All this has happened before. All this will happen again.

While words have been said on rationalizing why no one jumped in to support me against the charges laid by Brandon, the obvious words left unsaid - that no one had the balls to say - was this was also the case for Brandon - no one here felt the responsibility to either back up his charges, or chastise him for making such outrageous claims.  And yet with just ONE accuser before us, another RPeep who has been here for a while actually had to ask if its true.  Wow.  If I ever needed evidence to reinforce my long-held belief that a lack of visible public moderation here has its consequences, there it is.

Some time ago it was suggested to me that frothing on in the forum about public figures was fine and dandy - including libelous claims against honourable persons who serve your country, but any personal attacks on  fellow RPeeps was verboten.  Of course the enforcement to correct any personal attacks that did take place was never there, so nature taking its course, and with no evidence of consequences, the frothing and attacks against public figures was easily redirected at any RPeep - not just me - who offered even the slightest of opposition to the bleating.

The total failure to excoriate or even publicly reprimand in some fashion those who go too far has a predictable result of driving many voices away from this forum.  Why would anyone wish to risk the wrath of a Brandon or HC or Servo or even maybe a Beaker for merely stating an opposing opinion?  Must all opinions be carefully worded and threaded ever so delicately to avoid disrupting the sensibilities of the reader?  If you have anything resembling conservative viewpoints, that certainly seems what is demanded here - and my experience here is not the only one.

As a place for serious political discussion, this forum is a near total failure.  With my voice removed for some months, it was noted by more than one person that the level of rancor remained unchanged.  Blame me all you want.  Blame any other loud voices, be they conservative, liberal, independent or nutbar all you want.  Point the fingers where ever you choose - but know this - many of us have long recognized the reason for the failure of reasonable discourse in this forum - and the root of this failure isn't with any one individual participant. 

As far as my responses to certain people here goes, while some may dislike my style and claim alienation, in the face of no moderation or demerits for those who cross the line in their rhetoric, I'd like you to consider the presentation alternatives available to an opposing voice in responding to the screaming and frothing ALREADY ON DISPLAY.  And don't start with me in an admonishment to provide reasoned discourse in 'leading by example' - as this isn't anything demanded of anyone else here.

Unintended Consequences

The consequences of failing to set and maintain a reasonable standard for discourse here are numerous, and many are not obvious to anyone not familiar with the dynamics at play on a public forum.  Here's just a couple I have personally observed:

Knowledgeable voices on serious subjects remain muted and unwilling to participate AT ALL, having seen long-term the non-serious responses to serious topics, and/or the angry arrows aimed at the outspoken.

While almost all of us here are quite reasonable folks, all it takes is just a few - even one or two - to run amok, do silly things and pay no consequences, thus setting an (undesirable) example for others on just what can be gotten away with here. And thus the newbie lurker can turn into another example of a forum participant showing behaviour that is undesirable.  I've seen this several times now.

Newbie members assume the worst about certain members based solely upon the obvious and blatant disdain that a handful of others post.  With no corrective action taken against the offenders, the newbie assumes that allegations are true.  'Your reputation precedes you'...  Sad that the reputation of others may be controlled in any way by the vocal frothing of a handful here, but there it is.

RP members leave the forum and RP permanently as a result of the intolerance on display.  Military spouses have left not to return. How many now?

People leave here for Facebook, RL or safer environs elsewhere due to the venom and vicious attacks.  The RP forum isn't the only place to connect with music lovers, or other like-minded folk on any topic. Facebook, as one example, offers personal accountability (you use your real name) - and the prospect of moderation.  With every forum participant lost, the chance is high that their economic support is also lost.  While the forum is a tiny part of the business that is RP,   IMO, the opportunities available to RP to use it to their advantage are for the most part being wasted ... having venom and conflicts on public display weekly can't possibly be good for any business model.  One display of intolerance or personal attack allowed to stand undoes many dozens of great posts by the rest of the community.

Yeah so?

In the end, this post isn't about me.  It isn't about Brandon.  Its about the much bigger picture - the direction of the RP forum and your own personal interactions with others here.  Want to talk about anything other than politics - fine.  But talk about politics at your own peril here - for there are nearly no limits to what will be tolerated in the forum - Brandon's recent malicious allegations and personal attacks, which he refuses to either prove or retract - and has paid no observable consequences for, have reinforced this for us all once again - as if some of us needed a reminder.

