A Community Statement

[Celuien]

To the Barrow-Wight and other Administrators and Moderators of the Barrow-Downs,

We, the undersigned, wish you to be aware of the high levels of discomfort we are feeling with regards to the banishment of Davem. With the immense role that the Barrow-Downs plays in our personal lives, we feel it our responsibility to make it clear to you that we are not satisfied with the way this issue was handled.

For a long time now, Davem has been one of the most highly thought-of members of our community, and in terms of sheer volume, has probably contributed a textbook's worth of information and thought to this website, enlivening discussion and earning the friendship and respect of many in our community. His recent, and permanent, banishment seems unjustified. The posts given as cause by the Moderators are not, in any of our opinions, cause for banishment, and many of them came several days before the banishment occurred. It is the consensus of the undersigned only plausible explanation yet given (and this not from the Barrow-Downs administration) for the banishment was that it was incurred following his parody of a famous British poem, which was found to be offensive to someone. We can only assume, if this theory is correct, that the humour of the parody was lost on American-based Barrow-Wight who claims responsibility for the decision.

We further feel that, upon reflection, that those responsible for the banishment have decided to try and cover up this issue, making various excuses, none of which presented have seemed plausible to us, as already noted..

With all respect to the Barrow-Wight, whose site this legally is, we are not seeking the reinstatement of Davem, who justifiably, does not strongly desire re-entry into this community. We do, however, wish to make it clear how betrayed we feel at the secretive manner in which the banishment was conducted. If Davem, who was not in our opinion deserving of banishment, was banned suddenly and without notice, we are ourselves afraid that we may unwittingly step out of line and find ourselves suddenly unable to be a part of this great community.

The Barrow-Downs belongs, in a strict sense, to the Barrow-Wight and all the Administration and Moderators he freely chooses to appoint, and we are normally comfortable and secure-feeling in his guidance, which has helped to build such a strong sense of community. We do, however, spend hours upon hours of time on this website. If it is successful in content and traffic, it is because of the devoted users who return here not only day after day, but year after year. If we are not actual owners of the site, we nonetheless have a proprietary interest. In no way can it be said that we want anything less than a vibrant and comfortable community, goals we assume that we share with the Barrow-Wight and the Moderating team.

The recent events have left us, however, with our comfort shaken, and our energy dulled, as we timidly tiptoe around the forums, afraid to say anything which might be taken the wrong way and see us tossed summarily into the Void. With the peace of mind of the community at stake, we therefore submit to you our discomfort at how the situation was handled, and ask that in the future this not be the normal modus operandi.

Sincerely,

Anguirel
Boromir88
Celuien
Diamond18
drigel
Encaitare
Firefoot
Formendacil
Glirdan
Kath
Laitoste
Lalaith
Lalwendë
Lhunardawen
Macalaure
Mithalwen
Nogrod
narfforc
Rune son of Bjarne
Saurreg
Sleepy Ranger
Thinlómien

~*~

I've posted this with some hesitation, but felt that it was necessary. Discomfort over this issue has been festering, and I don't see the dissatisfaction resolving on its own. This statement comes only with the best of intentions and out of love for the truly wonderful site that the Barrow-Downs has been. The Downs has always been more than just a website. It's a special community, and I don't want to see that diminished by continuing lack of clarity and disappointment. This is not offered with any intent to upset or offend, but merely with the earnest desire to clarify any misunderstandings that may have arisen as a result of davem's ban.

The original statement was constructed here.

Thanks for your consideration and understanding in this matter.

[Aiwendil]

I hesitate to respond to this, but I thought it might be useful for you to hear from a member of the moderating team who was not directly involved with the incident with Davem.

There is a long thread in the Moderators' forum discussing Davem and how to deal with the behaviour on his part that we found inappropriate. We have all put a lot of time, thought, and effort into resolving this issue in the best possible way for the Barrow-downs, and I can assure you that recent events have left a bitter taste in our mouths as well.

However, all of the moderators and administrators felt that Davem was behaving inappropriately, and we all supported the Barrow-Wight's decision to ban him. I have been very distressed to find that many people seem to blame Mister Underhill and The Saucepan Man in particular for the action taken. This is extremely unfair. The fact is that the entire team of Mods and Admins is responsible; Mister Underhill and The Saucepan Man were simply the ones who gave the time and had the patience to deal with Davem. The final ban was The Barrow-Wight's decision.

I should also note, though this has been said before, that the Slough parody Davem posted was not the reason he was banned. I know that some of you think that this statement is a lie, but it's not. The Barrow-wight had actually decided to ban Davem before the parody was posted. I know this because the Barrow-wight posted a message on the Moderator's forum saying that he intended to ban Davem at 2:57 A.M. on 9/25; Davem's parody was posted at 9:50 P.M. the same day.

Finally, I should note that Davem was not banned suddenly and without warning. He was asked several times by the moderating team to refrain from violating our posting guidelines, and in particular, to drop his personal attacks against those who hold views different from his own. He disregarded these warnings. There was then a delay of a few days before he was banned by Barrow-Wight, for the simple reason that we Mods and Admins can be Entish (i.e. slow) at times.

Davem was banned because he disregarded repeated requests that he refrain from certain behaviours. Please, take it from me that it had nothing to do with religion nor with his parody. We regret the loss of Davem as a member as much as you do, but we stand by our decision.

- Aiwendil

[mormegil]

I would echo what Aiwendil has so wonderfully stated. This wasn't a sudden or haphazard event. It was given much thought and discussion. Everyone involved was rather sorrowful that it came to this but it was sadly necessary.

The issue that has me the most upset is the wanton maligning of both SpM and Mister Underhill. There has never been an explanation required for a banning yet SpM gave one in good faith and it has only been the cause of personal attacks and distress for him.

I do not believe that anybody need to fear a unexpected banning for a minor offense. If there is something that the mod team wants changed it is generally requested to be changed and it is changed. Sufficient warning would be given to anybody to make the appropriate corrective action. Do not feel like you have to walk on egg shells. You can have your opinion and express it just don't personally attack others for having a dissenting opinion.

[Nogrod]

I'd just like to add this comment from Formendacil from the discussion that underwent this statement:

The very fact that we feel compelled to make this statement ought to speak for our strong loyalty to the website.

To the point!

