Cruisingdad said:


> Hello my old friend!!! I am sorry we never got back together in St Pete. Please tell your beautiful bride we said hi. Enjoyed the talk and beers.
> 
> Brian


Hi Brian, Hope you're well. We'll catch up next time.

Just got a visit from Bill Archer. He is doing great and has decided, as soon as the remainder of his doctors sign off, to go sailing. 
Jen sends her best.

Happy sailing,
Steve


----------



## paradiselostparrot (Apr 16, 2013)

smackdaddy said:


> Meh. We're doing just fine.
> 
> BTW - SN rocks.


Are you saying you don't have a poor rep?
I don't understand the answer.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

paradiselostparrot said:


> Are you saying you don't have a poor rep?
> I don't understand the answer.


I don't understand your point.

BTW, there was a member here named ParadiseParrot. He ended up pissing off half the members here, not to mention one of the moderators, before finally being shown his way to the door. Funny that. Just curious, before I pull IP addresses, if you might have been around during that time? We still have his IP address, incidentally. Not a cousin of yours, is he? Your name brings suspicion... but hey, the world is filled with parrots! They are everywhere. Some are fun to watch and listen to, while others like to take a high limb and crap on others when they walk by. Just hope you two don't happen to be talking from the same branch. Because if you did happen to remember seeing him when you looked in that mirror in your cage, yet you did enjoy hanging around Sailnet, I would consider the unfortunate reality that not all Parrots learn to talk. Some just hang around on their perch, watch you quietly behind the bars, and observe the world around them in utter silence. In that way, they are often ignored, and ignorance is bliss. But when they start talking, they gain attention. When they gain attention, well, so does my IP checker and subsequent ban and IP blocking from an ISP should they be the same person or in the same general neighborhood.

Ponder that metaphor for a while in silence, please, ParadiseParrot.

Brian


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Dabnis,
You should work out the difference between an opinion, that your post was doubly stupid, and censorship or moderation. I don't believe I censored your doubly stupid post did I ? No, I simply opined that it was doubly stupid. 
Now I dare say that there is many a Dabnis post that I disagree with yet they remain intact do they not ? 
So fear not. If it is within my generally liberal (sorry for using such language) interpretation of the SailNet Scriptures then you can say what you like. 
Cheers
Andrew B

ps - someone mentioned the word Dill and that Dill referred to male genitalia. Wrong. A Dill is simply an all purpose idiot.



dabnis said:


> From TDW:
> 
> #7 (permalink) 02-04-2013 - Add Post To Favorites
> tdw
> ...


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

just want to thanks all the mods. fairly new to this forum but it's become an addiction. they say you might as well be dead ( and well may be) ifyou don't learn something new every day. this place helps keep me off that hook. thanks again.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> We just wanted to remind everyone that there may come times when we have to alter sigs or posts that are political in nature and we would appreciate your understanding.
> 
> Brian


It also appears that posts get censored or eliminsted without explaination even though they are not political or religious in nature.

It has just happened to a few of mine

Could you explain why that might happen? Can we have a little transparency in the midst of the kambaya.


----------



## Skipper Jer (Aug 26, 2008)

Maybe I am an insensitive clod, or just plain obtuse but could someone post a list of 
offending signatures and avatars? I really can't recall any avatars or signatures I have recoiled in horror upon seeing.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

chef2sail said:


> It also appears that posts get censored or eliminsted without explaination even though they are not political or religious in nature.
> 
> It has just happened to a few of mine
> 
> Could you explain why that might happen? Can we have a little transparency in the midst of the kambaya.


Such as...


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Captainmeme said:


> Maybe I am an insensitive clod, or just plain obtuse but could someone post a list of
> offending signatures and avatars? I really can't recall any avatars or signatures I have recoiled in horror upon seeing.


They are or were there. However, they may not have been offensive to you. They may not have been offensive to many others. But to some, who pressed the Report Post button, they were. And the reality is that they don't have a place on a sailing forum anyways. As has been noted, we are one of the few sailing forums that even have a OT. The reason for that is to keep that kind of stuff IN there, not out.

