Why did the Avatar thread close?

[OVUS1]

Just curious as to why it closed. I think COLOC8 brings up some interesting points and questions about our "professional" industry, some of the same points and questions that I have been asking for many years. As long as we continue to portray ourselves as rough and tumble mercenaries, and make little attempt to portray ourselves as the true professionals that we all are we will always be seen the way she sees us (and the same way many, many others see us as well). I know we have the "right" to put a "F*CK OBAMA" (or F*CK BUSH if you are so inclined) bumper sticker on our vehicle and proudly display it while we drive around (not on a company vehicle mind you), but you do understand the public's perception of that action and the overall perception of the driver, right? I was amazed at the backlash that she got when I read her post as a simple question and nothing more.

Until we start showing responsible behavior in every corner of our lives we are doomed to stay at the bottom of the heap - everything will continue to roll downhill. The first step has to be up to improve where we as an industry are, and that first step up might simply be changing an avatar to improve the perception of what we post. It's not "giving in to the man" or "censorship" or giving up some fought for "right" to offer simple respect when a fellow colleage and damage prevention professional posts a concern or opinion is it?

[ifinditunderground]

OVUS, I closed the thread because it had run it's course. Everyone got their jabs in (including "Frank"-Justice John) and their points across. And things had started to settle. My thought on closing it also included getting it closed while things were calmed down before "Frank" -Justice John had a chance to stir everyone up again. Your points are very valid and definitely worthy of discussion.....seems like we have a thread to discuss it now.......right? Of course you can also start another thread specific to your points posted above, but I think this one will be fine place to discuss them.

[OVUS1]

I agree that it was a good thing to do by closing it - it was like a runaway train that finally got off the mountain in one piece and found some level tracks - but you know I am always itching to throw my 2 cents worth in.

Thanks for the info, and congrats on being "...a splendid one to behold". Does that title come with a check?

[TheCableVine]

I haven't been on the site since Saturday. I've been fighting the flu and was afraid to check in after 3 days of being gone.

[sprayandpray]

Well,Steve, it seems like the "Liberal" members of the 'Vine were getting their butts kicked in a discussion about Avatar choices and decided, not unlike certain members of the Democratic Party, that if you can't beat 'em just shut down the thread, or try to suppress their points of view like they are trying to do with Conservative Talk Radio. (HeeHee - stir, stir)

[ifinditunderground]

If you weren't so old Spray I'd hit you over the head with my Rottweiler......
And OVUS, Steve pays me monstrous stacks of money, he just forgets to put it in the mail......

[RD_Wrangler]

*sigh* really?

[AULupstate]

I have NO comment, been there done that. Said what was said.

[ifinditunderground]

OVUS, I have been picking my brain trying to find a proper/constructive response to your post.

The only thing I can think of is:
This is a place for some to vent, and the postings here do not necessarily reflect their attitudes/performance at work.
I got nothing else. It really is a double edged sword. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

[sprayandpray]

I just reported Ifindit to the AARP and the SPCA for threatening to abuse his dog and a Senior Citizen!!

[RD_Wrangler]

Just curious as to why it closed. I think COLOC8 brings up some interesting points and questions about our "professional" industry, some of the same points and questions that I have been asking for many years. As long as we continue to portray ourselves as rough and tumble mercenaries, and make little attempt to portray ourselves as the true professionals that we all are we will always be seen the way she sees us (and the same way many, many others see us as well). I know we have the "right" to put a "F*CK OBAMA" (or F*CK BUSH if you are so inclined) bumper sticker on our vehicle and proudly display it while we drive around (not on a company vehicle mind you), but you do understand the public's perception of that action and the overall perception of the driver, right? I was amazed at the backlash that she got when I read her post as a simple question and nothing more.

Until we start showing responsible behavior in every corner of our lives we are doomed to stay at the bottom of the heap - everything will continue to roll downhill. The first step has to be up to improve where we as an industry are, and that first step up might simply be changing an avatar to improve the perception of what we post. It's not "giving in to the man" or "censorship" or giving up some fought for "right" to offer simple respect when a fellow colleague and damage prevention professional posts a concern or opinion is it?

John,

I agree whole-heartedly with you...and disagree completely.