Very many of us are worried about the things that have happened... Let us not break this fine community with this kind of polarising and harming actions. The bannig of Davem was an extreme move and this statement is another extreme move to balance it somewhat. (and I do accept my responsibility for being one who has contributed to the statement and has signed it too - ie. I'm not declaring myself neutral here)

Now let us sit down and heal this!

PS.
Reading the post of Aiwendil, I have to comment just a little...

How come Davem was first banned to a short time and after he came back was never notified that his posting was "bad" until he was just outright banned for life? What's the logic here? It's very hard to find a post of davem during the short season he was "back again" that would be the cause of the new (and definitive) banishment!

At least we should all have a right to see it! The reason must be in between the post(s) that Davem made after his short time banishment ended and when his final banishment was executed. In which post did he do it too bad then? I think I can speak of many here, but we can't see the reason lying in there between - and if it's not there, then the banishment was not fair as it was not grounded on actual posts but on something else...

[Nogrod]

Surely, at least to my experience, the mods have been just thoughtful and wise - even on occasions when I have wished to say something, they have toned me down and I have clearly seen their point afterwards.

This surely is no crusade against the mods in general, well at least from my perspective as I can't talk on behalf of the others. But I do believe the undersigned share my worry here (and I can see that the mods need to pull together - it's in a way a good thing to see that, really, think of it!).

This is a questionnaire against a decision that many of us have felt that was bad, wrong and unjustified. I hope this can be handled based on facts and arguments and most importantly, with a generous amount of good will. Otherwise we will just have a disaster here...

[Saurreg]

I have been here for a long time now though I have not posted as much as my contemporaries of the same period of inception into the forum. It is in my opinion, the is a stricter and more tense mood on the boards now then compared to the days when the new cadre of moderators were not in commission yet. Suffice to say, the mood has made me very uncomfortable.

If I should sum up what I feel about this current state of this site in a sentence, it would be,

An unexpected and dubious connoction of "political correctness" and "moral righteousness" has gotten a grip on the boards, resulting in an authoritarian and increasingly elitist atmosphere that is unnerving to many of the older users

Before this fiasco, the serious book discussion forum was a self-censoring, self moderating place. There was no need for any moderator to step in and ask another user to stop posting or to serve a penalty. The community itself looked out for one another and preserved the integrity and morality of that wonderful place out of their own will and loyalty to the site. Indeed any trash spewing or overtly aggressive user were swiftly nipped in the butt by the other veteran members before they could even start a path of "destruction" The serious book discussion forum was one of the best protected board I have come across through my years of internet participation in discussions. I have never seen a "public"community as united and resolute in defending the state of that board in all my life.

The facts speak for themselves. Close scrutiny of the old threads would show that any undesirable elements were quickly suppressed not just by Esty but also by the veterans users.

And Davem was one such user (more of what I think of his ban later).

Play nice, now that's a good thing to have, no doubt about it. But the degree of civility and politeness in various forums differ due to the very nature of the site, the forum's purposes and the discussion that is going on. Let's all admit it, the serious book discussion forum has always been intimidating, severe and stern for the casual newcomers, because the good users are really excellent debators and their posts are always curt, straight to the point and no-nonsense. Given that at all times difficult and time-consuming topics are on the agenda, the good users have to cut down on the non-essentials and go post their feelings and thoughts with proofs, quotes and whatnots; which is a good thing because long meandering posts (which I feel this is going to be, oh dear what a noob I am) tend to lose their gist and do not contribute much in substance. As such a degree of civility and politeness is curbed but I must emphasize that in all times these good users do not go over the board vulgar. Harsh at times, yes but never ever insulting.

So what is a noob (like yours truly) going to do when you enter a debate with a head full of high ideas only to be deconstructed by the big boys point by point and at times a bit harshly? You either stop posting and disappear which many have, or you could simply acknowledge your own inadequacy, read more, learn and try again. The second was my approach and I do feel that my debating skills have improved because of it. Of course it does come with a little sting to the pride but learn to eat humble pie. Never be overtly defensive, read careful and think before posting and never be afraid to admit to your mistakes and apologise. All these I learned to do and I am most grateful to say that those good users most probably saw the effort on my part and they never ever sought to demean me or ignore my subsequent posts.

The worst thing you could do when deconstructed and having your butt handed to you is to be highly upset, show that you're upset and turn the debate into a personal slugfest which is what I thought the bible thread had become. Instead of letting go and just giving yourself and the other chap abreak, some chose to continue posting until the point where I felt what was posted became increasingly deviating from the gist of the thread and at points irrelevant.

The netiquette of not debating (or posting) for simply the sake of debating/posting was lost and even more despicable was the efforts by some to want to appear as the "victim" even when their own posts were getting more insulting with every count. And what was the good user going to do when such posts are directed at him/her? Patience would of course be lost and sarcasm and curt posts would definitely be made. But pray remember what made the good users resort to such an approach in the first place?

So now to Davem's ban - I will not discount that fact that in the bible disscusion and in a post in another thread as linked by The Saucepan Man, Davem made some sarcastic posts which perhaps was not quite proper (but IMO understandable). But to hold him solely at fault and ask that he leave the thread (that I disagree the most since his posts carried an urgent message) was not right. I guess the last straw was to consider his posts in that thread against him when serving the penalty.

And as for the poem, he was simply in his way, showing what he felt about the so called suburban Shire homestead. We have been told that the final ban was not made solely because of that poem (which incidentally, caused some users to reply to it) but I am sure that post played a part in the decision in maintaining the ban.

So the ban was served and yada yada life goes on- BUT the person who was ultimately banned was never given notice nor allowed the final opportunity to even know (let alone defend) himself from why he was banned. The reasons as given by a moderator are IMO shoddy and do not justify the repeating offender profile given to Davem.

Suffice to say people might question the motives of the ban, but people will question the rational behind the decision-making process. By this manner of banning Davem and the lacking explanation given so far, I feel as though there is a great impenetrable wall that seperates us from the moderators and administrators, a wall that at this moment of time promises to get higher and thicker, creating a class system in this wonderful place where I thought we were all equals.

Noone likes to have a damocles sword tangled over their heads held only by a string which we know not of tensile strength or tolerance.