Brian


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

Cruisingdad said:


> They are or were there. However, they may not have been offensive to you. They may not have been offensive to many others. But to some, who pressed the Report Post button, they were. And the reality is that they don't have a place on a sailing forum anyways. As has been noted, we are one of the few sailing forums that even have a OT. The reason for that is to keep that kind of stuff IN there, not out.
> 
> Brian


PLEASE don't get rid off "Off-Topic." It is quite different from that same sort of discussion on non-sailing boards, no doubt because of the different nature of the folks that post here. I find it very entertaining, though I only seldom post there. True, it is a place where thick skins are advisable. On the other hand the person is not in front of you and is easily ignored, unlike a neighbor or wife; thus, it is a fun place to hone rhetoric. I consider it a highlight and is often what brings me back.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

pdqaltair said:


> PLEASE don't get rid off "Off-Topic." ... I consider it a highlight and is often what brings me back.


Hmmm. If you're returning more for the OT section than for the sailing topics, are we doing something wrong?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Cruisingdad said:


> Such as...


CD, it seems the entire Active Captain thread vanished. I'm not going to get emotionally attached to any thread, so I'm sure there was a reason. It's odd, however, that a thread isn't just locked.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Usually when a thread disappears it is because it was so incendiary that the moderators didn't want any remnants of it around or, as was the case with the AC thread, there was a lot of behind the scenes discussion and we needed to put it in a holding tank out of site to give us time to discuss without additional posts making things worse. In that case, it doesn't always mean the thread won't be plunked back in for general viewing, just that we need some breathing room to sort things out.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Roger that.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

DRFerron said:


> Hmmm. If you're returning more for the OT section than for the sailing topics, are we doing something wrong?


This has been an infinitely debated topic for the entire 5 years I've been here. SNOT serves a very important purpose. It gives sailors a place to talk and fight about stuff that they're interested in that's not sailing related (be it politics, religion, or just fighting). But, _they're still sailors_.

If a forum is ONLY about sailing topics, it can get boring. The way SNOT is set up is just about perfect. It's completely hidden from non-members, it's insanely easy to avoid for non-interested members, and it's lightly moderated but still maintained so things don't go completely off the rails. It's really pretty perfect.

The issue is just as CD has stated it. SNOTs need to be able to chill their kung fu when they come up on deck. If they just can't do it because they've gotten too worked up down below and bash everyone in sight, then they should be flicked.

When I first came out of FC (the first thread I became interested in when I first joined - and which was squarely OT) and into the sailing topics, the OT-style fighting continued - from me and most of the others that I'd been going round with. But after a while, it all died down. Now I rarely hang out in SNOT. I'm more interested in the sailing than the fighting...for now (I do reserve the right to jump back in the ring as needed).

So, it's simple. Keep SNOT. Lots of the sailors around here love it.

And SNOTters, have a little self-control. The style of SNOT snippery that is infinitely entertaining for you guys down below is really tiresome on deck.

Kind of like this guy:






(bl - I think I stole this video from you. You used on me one time. Booyah!)


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

DRFerron said:


> Hmmm. If you're returning more for the OT section than for the sailing topics, are we doing something wrong?


a. If this were the off-topic forum I could flog you for misquoation; I said "often" not "more for the OT section than for the sailing topics." We should always be careful with misquotations and distortions of meaning. I'm certain if you checked my post count you would find only occational OT sniping, and often nothing for weeks at a time.

b. Thus, there is no logic that there is something wrong with the forum. And if I liked OT better than the rest, that would still not be wrong.

-----

Basically, everything Smack Daddy said.


----------



## dabnis (Jul 29, 2007)

tdw said:


> Dabnis,
> You should work out the difference between an opinion, that your post was doubly stupid, and censorship or moderation. I don't believe I censored your doubly stupid post did I ? No, I simply opined that it was doubly stupid.
> Now I dare say that there is many a Dabnis post that I disagree with yet they remain intact do they not ?
> So fear not. If it is within my generally liberal (sorry for using such language) interpretation of the SailNet Scriptures then you can say what you like.
> ...


Andrew,

Well, you bit, finally Yes, you were kind enough not to delete the post.
*However,the thought of the big sword hanging over my head keeps me a bit nervous.

Paul T*


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

pdqaltair said:


> a. If this were the off-topic forum I could flog you for misquoation; I said "often" not "more for the OT section than for the sailing topics." We should always be careful with misquotations and distortions of meaning. I'm certain if you checked my post count you would find only occational OT sniping, and often nothing for weeks at a time.
> 
> b. Thus, there is no logic that there is something wrong with the forum. And if I liked OT better than the rest, that would still not be wrong.
> 
> ...