Unless things change around here, which I highly doubt, I see the pattern continuing on.  That's truly sad.

All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.

ADDENDUM:

I'd also like to point out that the lack of effective moderation also has had negative effects on one of the most important areas on this entire website - the song comments area.  Talk about cutting your own throat there...

And a heartfelt thank you to those of you who stepped in to address an RP member's question and refute the allegations made by Brandon.  Your efforts did not go unnoticed.  If the forum had any semblance of moderation, such events wouldn't likely occur in the first place.

Stimulating Hypocrisy

Earlier this year, Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 without a single Republican vote in the House of Representatives and with the support of only three Republicans in the Senate. This stimulus bill, which included $552 billion in spending and $275 billion in tax cuts, has provided much-needed support to state and local economies across the country. Cognizant to this fact, conservatives have jumped on the chance to personally deliver stimulus money to their cash-strapped states and districts, while conveniently brushing past their original opposition. A two-faced approach to the stimulus debate has become routine for many Republicans, with many GOP lawmakers who are standing against the stimulus in Washington, D.C., but touting it when they travel home to their constituents.

CONGRESSIONAL HYPOCRITES: Several House Republicans who opposed the Recovery Act quickly returned to their districts to tout projects that it funded. Stimulus opponent Rep. Joseph Cao (R-LA) met with New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin (D) and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood recently to solicit stimulus money for streetcar expansions and road repairs. Cao proudly boasted that he is looking "at federal monies that the state has and channeling more of that money to the district." Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) earlier this month asked for stimulus funds to be diverted into paying down the deficit rather than paying it out to states. But the same day he took credit for the construction site at Blue Grass Army Depot in Madison County, Kentucky — a project that was funded in large part by the Recovery Act. One of the most brazen acts of hypocrisy came from House Minority Whip Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), who has repeatedly claimed that the stimulus is "failing" to create jobs. Earlier this month, Cantor appeared at a job fair in Midlothian, VA, to demonstrate how he is working on "long-term solutions that will put...Virginia workers back on the path to financial stability." But scores of jobs advertised at the jobs fair were created by the stimulus, and Chesterfield County, where the fair was being held, will receive more than $38 million in stimulus funding over the next two years.

HYPOCRITICAL GOVERNORS: Republican governors lined up to attack the Recovery Act and oppose its passage as well. Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA), said if he was still a member of Congress he would've voted against the stimulus and wrote an op-ed in Politico lambasting the Recovery Act's effect, calling it the "stimulus that has not stimulated." Yet the very next day, he appeared with constituents in Louisiana to present a jumbo-sized check of federal grant money authorized under the Recovery Act to residents of Vernon Parish. He later toured the state in a "Louisiana Working" tour, handing out millions of dollars of stimulus money while simultaneously attacking "Washington Spending." Similarly, Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal last year titled "Don't Bail Out My State," proudly boasting about being the only governor to travel to Washington to lobby against the stimulus package. Yet after the legislation was passed, Sanford changed his mind and told reporters that being against the Recovery Act "doesn't preclude taking the money." In April, Sanford became the last governor to seek economic recovery funds.

THE STIMULUS IS WORKING: The Council of Economic Advisers, in a report released earlier this month, called the Recovery Act the "boldest countercyclical fiscal stimulus in American history" and concluded that the stimulus added nearly 500,000 jobs to the economy in the second quarter of 2009 that would not have been there without it. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), one of the few Republicans who voted in favor of the stimulus, noted last March that even "those who were opposed to the stimulus spending will see some of the projects that are underway in their communities as they've initiated." Snowe said she believes that the effect of the spending has been to create an "amazing" number of projects in her home state. Many conservatives who opposed the stimulus or the idea of Keynesian spending in general have started to line up to defend the Recovery Act. On Aug. 7, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who served as Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) chief economic adviser during his 2008 campaign, told reporters that "no one would argue that the stimulus has done nothing." Three days later, Niall Ferguson of the conservative Hoover Institution said the Recovery Act "has clearly made a significant contribution to stabilizing the US economy."