And this brings me to the point of political correctness and moral righteousness which seems to be a fad of the boards nowadays. Given what I have posted above, do we really need someone to constantly look out and censor every post so that a "12 year old" that stumbles upon a thread will not go about telling all that he learned of what is hell (be it concept or lingo application) and all the other whatnots were from the barrow-downs?

First of all, would a twelve year old be really interested in going into the serious book discussion forum and reading through (with understanding) every thread in the serious book discussions? And secondly, who are we kidding in "protecting" an innocent child from getting the wrong ideas from what has been posted.

Like I've mentioned, the forum in question is self-moderating and censoring. Chances are that that remarkable child who in this age is so "pure and innocent" as not have any knowledge on religious and sexual topics (even though he knows how to surf the far more dangerous internet) is not going to stumble upon something really really bad.

...except maybe the posting habits and style of said disasterous newbies in argument with other users. God help us all then.

And what of respecting other people's beliefs and religions and fantasies etc etc? First of all, self-moderation and censorship will without doubt butcher whatever falsities and misinformations. Secondly, if the thread or posts offend then in all common sense, stop reading! With that I submit that the moderators need not pay too much trouble to those the complain of undesirable elements in the Downs. Chances are those non-users are too dense to understand the posts of the good users that regulate the thread or are too dumb to stop reading.

[Lalwendë]

Personal attacks? That is something I never saw from davem's posts. He did post the contents of a couple of PMs, but these were swiftly censored and no harm was done; even in these he was not making 'personal attacks' but asking why certain comments had been made - and before anyone gets numpty about this, please remember that it is an entirely natural reaction to wish to defend oneself. Otherwise, no, I can find nothing which could have been construed as 'personal attack'.

If davem at some points gained the upper hand in debate by finding holes in matters of divinity and theology and it upset some people, I think they may want to stop and consider for a moment the idea of 'strength of faith'; many here have faith (me included) and we have all been challenged. I too have found some deeply unpleasant comments by members old and new on the Downs. Savaging and bullying of newbies. Clever asides in posts and signatures that people think are so 'clever' others will not 'get' them - they do 'get' 'em.

All of this is just because we're all human and we will fall out from time to time. It doesn't mean we hate each other - at least I know that myself and davem wouldn't do that anyway! Erm, don't know about anyone else! But I'd hope a few flamin' (sometimes literally 'flaming') words don't cause you to hate someone.

If davem chose to criticise the 'Bible' thread for being unworthy of the 'Books' forum then he ought to be able to say that. Any member ought to be able to ask the valid question: Is This A Valid Question? As a long standing member who was always concerned to find new points for discussion and not to allow the forum to slowly die into obscurity, he believed he was driving us to be more rigorous, more discerning.

OK, so we all understand that 'content' is a simple thing to define and pick up on when someone puts something inappropriate on the board - e.g. swearing, something a bit too adult etc. A mod tells you off, you might argue about it, but in the end it goes. It's easy to edit, easy to remember what, in future, not to write!

Anyway, that's the taters, now for the meat.

Tone is a whole different kettle of fish. Tone is about nuance, subtlety, humour, irony, all of those complex language issues. What is acceptable in Tone is totally different between English speakers across the world (not to mention Tone can be moderated by Age, Race, Class and Gender, but to discuss this would take up days so I'll concentrate as much as possible). How davem writes may be abrasive to one person, but I have to say it is entirely normal in the UK to use sarcasm, and to be ironic. How are we to understand such cultural differences? How are we to be mindful of them?

Example. Davem made a great point about the understanding of the word 'fundamentally' in the Americas and in Britain. In the Americas it means "exactly", "definitely", "at core" - hence why when Tolkien says "a fundamentally Catholic work" many American readers think "Right! It's at core a Catholic book!". However in the UK we use the language more fluidly, lazily, sloppily even. You can even see that Tolkien himself takes full advantage of this with multiple meanings and origins of words in his books. What does "fundamentally" mean here? It means "kind of", "sort of", "in a way".

There is not just a huge difference in understanding of English use between the UK and the USA but between different regions of the UK itself. Many southerners are deeply offended to be called "love" and "darling" by total strangers when they come to my city, but they are not being patronised, they are being welcomed by being called such things (men call other men "love"). Unfortunately some fail to grasp that language use differs and they get numpty about it. Ho-hum, they usually clear off anyway when they realise houses are equally expensive up here...

I can see right away that it was obviously not content that was causing offence, as there simply was not the evidence for it. So it's Tone. Which is extremely worrying. Especially as I don't speak or use English in the same way as the Mods. Nor does everyone. Lots of people here from other cultures, age groups, backgrounds. How can we be careful of something as subtle as Tone? So davem was, ultimately, banned for being a Yorkshireman, and using English as a Yorkshireman does?

[Celuien]

Originally Posted by Saurreg

No one likes to have a damocles sword tangled over their heads held only by a string which we know not of tensile strength or tolerance.

That sums up my concerns. I read through the posts that were cited as the offensive statements which led to the ban, but the problem is that I'm seeing a disconnect between the description of over-the-line offensive content and what I'm reading. If that disconnect exists, how would anyone know if they'd unintentionally stepped over the line, or even after a warning, know that they were continuing to step over the line if the defined boundaries of offensive aren't registering on (a fairly significant number of) the members here? It does make me uneasy. And I think that's the reason the question keeps coming back.

No one wants to cause a rift in the board, and no one wants to confront the mods/admins of this site, who have done a great job keeping this site going for so long. But I don't want to be in the position of potentially being evaluated as having done something offensive and worthy of banning without knowing that I've done something wrong, and just saying that davem was misbehaving without having the process behind why he was felt to be out-of-line (even with the knowledge that there was extensive discussion) is making me feel like that is the situation, despite assurances that it is not the case.

[Folwren]

I can not help but feel as though some bubble has been popped.

Alright, what I mean to say is this, I hate to see unhappiness and uneasiness amongst people. I understand, however, how important it is for everybody to get their thoughts out about what they are displeased about. Being the sort of character that I am - hating unpeacefulness, angry words, flaring tempers - I'd like to say, before anyone gets heated over this matter (I've a feeling that this could get hot fast), to please remain calm and as quiet as possible while writing.