True. Often does not necessarily mean more.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> Such as...


Specifically the Active Captain thread


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

DRFerron said:


> Hmmm. If you're returning more for the OT section than for the sailing topics, are we doing something wrong?


No I don't think we are doing anything wrong. In fact I think the multi facetted approach is a good one. There are some OTH and chat followers who do not ever post in the sailing threads.

The OT threads are part of Sailnet just like the CHAT is.

Personally I don't think the Chat should be part of Sailnet either as many of the conversations are not related to sailing.

However I am not for getting rid of it as it draws people and some people like it so far be it from me to push my ideals on the entire group.

I can choose to ignore it which I do, just like SN members can choose to ignore the OTH threads.

I think people especially the MODS have to be sensitive to not treating people who participate in the " fringe" non sailing threads or chats as less than or aberrant personalities who ruin Sailnet. That is an incredibly short sighted acessment.

Someone like the OTH categories as they have 181,000 posts.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

chef2sail said:


> Specifically the Active Captain thread


But Chef, not once, but at least twice, you told me to eliminate it. You were upset that I did not eliminate it (it was the very last post to that thread) and now you are upset that I did.

Not sure how to win in that situation??



chef2sail said:


> Chuck,
> 
> Not sure what you exact point was here. many of us belong to other threads and many of us are adult enough to understand the relationship oft the pressures which can be brought to bear through legal means on companies/ sites like this. That was a statement of the obvious.
> 
> ...


I did what you wanted....

Brian


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Cruisingdad said:


> But Chef, not once, but at least twice, you told me to eliminate it. You were upset that I did not eliminate it (it was the very last post to that thread) and now you are upset that I did.
> 
> Not sure how to win in that situation??
> 
> ...


That's an interesting way of looking at it. SN gets caught censoring posters threads in a way which potentially signifys a bias and I get what I wanted by gettinghe whole thread censored. Really

Lets see and look at the history of the mysterious disappearing posts....then when challenged and as why there was no explaination

When challenged again with the above statement that someone censored some of the dialogue but that they only decided to select on side of the opinion to censor leaving the other side up, I guess you have now decided to get rid of the whole thread. ( yes that was what I suggested, but not what I wanted)

What i wanted ws transparency....an explaination either in the thread or a PM . I wanted an explaination why my, Cannucksailor, and a quoted letter from the president of NMEA was censored with no explaination and why the other posters were allowed to stand.

Yes I suggested it was biased censorship should that be allowed to stand and the whole thread should be censored if it was needed. And I also said transparency was important here also.

If we can't talk about Active Captain and the pertinent individuals ...tell us that.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I think we should discussing sailing again. I'm lying aboard right now and none of this seems important.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Minnewaska said:


> I think we should discussing sailing again. I'm lying aboard right now and none of this seems important.


Enjoy your margaritas my friend. Have a second on me.

I can decide for myself what's important for me. I find unexplained censorship an important issue when it's done to me or others. Maybe this is a carryover from my participating in the Oth/ Relig/ Politics threads

Dave


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Chef ..... I'm not specifically entering this debate but just to explain. The post in question was moved to holding cell while we discussed whether or not it could stand. It was after all seriously abusive and while it may have been valid abuse it still was abuse. Later on, as a result of calls from you and others the entire thread was removed and this before the offending post could be edited. 

It was most certainly NOT an attempt to censor and if it looked like it was then yes that is a failing on our part for not explaining ourselves. Jaysus man, I like my fellow mods (except for the good Doctor of course who was but a babe in arms at the time) had to live through the great Tartan meltdown and wouldn't deliberately risk another bunfight like that. 

Oh yes and SNOTters .... Smack old man you still have it. 

Andrew B


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Andrew,

Thank you for the explaination. That is really what I wanted in the first place. I commend you for coming forward with the facts. It would have been better from the beginning to have said exactly what you said. It would have avoided a lot of speculation. Certainly I would have had no reason to continue to pursue the truth.

Honesty and transparency are so very important to maintain integrity. Integrity and reputation come from this.

I feel no more need to post on this topic.

