I wanted to let a few days go by, before I responded, to see what direction this discussion took, and to let my own thoughts coalesce. I know some will resent that I’m reviving a contentious thread they rather would disappear, but I feel the subject is an important one, and one worth exploring. If you are one of those has read this far with dread in your heart, I recommend following Oz’s advice and if you don’t like something, or it offends, move on to the next thread.”
I apologize for the length of this. In my old age, I’ve become verbose. But, I also was a communications major in college, and I have an inbred fear of miscommunication. So, I’d rather use too many words than use too few, thus running the risk of misunderstanding.
One of the most interesting things I found in the responses to my post was that, rather than address the point I was trying to make, most focused on the example I used to make it. I wished to see who else felt that the blanket statement “it sucks not being able to state an opinion without fear of retaliation” is accurate. I TOTALLY disagree with that. Even giving the benefit of the doubt by assuming he actually meant not being able to state a negative opinion of Axiom the company, or Axiom products without receiving retaliation” I would disagree, though I would concede that it does, occasionally, happen. This IS, after all, the Axiom forum. I would submit, however, that this occurs primarily when the poster is unwise with how the negative opinion is expressed. I have seen many more negative opinions expressed without incident, than with.
A similar incident just occurred on the av123 forum. Rather than delivering his criticism with tact (Gee, guys. I can’t figure out why I’m not hearing what I expected to hear, and I’m disappointed), the poster came off as saying “What the heck? This is piece of garbage. You guys conned me” (those are my, slightly exaggerated for effect, interpretations, NOT what he literally said). The staff, understandably, defended their honor, the initial poster got defensive, miscommunication and misunderstanding flourished, and we were off to the races (I did NOT participate in this thread).
My point is, if one is going to criticize a product or company on the forum operated by that company and populated by owners of that companies products, it would seem, to me, that being VERY careful how you phrase your criticism would be an exceptionally wise path. And, should one chose NOT to follow that path, one should not be outraged at receiving flak in return.
As to the specific example I cited in my post, I’m reminded of a conflict I had with neighbor years ago. We both agreed that living in an apartment meant making sacrifices. However, we disagreed on the nature of the sacrifice. He felt that one had to endure the behavior of other tenants. Among other habits, he would move his speakers out on the back porch which was literally 1 foot from my back porch, and crank his music for hours. This, on a courtyard with 4 townhouses along one side, 4 townhouses directly across the courtyard from the first 4, and, at one end of the courtyard, an apartment building with the windows of, perhaps, 15 apartments facing the courtyard. In fairness to him, had I done the same, he probably would’ve “endured” it without saying a word.
I, however, felt that, when one lives in an apartment one must, out of consideration for others, curb one’s behavior. Needless to say, we didn’t get along. I suspect we held differing points of view for the very same reason; it was how we were raised. If my father caught me stepping on someone else’s toes (literally or figuratively), I’d get a light crack on the back of the head, nothing abusive, just a little attention getter. He would then bend down and gently whisper into my ear “there are other people in the world besides you.” I’ve never forgotten the message.
We seem to have a similar situation here. On one side, there are those who seem to feel it’s acceptable to say anything, even in jest, expecting others to “endure” it or move on to another thread, while on the other side are those who feel it’s incumbent on us all to take into consideration the feelings of others. It’s obvious on which side of the argument I can be found. I’d be interested to hear on which side others can be found.
On the personal note, I ask that anyone who has stuck with this so far go back and reread my post. I tried (and feel I succeeded) to restrict my criticism to Mike’s POST. While indirectly that criticism reflects on Mike himself, at no time did I denigrate him personally or call him names. Yet, in return, I got “there is no reasoning with you,” which I found a particularly interesting conclusion since no attempt was made to reason with me. And then, of course, I was derogatorily referred to as a “cop.”
Oh, and Oz? Just so you don't misunderstand, it's not the words that offend me. I have a few years on you and was a musician all my life. You'd have to use the words about 20 times a minute to catch up to me. What bothers me is using the words in a public place without consideration for those who MIGHT be offended by them. It seems to me just another example of the selfish society in which we exist. You may feel you have the right to say anything you want anyplace, but what about the right of others to NOT hear the words. I have the right to swing my fist anywhere I want. But, my right to swing my fist ends at your nose.
I know that values and mores continue to change, but have we reached a point on this forum and in our society where tact and consideration for others, and the expectation of same, are not only disappearing, but now are considered a character flaw? Are there NO standards to which we must adhere?