The Barrow-Wight and the mods who make up this forum have done a magnificent job for the year and a half or so that I've been here. I've been comfortable here and very happy with how they handled certain situations. I have very much faith that what they do is entirely justified, that they have reasons backing their actions, and would not be rash in anything like banning someone for life.

I do hope, however, that, after time, maybe they'll consider their verdict again, and lighten the punishment? (I can't help but call it punishment, I can't think of any other word, and I can't think of any worse thing you could do to keep order here...)

Anyhow, those are some of my thoughts. Please, please, don't get angry or upset, anyone! Feelings, thoughts, people can be hurt and infuriated so easily, and when that happens, people are torn apart.

With the utmost concern,

Folwren

[The Barrow-Wight]

I banned davem because he continued to act in a manner contrary to the publicly stated wishes of the moderators. The fact that he continued to do so after returning from temporary banishment was enough motivation for me to ban him permanently. You can consider that fair or not, but when a member causes enough disruption to warrant several pages of moderator discussion, I have every right to ban that member without a formal declaration. If anyone fears the ban was made because someone did not agree with davem’s point of view, you are simply wrong. If you can see that the ban was enacted because of his manner, you are correct. Assigning any other meaning is inaccurate.

Think about it. How long have many of you been here, and how many people have we booted simply because we disagreed with them? The answer is none. The few valued members we have banned over the years were all dismissed because of their refusal to adjust their attitude to a tone (not the content) we repeatedly requested.

With this said, let’s get back to the fun of the Downs in the same spirit as always without the unnecessary suspicions. They weren't required before this began, and they certainly aren’t needed now.

Sincerely,

[Meneltarmacil]

I tend to agree with Folwren in that a bubble has indeed been popped.

What I really would like to say is that I am feeling somewhat disturbed about this whole affair. Surely, arguments over administrative issues have their place, but I'd rather not see the Barrow-Downs turned into a war zone here or see those we've all known, loved, and respected be personally attacked.

I've been a member here for over three years now, and in that time I haven't seen anything like this happen to us. Dividing us against each other just doesn't sit right with me.

I was not involved in this before, and do not intend to favor any particular point of view here. I just don't want to see a breaking of the fellowship over this.

EDIT: cross-posted with B-W

[Hookbill the Goomba]

This discussion I had decided to stay out of... but I'd just like a question cleared up...

It was clear to me that Davem meant no offence with his posts. If they were anti-christian I was never insulted and I've head much- much - worse in my time. I accept that that doesn't apply to everyone and it's clear that some people were insulted - I would go into some long rant about 'forgive and forget', 'turn the other cheek' and so forth, but I think it's been said.

My question is this: if he was willing to come back, under what circumstances would the mods consider it? Even if this meant starting some new account or something. Lets just say, theoretically, that davem apologised for insulting some of our members (even if he still stands by some of his points and principals) or his 'tone' or whatever, would the mods consider forgiving him and letting him back into our community? It seems to me that a lot of people have been hurt by this and I don't want to see the Down fall apart or be broken up by it. I'm only looking for a solution to make everyone happy.

It still stands to reason that Mr Dave may not wish to come back, that aside, I'd just like to know there is a possibility that one of our most esteemed Downers, not to mention one of our liaisons with the Tolkien Society, could come back...

- On a side note, davem needs to come back for his role as chief of police in The Downer -

[drigel]

The posts here are appreciated. It seems that everyones position, and how they saw things as it went to the breaking down point is clear (although it hasn't changed anyones opinions - nor should, really). Here are some gut feelings with some points that have been brought up.

TECHNICAL:

It has been suggested that the LotB thread should have been closed. I was always reluctant to see that happen, though, because there were people who wished to discuss the topic raised.

As long as they all agreed to not only the subject, but the validity? I'm not saying that Davem was in the right, but there have been threads that were closed before. Never seen a call for the Bill of Rights afterwards, though. Besides which, because there are BD rules, there really isnt any real freedom of speech on this site (and rightly so).

due to the actions of one member who was not willing for that discussion to take place would hardly have been consistent with principles of fairness and freedom of speech.

There is a time and a place for everything. Forever silencing the best asset the Books have is one option (neither fair nor free speech IMO). However, this would have been the time for admin to say OK everyone SHUT UP, and MOVE ON. This ends the conversation that was going nowhere. It had already diverged into "Yes it is - and here is the evidence" and "No it isnt - you are being silly". Anything after those points is moot.

Myth 1: The Downs “management” is intolerant of views, beliefs and opinions which dissent from their own.

I agree. The only run in Ive had with BW was a political post on a political thread that I am sure I would have had the perma ban on other sites. btw - that was a thread that got closed.

Myth 3: The forum policies have changed or are being applied differently.

Maybe not, but tone has. Not from Admin, but the users.

There has, in recent times, been a downturn in serious discussion and an upturn in activity in the Mirth threads, with, for example, Werewolf and other games taking up much of many members’ time.

Not me. I would say look for other reasons. If you would have asked me, I would have loved to give you an honest reply. Which leads me to:

TONE
I completely agree with Boro's post.

Which some may think 'well it's only one member,' but think of how many other members saw this and were effected by it?

Or who here are like me, who only are here because of people like Davem? Im not saying that it's all about a Davem fan club or cult. It wasnt about him at all personally (I dont really know the guy - seems OK to me though). It was about his posts, and what that represented, about him, and (more importantly) this website. In the Books, here was a place for those of us who dont desire to play games, trivia, RPG etc.

The attitude has changed, the feeling has changed, I think we have this clique-like softy-softy attitude developing in the downs, and I don't like it.

Ive experienced it as well.

davem needed a lesson in Tone if this was the problem. So do a lot of people. The people with a tendency towards being patronising who are still very much thriving here, for instance. His 'Tone' was only 'off' because it was used in: Hey! A Religious Thread! And his tone was used in response to someone with an equally sneering Tone.

The point being that the Tone I was picking was not only in the posts, but in other remarks, and were never really up front and confrontable (very BD "rules" savvy). A backhanded way that IMO told me that I definately was not a regular member, and because I dont write in a flowery or english lit. paper style, that my point isnt valid, even if what I said in 2 sentances counters very neatly what they said in 8 paragraphs. A Tone sirs, that I have put up with for a while, because the utility I recieved from participating far outweighed the nuisance. Every site has it's own culture, and this place isnt any different. I can fit in I think. But when something like this happens, all the little things that one puts up with, suddenly becomes unbearable in the scale.

my initial decision had nothing to do with this matter, although it has perhaps hastened my withdrawal.

same here

Hope this explains something to somebody. There is a time to manage, micromanage, and there is a time for Social Engineering. I only post because I care.