You are the man Andrew ( and the best looking male moderator)

( note: I don't need a banana bread recipie, I have my own)

Dave



tdw said:


> Chef ..... I'm not specifically entering this debate but just to explain. The post in question was moved to holding cell while we discussed whether or not it could stand. It was after all seriously abusive and while it may have been valid abuse it still was abuse. Later on, as a result of calls from you and others the entire thread was removed and this before the offending post could be edited.
> 
> It was most certainly NOT an attempt to censor and if it looked like it was then yes that is a failing on our part for not explaining ourselves. Jaysus man, I like my fellow mods (except for the good Doctor of course who was but a babe in arms at the time) had to live through the great Tartan meltdown and wouldn't deliberately risk another bunfight like that.
> 
> ...


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

chef2sail said:


> Enjoy your margaritas my friend. Have a second on me.
> 
> I can decide for myself what's important for me. I find unexplained censorship an important issue when it's done to me or others. Maybe this is a carryover from my participating in the Oth/ Relig/ Politics threads
> 
> Dave


Rita season hasn't started yet, but I have all the fixings aboard! 

Slept for the most peaceful 8 hrs since last Fall! Not our first weekend aboard this year, but they have been pretty cold and windy until last night. Puts the entire world back into perspective.

My comment on importance wasn't directed exclusively at you, but included everyone. However, the explanation you got from tdw was essentially the same one given by DR earlier yesterday and you were still beating on the mods.

I've been edited along the way too. Once or twice in 3 years. It tells you who did it at the bottom, so I've sent a PM and received a reasonable explanation. Since there is no prize money here for winning an argument, I move on.

Now, to focus on getting the boat off the dock this weekend! Cheers.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

Enough of these silly politics. I'm heading over to my boat!


----------



## canucksailorguy (Mar 2, 2006)

> The post in question was moved to holding cell while we discussed whether or not it could stand. It was after all seriously abusive and while it may have been valid abuse it still was abuse. Later on, as a result of calls from you and others the entire thread was removed and this before the offending post could be edited.


Since I was the person who posted the information that got the uproar started, I should explain. I have watched Jeff Seigel perform his little act on several different forums - the passive aggressive attack on an organization being used to direct attention to his own website, often leading to specific abuse of individuals. 
I have it in his own words that this is the reason he does this sort of thing on forums (and yes, mods, I'll provide you with those quotes if you wish) and I didn't want to see SN and its members being abused in this way. I decided that SN should see the other side of Seigel, the side we in the industry know and despise. This was not a personal attack on my part, it was to provide information; nor was it meant to be abusive - and if it were, it was Seigel's own words that created the unpleasant atmosphere.
I believe the mods handled this well given that they were unaware of what he was up to, and I trust that Seigel has been cautioned about his behaviour in here.
For those who took offense at my posts, my sincerest apologies. Unfortunately, the truth is sometimes unpleasant, as it was in this case. However, no one but Jeff Seigel was responsible for his words and behaviours and the consequences of them.
In closing - what really impressed me is the rousing support of SN against Seigel's remarks that so many members came across with. This is an amazing forum filled with amazing people.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Thanks nuck. I for one think there's a lot of value in seeing a challenge to someone's statements - especially if the challenger is providing documented proof. People say a lot of stuff on forums. Both sides of any story is critical. I might have missed something but I didn't take your stuff as an "attack". 

At the end of the day though, as you rightly point out, I do trust the mods here to make the right call. They generally do.


----------



## canucksailorguy (Mar 2, 2006)

Thanks Smack. I just think that this forum is too important to its members to be 'misused' by any one individual for his own aims, particularly when it involves running down the site as was done in this case.


----------



## sd1953 (Mar 21, 2010)

So if this thread is designed to explain why the Second Amendment of the US Constitution is not an acceptable signature line, why does Canucksailorguy get to post Commie Propaganda (i.e. Cuba - Forbiden Paradise) when Cuba is FAR from paradise and has more political prisoners than any other country in the western hemisphere? 
Or is this okay just because Canada is investing heavily in Cuba?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

I'd definitely go to Cuba if I could...."Commie Propaganda" or not. Have you tried their cigars and comida? Freakin awesome.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

canucksailorguy said:


> Thanks Smack. I just think that this forum is too important to its members to be 'misused' by any one individual for his own aims, particularly when it involves running down the site as was done in this case.


Thank you for your posts Canuck. I did not see where your posts were offense to anyone. Sometimes people are afraid to speak about the elephant in the room, but that doesn't mean it isn't there or goes away.