If we wish to be taken seriously as an industry, how we appear and portray ourselves in the course of our daily business dealings, truly needs to change. It's an obligation we have to our industry, our employers, and our careers. Personal respect and pride in what we do.

As an individual however, each has his or her own obligation to portray the image of themselves how they would prefer to be viewed by others. Would I use a half-naked woman or pooh-flinging ape as an avatar? No. Because that's not me. That's not the image I wish to portray as an individual. Nor is it the professional image I wish to portray. But it's MY image and MY sense of courtesy that I'm concerned with. And it's the only one I have any control over in a format such as this. I don't have the right, nor the authority to dictate what is proper to others. I can only do MY part to censor what it is I don't wish to observe.

As an employer, YOU have the ability to dictate the image portrayed by any of your employees while they are drawing your wages, operating your vehicle and representing your company. You have the authority to dictate what they wear, how they present themselves, etc. But when they're off the clock...not so much....as long as their behavior or appearance doesn't affect their work performance/safety. I say this despite some of the less than savory practices recently enacted by employers in multiple fields in using public internet forums and social networks to persecute employees. But that is another topic.

In a public setting (a park or restaurant for instance) in which others will come in contact with you without choice of their own, individuals DO have an obligation to their fellow citizens to portray and behave in a manner which is deemed acceptable. For example it wouldn't be proper for an individual to walk around naked, curse loudly, wear inappropriate clothing, etc. People have no recourse but to see you behave in such a manner...and such behavior should be unacceptable. If I'm in a public arena where someone's lack of decorum is offensive to me or my children, I THEN have the right to censor their activities, as I have no "back button" or remote control in real life.

In a setting such as my home, a club, social organization, or I dunno...website or forum...it is the community, or the owner/leaders, within those particular formats that determine what is "acceptable". The Boy Scouts of America for instance doesn't allow within it's ranks anyone with a homosexual preference. It is contrary to what the organization believes to be acceptable, regardless of public opinion. They have that right to choose. I don't allow men in my home with more than 1 extra hole in their bodies than what they were born with, it's MY decision. On the other hand there are nudist colonies, liberal communes, etc. who's members have a FAR broader sense of what is acceptable, than what even some of our more brazen posters here would have.

Regardless of my personal feelings on the issue, or yours, in the end it is Steve's ultimate decision as to what should be deemed appropriate and what shouldn't. He owns, maintains, and operates this site for our pleasure. If he chose to dictate that certain avatars or picture postings were inappropriate to the image he wanted to portray on HIS website...I would give him my full support...it's HIS house. If his intention is for this site to be a representative of the industry, rather than a forum for the social interaction of individuals who happen to have the industry in common...again...my full support.

If he however feels this is a social forum for free interaction among people to be used for fun as well as sharing of technical info. then it is up to the community to dictate what is acceptable, censoring each other as need be...which I think they have done quite well to date. Will everyone be comfortable with every post here? Nope (back button). Do I want to see the posts or avatars of every member on the site? Nope (block user). Individual choice and personal responsibility is ALWAYS better than established set regulation. Ever hear the the quote "Formerly we suffered under too much crime, today we suffer from too many laws." ? It's a good one.

Why is it every time I post it turns into a dang novel?

[ifinditunderground]

Ovus?

[OVUS1]

My view of the internet is that it is a social interaction forum (public setting) just like life, except that we get to hide behind "anonymity" to a certain degree. That "anonymity" factor leads to people saying (and sometimes even spewing) anything they feel like saying, whether there is truth, substance, or any real value in their words. We use the internet to insulate ourselves from the world and still give us a social outlet at the same time. Nobody can tell us to shut up, nobody can do anything to us, we are free to add to or take away as we see fit. We continue to devalue direct human interaction and slide further and further into the virtual world, and that is becoming dangerous. When we lose value of each other, life as we know it will change in major ways. Life is already changing even as I type this post. We are not entitled to tolerance from others, but generally get exactly what we give. Give no respect - get no respect, that is generally the law of the land.

It is my opinion that having both good character and respect are virtues that we should have even in the dark, even when we are asleep, and should extend into every corner of life we choose to put ourselves into, whether in a public setting or in a virtual life. My biggest problem is not how others see me, it's how I see myself every time I look in a mirror. And, I always ask What Would Jesus Do if it were Him..................