[Folwren]

I did not intend to post again here, but having read all the posts to this point, I can not help but ask this one questions:

What is everyone trying to accomplish here?

Which leads to many other things...

If your purpose is to gain a proper explanation - haven't you gotten your explanation? The mods have done their best to tell you what happened! I don't think they can say anything more than they have. You don't think these reasons are good reasons so...

Do you want the mods to apologize? Say so and have done.

Is it to get them to let davem back? Here's a question - would he even return? I've heard from a few people that he wouldn't. To beg for the lifting of the ban only to be disappointed by the person in question will only cause more damage.

Do you want something else? Tell the mods what it is! You're all saying 'The feeling and tone of the Downs is changing.' But how is it changing? Less freedom? Less good, in-depth discussions? Figure out the answer and then try to come up with a solution. There are some things that can not be left up to the mods to accomplish or to fix. They can't make the discussions in the Book Forum better. That's left up for the posters.

Also, I highly, highly doubt that the mods mis-interpreted davem's style of writing, his humor, sarcasm, and all the rest to the point of banishment. I just can't see the misunderstanding being carried so far. He might well be a Yorkshire man, and Yorkshire man may be satirical and sarcastic, but we've got mods from different places in the world who are used to and accustomed to such behavior, through personal experience and reading. It just doesn’t seem likely.

My ideas of a solution:

Say, outright and clearly, what you want done to satisfy your discomfort. State what needs to be accomplished to make this place happy again. Stop arguing and tearing people down. And…….don’t leave the Downs. Another member leaving this place will cause much, much more damage than davem being banished.

In hope that things will clear up soon,

Folwren

[Glirdan]

I have been a little hesitant to even consider looking at this thread, but it seems that the bug has finally lured me in.

First things first, I may not know all the details on Davem's band (and personally, I do not have time to pour over every post he's made to see what he's said that could be offensive...), but I will say that I am slightly displeased. Yes, displeased. However, I will say no more on this subject as I regard the mods and admins with great regard and whatever their decision is, no matter how much we are displeased, angered, frustrated or annoyed with them for it, we must respect that fact that THEY have the authority here. Whatever choice they make may (and in their eyes hopefully will) make this site an even better place to be a part of than it originally was.

Secondly, I must concur with Saurreg. I used to get home after school or wake up in the morining to many posts in a variety of threads. These past few days, when I have just quickly jumped on to see what was happening, I've noticed that the talk has been very subdued and less spontaneous than what it used to be. The Books forum has gone down hill from the looks of things. The Mirth section (which was a favorite haunt of most of us) seems to have fallen. The only positive things I can say is that the RPG forums seem to be getting quite a bit of visiting as well as the Quotable Quotes and Quiz Room forums.

Granted, I am happy that the RPG's and the other two are getting more visits as they were falling slightly down hill. But we're here to have fun and get to know new people from around the globe (and I can gladly say that I have become good friends with quite a few members [you know who you are]). We used to have lots of laughs and jokes in the Mirth forum. But now, everything is less spontaneous and it saddens me. I always used to look forward to reading what funny thing was posted about the latest picture in Crazy Captions. The Werewolf games (although they have slightly lost their taste) were always a fun way to get into the RP spirit, even if it was indirectly. Yes, a lot of us (myself included) probably had lapses of stress because we were worrying about being killed off. But that was the fun things about it. The Mirth forum has lost it's spontaneousness. It's true Davem never had a big part in it, but it seems that because of his departure, it has affected all of us who normally posted there.

The Books forum seemed to be one of his favorite haunts and as said previously, it has gone downhill. This also saddens me. We are all Tolkien lovers here. We are here to express our joy in that which the dear Professor brought to us. We are here to honour his memory by discussing the finer parts of his great litterary works. We are here to discuss what we didn't like about the books (done in a proper manner mind you). Granted I've never played a big role in the Books forum (but that's because I feel quite intimidated next to all of you [Davem especially] and because what I wanted to say, had been said before hand).

The Movies forum also was a favorite of many and that seems to have fallen as well. It's true that PJ made the movies without the aid of Tolkien. But I must say that what he had to work with, he did an amazing job. Yes, there are those who would disagree with me. But that is what this site is about. Is to discuss our love of Lord of the Rings, an amazing piece of literary work and film making.

I guess what I am trying to say is that we (as in all of you) are spending time brooding over something that, in the Barrow-Wight's mind, had to be done to make this place better for us all. Thechnically, we have no power to reverse this decision. Yes, I am quite sorrowful at the banishment of Davem. I have even asked Celuien to add my name to her list of members who aren't happy about this decision. My reasoning? Not out of spite of the mods and admins. But for the reason that I am sad to see such a reputed member, a great thinker and an amazing person leave us for (what it seems like) eternity. For the reason that I do not think (in my mind anyway) that they should have banned him. I completely respect the mods decisions, even if I don't agree with it. After all, they are the authority and they are doing what's best for the site.

But I must agree with something that Davem said before hand in his farewell thread. He is the way he is. There is absolutely nothing that we can do about it. I personally don't think he should be banned for acting the way he does. He says he can't change and I agree. I have tried to change myself for so long and it just doesn't work. It may work sometimes, but not in every case. That is why I disagree with the mods.

However, I believe instead of brooding on what has been done, we try and get back to having fun. Yes, we can miss Davem's intelligence and his humour. But do we have to debate about it constantly? I will miss Davem, even though I've talked to him maybe once in my entire year on this web site. I may only be 16, but I am mature for my age (and I would assume that my writing and this post would reflect that...or I would hope anyway).

I know that this may seem to not have had a point (my posts never do seem to have a clear point do they?) but beneath all of this confusion, there is a point. Let us a move on past all this frustration towards the mods. Let us get back to having fun and discussing the things we enjoy discussing. Let's get back to honoring our dear professor. Miss Davem all you want. I am not saying that we shouldn't. Heck, I will miss him greatly! But we cannot brood on this forever. But you cannot do it as openly as you have and with as much animosity towards the mods and admins as most of you have. Even if you haven't outwardly said you're angry, you can tell in a person's posts by their writing.