Thanks you also for using actual published statement, letters etc from the individuals.

When all informstion is presented without censorship I think we are adults enough to draw our own conclusions whatever thy may be. It's when there is no transparency that things get murky.

I personally applaud you for your courage in posting the f acts you had.

I can draw my own conclusions about the posters. It's unfortunate that the Active Captain stuff, which I and others use and is helpful, gets tainted by the arrogance and personality conflicts of its proprietor. I will still use it

It is not unlike how The proprietor of ROCNA was. He also was extremely negative and confrontational to others and his competitors. I still like his product though and use it without reservation ( I will be anchored with it in two hours)

We a all adults...no need for extra drama and conflict. I don't UN my business like them, but that's not to say it int successfully run. To each his own

Again thanks for your perspective.

Dave


----------



## canucksailorguy (Mar 2, 2006)

> why does Canucksailorguy get to post Commie Propaganda (i.e. Cuba - Forbiden Paradise) when Cuba is FAR from paradise and has more political prisoners than any other country in the western hemisphere?
> Or is this okay just because Canada is investing heavily in Cuba?


I honestly don't know whether to answer this, or suggest it goes to OT/Pol. I will say that there is nothing political in either the url for my blog or facebook name. I try to make a point - don't always succeed - in not mixing politics in discussions I have about Cuba here on SN but, whenever possible, try to correct misinformation - of which there is a great deal, most of it coming from those who have never been there, quixotically enough. If you go to the links referenced, you'll also notice there is very very little that is political on those pages. Just information about Cuba, and sailing there.
'Paradise' is simply a term, and there is much that is lovely about Cuba - especially its people, and the sailing there is fabulous.
If SD 1953 wants to continue this line of posting, it likely belongs in another thread where I may (or may not) choose to join in. However, I suspect I've tried the mods' patience enough lately so I'll desist here.


----------



## sd1953 (Mar 21, 2010)

So, my question was to the moderators. I.e. where is the line?
I offer the URL's below to make my point:
Cuba
Foundation for Human Rights in Cuba | A non profit dedicated to supporting Cuban civil society and human rights activists in their fight for democracy
Cuba | Amnesty International
The political regime in Havana is a brutal, capricious dictatorship. It violates human rights of the residents of the island and those who visit / do business there.
Pretending it is "Paradise" is a political statement. So my question was, where is the line? Why is the US Constitution's Bill of Rights not okay, but promoting a brutal dictatorship is okay?
Thanks for your reply, but I am not arguing the benefits of tyranny with you, I am questioning the moderators.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Yo Jeff, I don't know you and I don't Nuck. But I do know "Personal Attacks" when I see them. I think you need to work on your definition of the PA. I haven't seen it here. You admit you've done a good amount of what Nuck is saying. And you do like to get a bit aggro in you posts. So where exactly is the Personal Attack?


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

tdw said:


> Oh yes and SNOTters .... Smack old man you still have it.


 I am surprised to see that the SNOTszi card remains unplayed.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

sd1953 said:


> So, my question was to the moderators. I.e. where is the line?
> I offer the URL's below to make my point:
> Cuba
> Foundation for Human Rights in Cuba | A non profit dedicated to supporting Cuban civil society and human rights activists in their fight for democracy
> ...


A couple of points in wally's defense;
1. Sailnet is international in scope, so, while you feel his sig is political because of American/Cuban relations at present, the rest of the world has a different relationship with Cuba and it's people, politics notwithstanding. one can hate the game, but not the players, as appears to be the case with Wally's love for Cuba.
2. Have you bothered to actually read the links in the sig in question? Politics rarely enters wally's blather, except as it pertains to canada, in jest and in vain.


----------



## JeffreySiegel (Jun 8, 2007)

smackdaddy said:


> So where exactly is the Personal Attack?


It was mainly in the previous thread that I mentioned. Wally's posting was removed within a few hours. As a result of that, the entire thread was removed. His posting was a total personal attack having little to do with the content of the thread. The discussion here had turned to that thread and Wally's posting in that previous thread was an obvious and direct personal attack by anyone's definition. I'd welcome the moderators to re-publish that posting here since it is under the microscope.



> it was Seigel's own words that created the unpleasant atmosphere.
> I believe the mods handled this well given that they were unaware of what he was up to, and I trust that Seigel has been cautioned about his behaviour in here.