And while Steve may be the administrator when it comes to this site, I don't need Steve to tell me when I am out of line - I generally know it right after I hit the SEND button........

[AULupstate]

I ask What Would Chuck Norris Do??????


(sorry, inapropriate, but funny, I couldn't help myself)

[RD_Wrangler]

My view of the internet is that it is a social interaction forum (public setting) just like life, except that we get to hide behind "anonymity" to a certain degree. That "anonymity" factor leads to people saying (and sometimes even spewing) anything they feel like saying, whether there is truth, substance, or any real value in their words. We use the internet to insulate ourselves from the world and still give us a social outlet at the same time. Nobody can tell us to shut up, nobody can do anything to us, we are free to add to or take away as we see fit. We continue to devalue direct human interaction and slide further and further into the virtual world, and that is becoming dangerous. When we lose value of each other, life as we know it will change in major ways. Life is already changing even as I type this post. We are not entitled to tolerance from others, but generally get exactly what we give. Give no respect - get no respect, that is generally the law of the land.

It is my opinion that having both good character and respect are virtues that we should have even in the dark, even when we are asleep, and should extend into every corner of life we choose to put ourselves into, whether in a public setting or in a virtual life. My biggest problem is not how others see me, it's how I see myself every time I look in a mirror. And, I always ask What Would Jesus Do if it were Him..................

And while Steve may be the administrator when it comes to this site, I don't need Steve to tell me when I am out of line - I generally know it right after I hit the SEND button........

Again, I agree with you completely (to a point). I strive every day to live by a strict self-imposed code of ethics. My integrity is the only thing I will be able to take with me in the end. I intend for it to be intact. I agree that good character and respect are virtues to strive for, continuously.

BUT, I can only dictate what *I* do. I can only control MY actions. It is not MY place (nor yours) to dictate to others as to their behavior, if it doesn't have a direct impact upon my life. It doesn't in this format. Regardless of how you "see" it, the fact is, the internet is infinitely malleable in that I can control what I see, read, and hear on it completely, and so can you. Because of this amount of control, I am inherently responsible for self-censoring those things I don't wish to see. I HAVE control, so I also own the personal responsibility of doing so. I prefer it that way.

Try to understand. I agree with your stance completely in that I truly wish everyone would live their lives with a sense of integrity and decorum as a sign of respect for, not only others, but themselves as well. Those who DON'T conduct themselves with such restraint, I simply don't associate with. I just don't feel it is MY place to dictate what that line should be for others, excepting of course in their direct interaction with me. Anonymity has little to nothing to do with it. The conduct I exhibit on this site, is the exact same as how I conduct myself in my personal life. I expect the same is true of most members.

Is the whole picture thing a big deal? Nope. But the idea behind wanting to regulate them because of a sense of personal morality, when individuals have the freedom and ready ability to NOT see them, is what I oppose. The implications behind the motivation to remove them are large indeed. Freedom implies that everyone should be entitled to make moral discriminations for themselves, by choice, not by force. I react so strongly to your stance because I feel it is a slippery slope of ideology that has slowly whittled away the liberties of individuals in our culture. Conservative religious groups and liberal social organizations alike all seem to feel that they know whats "best" for us, and that we need to enact laws to enforce those convictions. What they really feel is what's best for THEM, and want the rest of us to conform to their ideals. And while there IS a need for a legal definition as to whats acceptable, for the protection of the public at large (already established as I've pointed out), it should be minimalist at best. And it should NEVER be based on such a perceptual and intangible concept as morality. If we went that route the 7th Days would have us in jail for working on Saturday, the Mormons would have us jailed for drinking a cup of joe, the Muslims would be throwing women in jail for showing their face...oh wait...we see that now...

I see this little discussion we are having as symptomatic of an ongoing complacence we face today. We're getting used to being told HOW we should think, WHAT we should see, and HOW we should feel about certain things...rather than being encouraged to make those decisions for ourselves. Frankly, it scares the hell out of me. I can do without the morality police in my life thank you, we already have enough stupid laws.

As far as needing Steve to tell me when I'm out of line? I don't need it either. But, he's the ONLY one with the authority to dictate what I post here and what I don't. It's his house.