So, let us move on. Let us get back to things that we enjoy and miss Davem without all this animosity, anger, frustration and annoyance.

That's all I have to say.

Yours always,

~Glirdy~

[Lalwendë]

Firstly, why have people decided to do this statement? Well you'll have to ask them; I cannot speak for individuals' different emotions over this, it was not even my idea. There is a general feeling of great discomfort and not a little sorrow, so perhaps that's the overarching motivator; for myself I am motivated by sorrow that the Downs has turned out to be not the place I thought it to be and the intense upset caused to davem.

Has the Books forum been in decline? Yes it has, and we have lost its champion, the man who would spend hours pouring over books and finding new topics to discuss. Why, after he left the Bible thread he even started yet another fantastic thread, which should show his commitment and lay to rest the myth that he wanted to be banned. Nothing has taken off in the same way since. And yes, people could get together to post things, but do people fele like posting right now? I know for myself I could spend an hour or more on a post, several volumes of HoME at my side, but do I want to dedicate my time to that endeavour now?

And why not? There is the fear of being banned - as I've said tone is a very intangible matter - and having your work wasted. There is also the niggling feeling that here I am, writing away, and what for? Who for? Other Downers? As has been made clear over and over, this site does not belong to common or garden members but to the team who head it up. So I am therefore spending my time giving them free content. Most websites would pay a lot of money for such dedicated input. I have the niggling feeling that thanks are not passing down a two-way street. Of course we are glad the admin team take the time to run the site, but this is also a privilege for them, a conferring of status and power. What do members get in this relationship? That's up to the mods of course, but bear my next point in mind.

At face value this is just another website, a collection of bytes and whatnot. However nowadays forums and bulletin boards are something more than this. They are communities. They are Villages. They have populations. And relationships form. The admins must oversee this, but they must also think about how they do this, and the ethics involved once they embark on the creation of a new Village.

Many tangible communities practice 'shunning', whereby if you do not follow the rules then you are ostracised (e.g. the Amish, religious 'cults') for good. Of course this is one way of exercising control, but it is an extreme way. Whether the members accept 'shunning' very much depends upon their own level of either education about the outside world, brain washing or addiction. In this community few of us are 'brain-washed' so we feel we must express our distaste and distress at what has happened to a member of the community whom we love. And even for some who do not love davem, they have concerns about the ethics of the case, the evidence to them is just not there.

As I say, when you create a community, you also create a complex web of human relationships and one tug on a thread can bring those relationships tumbling down. A forum aint just a website.

About some specifics brought up.

Davem was not banned first time out for behaviour. He was annoyed that due to his response to a spat in a thread he was the one being reprimanded. Parties on both sides were in the wrong, davem was the one who was blamed for off colour humour (however, being deeply patronising is not an inappropriate tone, so it seems), and eventually he decided he'd had enough and was going to leave for a bit. He was beaten, he'd taken all the blame, he was lying on the ground, but then the mod team came along and gave him a boot in the ribs just for good measure - a week's ban. Sorry, but I have to say if there was one way to antagonise someone then this was surely it.

Remember davem was man enough to leave the Bible thread when he was asked. He then went on to create a brilliant thread and it was all forgotten about as far as he was concerned. As for the so-called snide asides he made, he was laughing at himself and his hobbyhorse, as we all do now and then. He'd forgotten about it and was only concerned with getting Books back in business. Whether these statements were of the wrong 'tone' is entirely down to personal interpretation. I have mine - and I was there so I know why he said them. Mods thought otherwise as they were still angry he dared to argue his case.

And onto that subject. Davem is 46 years old. He is not 13. He also thought he was a friend of many of the mods, and as such would be able to discuss matters with the mods. He was wrong alas. Misjudgement. He was deeply upset by this afterwards. Nobody thought about how upset this would make davem. This was deeply unpleasant. However many things posted since (including boasts about the importance in the world of Tolkien scholarship of people who have been banned before) have revealed the levels of machismo and male ego that may be involved here; no man likes being argued with after all. Maybe if you all (davem included) were made to cuddle fluffy bunny wabbits and wear bras and dresses and do nurturing things for a week you would learn some of the subtleties of human relationships and drop the ego?

Come on. This was all just a stupid argument that blew up into a misunderstanding and then became some sort of vendetta resulting in davem waking up to find a horse's head in his bed (no not me, that's a mafia reference...). He's not evil, the mods aren't evil (SpM is very interesting to talk to when he's off topic). What can be done to get rid of the bad smell. I have ideas but they might not be popular as they would challenge male egos.

Get back to normal? Aye mebbe. But I've lost me rose tinted spex. It's like finding out that Father Christmas is really your dad in his underpants, he's got mince pie stains on his vest and he stinks of stale booze.

[The Only Real Estel]

Well I guess I'll chime in on this.

First off - I don't want to come off as anti-davem. Though I didn't have a lot of contact with him I am not so short-sighted that I can't see he was generally a wonderful member who contributed a wealth of information, etc., etc. as everyone has said. I enjoyed the small debate that we had in the LotB thread, & he did as well. If he wanted to come back & the powers that be allowed it that would be just fine.

But why again is the sky falling?

Originally Posted by Saurreg

After all, what's there left now that the good stuff is gone?

What? Because one member is gone? Yes, davem is a loss, & I don't want to trivialize it or sound cold. But suggesting that the content is declining based solely upon that? As has been said, discussion in the Books was "declining" long before Werewolf and other things broke onto the scene and gathered even more attention away, it hasn't been an overnight thing. davem contributed a great deal but are you suggesting that "if only davem were here, everything would be fine again”? If Downers think the discussion is lagging then I can’t for the life of me see why they don't do something about it instead of wishing davem was here to do it...

I understand you can't replace him but for all the talk of the effect davem has had on people you'd think you could've picked up a thing or two from him rather than appear completely lost without his reasoning.

Originally Posted by Thin

Yes, there was an explanation in the Coming of age club -thread *a nod of approval towards SPM*, but I wonder how many of the 'downers ever saw it. In my opinion, the information should be provided so that members have a better access to it.