He's heading in the same direction here. The mods didn't remove any of my posts - they directly removed Wally's. Then with bruhaha led by chef2sail, they removed the entire thread. I never responded after Wally's rant.

For what it's worth, that previous thread wasn't started by me and took 3 pages before enough spiders told me that there was a discussion about ActiveCaptain. There were questions about what I wrote and I answered all of them. There was no attempted fight to gain new users. I simply discussed the newsletter piece - I don't believe I even gave a URL to it. The moderators did contact me to ask me to put my website links in my signature. I thought that was on the advertising side so I hadn't but as of that moment, I changed by signature.

I'd like to also point out that I didn't say that forums like SailNet are bad or need to be replaced. In fact, quoting directly from the newsletter segment, "Don't misunderstand this. There are good uses for the other forums."

The really ironic (perhaps even funny) thing is that the previous thread proved all the problems that I think existing forums have. There's actually a good discussion there if it could ever be done without the attacks.


----------



## sd1953 (Mar 21, 2010)

@bljones; Since Canucksailorguy is Canadian, Cuba is NOT "forbidden" to him. And in the view of international human rights groups is sure as hell isn't paradise. (See links I provided earlier.)
So, since his signature is clearly aimed at those of us in the USA, and it seems to want to convince me that the Cuban embargo the US enacted is wrong, it is by definition political.
Cuba is a beautiful island (if the photos and descriptions can be believed - I have no reason to doubt them). The Cuban people are just like folks everywhere else ... mostly good. I live in South Florida, I have Cuban-American friends. I know we got Cuba's best when Fidel ran everyone out of the island. I see and read about people still fleeing "paradise" in little rickety boats. For the Bill of Rights here in the USA.
My question remains to the moderators, where is this line you want us to observe? Why is it okay to prop up a brutal dictatorship, but not the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution?


----------



## blowinstink (Sep 3, 2007)

JeffreySiegel said:


> blah blah blah blah . . . The discussion here had turned to that thread and Wally's posting in that previous thread was an obvious and direct personal attack by anyone's definition. I'd welcome the moderators to re-publish that posting here since it is under the microscope.


NO NO NO! For the love of god (fortheloveofgawd in chat speak) please do not "republish" any of that crap. "Republish" is such an interesting choice of words in the context of this thread too . . .. Self promote self promote self promote . . . sure for defamation?



JeffreySiegel said:


> Blah blah blah blah . . . He's heading in the same direction here. The mods didn't remove any of my posts - they directly removed Wally's. Then with bruhaha led by chef2sail, they removed the entire thread. I never responded after Wally's rant.


What are you a 2 year old??? Worse, do you think we are all 2 year olds???



JeffreySiegel said:


> The really ironic (perhaps even funny) thing is that the previous thread proved all the problems that I think existing forums have. There's actually a good discussion there if it could ever be done without the attacks.


No, what is "really ironic" is that you sure look like the source of all the stuff you claim is bad about the forums. Wally ain't no saint, but you with your "I'm just protecting my reputation (ahem . . .from the people I just trashed)" routine . . .. Cut me a break. There is a ton of great stuff on SN but you seem to only participate in ways that promote your business.

Bring something positive to the table -- or maybe you oughta take you private fight elsewhere.


----------



## blowinstink (Sep 3, 2007)

sd1953 said:


> My question remains to the moderators, where is this line you want us to observe? Why is it okay to prop up a brutal dictatorship, but not the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution?


How about you talk politics in Politics / OT - and sailing here? What is so damn hard to understand?


----------



## sd1953 (Mar 21, 2010)

@blowin; The original post by the "Best looking Male Moderator" was an explanation by the mods over a couple of signatures that were requested to be removed by the moderators as they were "political" in nature. This drug politics into every thread where they posted.
I read the thread, but as I don't often discuss politics here - like you I come for the sailing - I didn't have any strong feelings about the thread nor did I make any posts myself. Then after many pages of posts I saw one that contains a signature that promotes Cuba as a "Forbidden Paradise". It is not. The poster, self-identifies as a Canadian. Cuba is not forbidden to him. Cuba is not paradise. I posted links to Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International to make my point.
My question is not to my fellow (Canadian) SNer, it is to the moderators.
Why does promoting Cuba get a pass and the poster who extoled the virtues of the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution get told to take his down.
That's not hard to understand, is it?

(MY house suddenly smells like banana bread!)


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Sir I have to say this is way out of line and basically supports everything that has been said. You reopened this on purpose in another thread and I beleive you should be banned from Sailnet. The first time I have ever asked for that

All posts were removed from that thread and it was eliminated in fairness to all sides

This site has no place for the personal crap. You continued something which was put to rest and handled. You appear to like to cause trouble in other people's intellectual property to draw attention to yourself and yes you product. Good marketing ploy.

Moderators....please have this man desist......make him go away.....he can't really be a sailor and do this on a sailing site in front of other sailors and then call himself one of us. 

I hadn't really taken any side till I saw this violation of TOS after the mods already evenhandedly removed everyone's comments by removing the other thread. 

Dude you just lost me.

Dave


----------



## steve77 (Aug 5, 2010)

Cruisingdad said:


> Wombats are large rodents. What did you expect??
> 
> (HEHE!)
> 
> Brian


I read through this entire thread and what do I find? Misinformation! From a moderator no less! Wombats are marsupials, _not_ rodents!


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

steve77 said:


> I read through this entire thread and what do I find? Misinformation! From a moderator no less! Wombats are marsupials, _not_ rodents!


That's true but lets face it, CD is somewhat delusional and lives with an oversupply of gas fumes and a farting bulldog. We have to make allowances for the poor chap.


----------



## steve77 (Aug 5, 2010)

tdw said:


> That's true but lets face it, CD is somewhat delusional and lives with an oversupply of gas fumes and a farting bulldog. We have to make allowances for the poor chap.


My dog likes to sleep in bed with me, usually with his butt in my face. So I guess I can sympathize with CD on that point at least.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

sd1953 said:


> So, my question was to the moderators. I.e. where is the line?
> 
> ..... snip .....


As far as On Topic is concerned the line is discussing politics.

A discussion on the rights and wrongs of the political regime in Cuba is not Sailing related it is political.

A discussion on the attractions or otherwise of sailing to Cuba is quite another thing.

Andrew B


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

*CanuckSailorGuy, Jeffrey Siegel, Hear ye Hear Ye.*

Ok ..... both of you .... cease and desist. You will deploy the IGNORE button. If you do not it will be deployed for you.

All further posts that relate to the two of you by either of you will be binned and if this BS continues one or both of you will end up taking a bloody long holiday.

Andrew B


----------



## canucksailorguy (Mar 2, 2006)

> A discussion on the rights and wrongs of the political regime in Cuba is not Sailing related it is political.
> A discussion on the attractions or otherwise of sailing to Cuba is quite another thing.


That's fair.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

JeffreySiegel said:


> But since you've brought up my character, Removed quoted version of a personal attack in violation of forum rules- Jeff_H SailNet.


Wow - I don't know or care what all the facts are...but unless _you_ were _directly_ involved in this...throwing something like this out in a public forum is seriously skanky on your part, Jeff.

Why on earth would this woman be sending _you_ information like this? I can totally see her doing so with the SN mods, but you? What's that all about?

I will tell you this - aggressive entrepreneurship or no, the above is out of line. It is about as personal an attack as I've seen in these threads.

It's obvious you, Nuck, and whoever this Chuck guy is have a serious issue with each other. Fine. But as a recently joined member of Active Captain myself, I can honestly tell you I'm not liking what I see out of its "aggressive entrepreneur".

How do I cancel my membership?


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

sd1953 said:


> @blowin; My question is not to my fellow (Canadian) SNer, it is to the moderators.
> Why does promoting Cuba get a pass and the poster who extoled the virtues of the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution get told to take his down.
> That's not hard to understand, is it?
> 
> (MY house suddenly smells like banana bread!)


This forum contains members who do not live in the USA.

For these members a discussion on Cuba is no more political than a discussion of any other potential cruising destination. It is a sailing related discussion.

Fiji is also being run by a dictatorship. Other interesting potential cruising destinations have governments with questions to answer.

It is simple, If you want to discuss the politics of Cuba go do it in OT.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

chall03 said:


> This forum contains members who do not live in the USA.
> 
> For these members a discussion on Cuba is no more political than a discussion of any other potential cruising destination. It is a sailing related discussion.
> 
> ...


Plus Freakin' 1.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Peoples,
Just going to lock the thread for the time being. Not moving it as yet but we are discussing its fate.
Andrew B


----------