If people didn't see it they can do what I did, PM another member & ask for information. What do you want the mods to do - create a thread entitled Why davem Was Banned and leave it there for two months? Three? Four?

If you really want other members to be more aware of it then post a link to Sauice's post in your signature...did you happen to read alatar’s post above yours? I don't understand why you're clamouing for "better access" when there is a very detailed and, in my opinion, well put explanation right there.

Originally Posted by alatar

davem was disregarding/taunting mods, the rules, and setting a poor example

That is the way I saw it, though I wasn't personally insulted, & I couldn't believe I saw it coming from davem. In my opinion he was four times the member than the way he was acting. Yes, Lal, I've read all you've said about Tone and I understand where you're coming from. But when you've been informed many times that what you're doing is unacceptable is it that difficult to stop?

He may have meant something completely harmless by it but if the management on the Downs deems that it is out of line then who is to decide? davem? Right or wrong it has to be the moderating team, and if you think they are abusing their powers then I simply don't see it.

Side not: Boro has posted as I've been typing this up and I just want to point out that Sauice said the decision to ban him wasn't based on members complaning. He didn't say no members complained (that I've seen). But there are probably quite a few members out there like me, if I was offended by something I wouldn't go tattle to the moderators first thing...they have to watch out for those members also.

Originally Posted by Lal

Unfortunately some people could not see that because maybe they love other things more than Tolkien or the Downs.

Or maybe others love their habits of using irony, sarcasm, & occasional downright ridicule too much to give up when asked repeatedly. I don't see how a matter of "Tone" on a touchy subject can't be adjusted if "Tolkien and the Downs" is the chief care and concern.

Originally Posted by Also posted by Lal

And what did davem do in the end? He. Left. The. Thread.

Yes, technically. At last, at the constant urging of the moderators, he did the right thing for all concerned and left. But then what did he do? He continued to make reference to it, almost as if to say "oh by the way, remember that subject? I'm still right on it..." which is unnecessary and, quite frankly - though I hate to say it about him - childish. Yes, he was using it as metaphors & examples but there are countless other things that someone as creative as davem could've used.

Lastly, I don't buy this "we are all afraid of one misstep getting us banned!" response. Please. As alatar said:

Originally Posted by alatar

Afraid of getting banned? From what I’ve seen, you’d really really have to work at it to be successful. Not sure if the content of your post is verboten? Ask a mod, or better, see if there’s something similar elsewhere in the forum and try to figure it out from there.

Or, no offence to davem, maybe try getting the point about the third time you're warned? It doesn't matter if you think the mods are being unreasonable or not, if you truly want to avoid a ban you will cease whatever it is that you're doing.

Originally Posted by Saurreg

Users seem to be accutely aware of the animosity in the air and stricter overseeing of the forums and thus fear to tread carelessly lest they share Davem's fate. I mourn for the innocence lost.

I'm treading as carefully (or carelessly, however you like ) as I ever did.

It's being made out like a temporary ban is about to be dropped on anyone all-or-a-sudden; like walking along the street & suddenly stepping into a pothole and breaking your ankle. Downers, that just isn't the case!

If the street is lined with signs stating "Beware pothole ahead!" "Careful, turn back" "Watch your step!" & perhaps even "Warning, pothole right here \/" and you keep going you have no one to blame but yourself.

Again a side note on Boro's post: If the matter is "we're all afraid of saying the wrong thing and being watched extra closely" then I still don't see the uproar. First offences do not bring you immediate probation. If you disagree you can always talk it over with a mod through a PM but in the end if you're going to insist you have the right to overrule a moderator or the Barrow-Wight then the very reason for them to volunteer their time has gone by the wayside.

[Boromir88]

Hookbill, that may be what some of us wish to see, but I think there's a bigger problem. The banning of davem is done with, the mods seemed to have discussed this greatly and felt like it was the best decision for the site. But, I see a bigger problem here developing. Now that SpM, alatar, and the mods have stepped out and explained the situation more clearly (that which I am thankful for) I see these problems developing more clearly.

Is it logical for me to say that the reason davem was banned, because the mods felt what he was doing fell under, flaming, trolling, and spamming? Since he had continued to discuss the topic of Christianity outside the LOTR bible thread?

SpM,

Myth 1: The Downs “management” is intolerant of views, beliefs and opinions which dissent from their own.

Whoever, started this myth, or whoever thinks it's true I'll be more than happy to tell them differently...just send them to me. You know fully well that I've disagreed with you several times...I wouldn't be surprised if I haven't disagreed with a moderator or admin. This has never been a problem in my view.

Myth 2: Members are increasingly at risk of being banned without justification.

I wouldn't call it so much a concern as far as a member getting banned from something they said. I think it's more of a concern of what is it that we can say or can't say? A concern that are we writing something here where a mod is going to come out give us a slap on the wrist, and restrict what we further say in the future.

Personally I didn't feel like what davem said was out of line by your own admission SpM you say nobody lodged a complaint, nobody contacted a mod for his removal or felt he had created some huge hurtful Crusade against religion. So, if nobody felt offended by his remarks why was it such a problem to the mods? It's the mods jobs to make sure to keep this as a friendly and an accepting environment as possible...if nobody had a problem with what he said (and I have yet to see or hear from somebody that did) than why did the mods feel like what he was saying was out of line? What gave them the feeling like what davem was doing was harming the 'good community' of the downs, if nobody felt offended by his remarks?

There have been times that I've found people's remarks offending, and I'm sure people have felt like what I've said before may be rather harsh. I don't think that's an intent on anyone here, and that's certainly not my intent, and I did not catch that intent in davem. If that does happen where some people did feel like they were insulted, than as Saurreg states there always seemed to be a self-modding from the members. They chat a bit, hatch out their problems and move on. If no one felt insulted or hurt by davem's remarks why should he stop from expressing his own opinion?

The point I'm trying to make, anytime you put up a thread or a topic, that topic should not be restricted to simply one view and one opinion allowed on that thread only. What good comes out of that? Ignorance to the other opinion does absolutely no one any good. Why is it that threads must be restricted only to talk about 'references to christianity, references to buddhism, references to whatever it may be,' and anyone that comes in to say 'This is not how I see it, this is not how Tolkien felt' constitutes a banning? That's how I've seen what happened here.

You say that since davem ignored repeated warnings to stop his belaboring against the members who felt like there was christianity in the story, davem had to go. The whole thing is, they weren't attacks, or at least I didn't see them as attacks, and apparently nobody did. I saw it as a challenge, I saw it as somebody who had a different view than me, and therefor I saw it as a test and as a person to argue against. You claim that this is a very accepting site of opinions, in which case I used to agree (to a certain extent I still do). But it seems rather biased to me that somebody had to stop saying what he felt, while others were free to continue to post their opinion on the subject.

Myth 3: The forum policies have changed or are being applied differently.

Aye, but the question is did what davem post constitute as 'disrespectful' and 'abrasive' attitude? If I felt like davem didn't respect my religion, I wouldn't respect him the way I do. I wouldn't respect him as a person. He expressed his opinion, arguments did get heated, but I didn't witness him insulting anyone or a particular group of people (rather he went against those that wanted to use LOTR to push their own agenda- and I find it comparable to authors that like to use the Tolkien to rake in their own profit). So, I don't see how his post to people outside the forum have anything to do with it.

Myth 4: The Downs “management” had ulterior motives in banning davem.

See what I felt about Myth 1.

Myth 5: Davem was banned because of persistent requests from one member or a small group of members.

This was not the case. Davem was banned because the mods/admins considered it appropriate, not because any member called for it. I can assure you that any suggestion or speculation that any one member or group of members demanded that davem be banned is wholly incorrect.

Here's where my biggest concern comes, was it offending, why is it that the mods felt that what he was doing was inappropriate and created an unhealthy atmosphere to the site? Going back, you say that since he ignored repeated warnings to leave the LOTR Bible thread to rest, then he continued to talk about religion and Tolkien outside the thread, that's why he was banned. This begs the question, if no one felt they were being insulted, why was it necessary to tell davem to stop posting his opinion? Why was it necessary to have him repeatedly warned to just let go the LOTR bible debate, while people were still allowed to express their different opinions? Why is it that the discussion of the topics that are sited in SpM's explanation felt they needed to be restricted to a certain opinion?

It appears to me there was some sort of babying the moderators did in this situation. To try to keep one side happy, and freely discussing their own opinion, while he was being told that he had to stop. This is what appears to be what davem didn't like, and I don't advocate it either. From the posts on fordim's and formendacil's blogs, I took that he didn't appreciate he had to stop posting his different opinion, while others were allowed to go on and share their wonderful little conversations of 'Yes, you're right, I agree. You are perfectly correct. That's so true!' (because to start criticizing and critiquing that belief is 'bad.') I don't enjoy those conversations, I'm prone in the movies thread especially, to simply argue against the popular belief of the thread just so we can get a discussion going instead of one big thread of everyone agreeing with eachother. We all like debates, we all like arguments, there have always seemed to have been great tolerance by the mods to allow this, UNTIL the LOTR Bible thread, when one person had to leave the thread at peace and let it go. But the question is why did he have to let his opinion go?

Myth 6, I don't feel is an issue here either so I won't discuss it.

Myth 7: Discussion is dying following davem’s ban.

Well I think book discussion has been declining over the years, long before davem's ban. That's apparent...though it really doesn't help things out when you get rid of a member who always had the insightful and provoking post and contributor to the books forum. It may have been in decline, but getting rid of a solid contributor to the forum only furthers the decline.

Myth 9: like 1 and 4 I know there is no truth to it at all, so not an issue.

So, I guess you can say my biggest concern with what was done is:

1) The Books forum and it's intriging great conversations of old, which davem always seemed to be a part of will continue on a spiral downward trend. There will be fewer and fewer threads where we have two opposing sides arguing their opinion, because of a fear that a mod will come over their shoulder and say 'No no no.'

I can see if davem was a nuisance and cancer to the forum I would be more than happy to make this trade off. But was he causing so many problems that he was a cancer? To the mods it appears so, but I think you fellas made too much out of nothing.

2) It seems like you (by you I mean the mods and admins) went off an instinct that felt like davem's attitude towards the religious viewpoints in several threads was unacceptable, and since he went to other threads to continue the debate he was challenging your authority. Since you were going off this instinct, you watched him and looked for any possible post where he was going against your authority and your warnings. Aye, but was davem challenging your authority as mods, or was he challenging the flimsical and biased reasons for why he was being warned? Aye, now there's the question.

Indeed I would trade one davem for 50 'Yes that's so true...you are dead on' people anyday.

[Valier]

I know that I am relitavely new here, but I have some thoughts on this that I would like to share.
First off I agree whole heartedly with Folwren on everything she has to say. What does everyone hope to accomplish with this? Is this just a way to let everyone express how they feel, or do you want something to come out of this?

Rules are part of everything. I thought it was understood that the Mods are in charge, if they don't have the right to ban someone then who does?

When I first heard that Davem was banned I thought of course he had to have done something really bad to have been banned. So I checked out the thread for myself, and as soon as I saw that it had to do with religion I didn't need to read any more. Religion is a touchy subject.
I understand where the mods where coming from. If I myself were a Mod and saw that the topic of religion was starting to heat up, and one person was lighting it, I would kindly ask that person to watch what they say. If that person continued to not "play by the rules" then it is their right as the Mods to ask him to leave.

Now I also understand how some people who knew Davem would be upset about this, but it was by his own choice right? I really have no feeling that at any time I will be banned without notice...that's just rubbish! I have thorougly enjoyed my time here and I would hate something like this to turn members off from coming here.

I have to say also that the comment about all the serious discussions going down hill since Davem's ban is kinda offending.I never noticed a big change. There is always lulls, remember new people come here all the time and lots of "newbie's" have shared very useful, serious and interesting things on this site. And just because there are not as many serious threads is that so bad? Something will come up, but in the mean time there is nothing wrong with a little fun.

I do not believe there is anything wrong with feeling that this is a community. We need to put this to a rest and get on with it. If you want something in specific to happen or change then just say it.

I myself think the Mods do a great job keeping weird and offensive people off this site and if sometime in the future something like this happens again, I am sure the Mods will deal with it fairly and tactfully. Really would it solve or help anything if the Mods posted their concerns about members as threads? No. Leave it up to them.
I doubt that my post will make a differnce about anything, but I felt the need to express how I felt, however uneloquently it may be.

Signed a new, but not so new member. Valier