Discover?

[KEVMOVE02]

The OP did not post a topic about religion and politics. He posted the word "God" in a topic about Discover.
Technically it fails to count as a violation of the forum "law".

- God loves them,

- their decisions have eternal consequences,

- they are loved (by God)

 - There but for the grace of God go we all.

Seemed pretty religious to me. 

"

In your experience, do people act in their own best interest? "

That was the question Yorick replied to, and I completely understand how he involves his obviously strong belief in God in his reply as it is relevant - he was asked about

his

experience.

I think it's best if the moderator could step in rather quickly and say whether that was over the line or not.

Contextually, his comment (as listed above) was not consistent with the tone of the conversation. People who participate in an open collaboration service without reading and understanding the Terms of Service is deemed to be "not acting in your own best interest, which is a slight variation of the term "Caveat Emptor". Therefore, you can't make an argument that Yorick's answer was a topically valid response or refutation to my question.

[Jagwah]

I don't like heavy policing and lack of freedom of speech either but this is an audio forum and we could end up with constant arguments on certain topics derailing threads everywhere.
 
Also, I found this "There but for the grace of God go we all" - to be pushing the issue on a different level, that even I find totally unacceptable.

[Gaja]

I wouldn't call it fascist at all.
Enoch was actually more friendly than I had expected, when he kindly asked to leave religion out of the forum, as per the forum rules.
Since the rules have been outlined very clearly, and Yorick was in breach of te rules, Enoch's intervention was justified imo.
Audio equippment, software, etc, these are things one can argue about. Points can be made to support a statement, or to falsify it.
Religion is an entirely different matter. One person says they have made a religious experience, and the next guy can only say I believe you, or call bullshit, unless of course they're trained in dealing with these kind of experiences. And both approaches can't get even close to understanding what the other guy meant. He has had an obviously different path, which lead him to where he is now, and nobody can fully appreciate his experience, because of that.
And that is why I think leaving religion out of the Forum is the right ting to do, not only for the vibe of the forum, but also for the individual, religious or not.

But Selig has kindly asked to stay on topic: discover...

I think a better browsing experience, would help discover stuff faster. I think tags should be applied.

[Noplan]

Since PH introduced Discover I'm firmly convinced that there is no God.

[Lunesis]

So should I take this to mean that you guys have run out of relevant conversation for this thread?

[orthodox]

Points can be made to support a statement, or to falsify it. Religion is an entirely different matter.

Why is that?

The question was 'In your experience, do people act in their own best interest?'.
That itself was a statement, without any supporting points, which constitutes personal belief that people are inherently blind. (That might also be a doubt that Yorick is acting in his own interest, but that's another story).
Yorick just could not make a point that could not be discredited.
He could just say 'yes they do, I believe' and they would be even.
But he tried to elaborate on the destructive cause of questioning common sense and happened to mention God, which offended many.

There are many baseless things said on the forum which are not even called bullshit.
But using religion concepts in a context, not as an argument, but rather as a form of expression, amounts to a rule violation.
That equates religion concepts with expletives.
That is not right.

Sorry for this OT and my English.

Btw, I don't support Yorick's opinion about licensing policies. Serious music makers can choose whatever they want, but this Discover sandbox is for the masses.

[Gaja]

Points can be made to support a statement, or to falsify it. Religion is an entirely different matter.

Why is that?

The question was 'In your experience, do people act in their own best interest?'.
That itself was a statement, without any supporting points, which constitutes personal belief that people are inherently blind. (That might also be a doubt that Yorick is acting in his own interest, but that's another story).
Yorick just could not make a point that could not be discredited.
He could just say 'yes they do, I believe' and they would be even.
But he tried to elaborate on the destructive cause of questioning common sense and happened to mention God, which offended many.

There are many baseless things said on the forum which are not even called bullshit.
But using religion concepts in a context, not as an argument, but rather as a form of expression, amounts to a rule violation.
That equates religion concepts with expletives.
That is not right.

Sorry for this OT and my English.

Btw, I don't support Yorick's opinion about licensing policies. Serious music makers can choose whatever they want, but this Discover sandbox is for the masses.

I never meant to equate religion to expletives. I meant that religion can't be falsified because it's a matter of personal experience that in most cases cannot be reproduced.
I agree that discover is mainly for the masses, but professionals might use it for certain things.

[avasopht]

... religion can't be falsified because it's a matter of personal experience that in most cases cannot be reproduced ...

Hence why it's an awful topic of discussion. Just look at this thread.

These are the reasons I never created a forum. I have the servers and the software, heck I installed a forum for Reason months ago but decided not to because of the tough task of moderation.

I think the mods here are doing a fantastic job of making this a productive place. There may be a few sour feelings for some, but we have to make a choice as members whether we want this to be a productive place or an unproductive one.

Perhaps if we play nice we could have a religion and politics section (something I doubt would ever happen). But since we are a community it's only natural for us to want to exchange and debate ideas. But how about we focus on sharing musical and technical ideas

[selig]

... religion can't be falsified because it's a matter of personal experience that in most cases cannot be reproduced ...

Hence why it's an awful topic of discussion. Just look at this thread.

These are the reasons I never created a forum. I have the servers and the software, heck I installed a forum for Reason months ago but decided not to because of the tough task of moderation.

I think the mods here are doing a fantastic job of making this a productive place. There may be a few sour feelings for some, but we have to make a choice as members whether we want this to be a productive place or an unproductive one.

Perhaps if we play nice we could have a religion and politics section (something I doubt would ever happen). But since we are a community it's only natural for us to want to exchange and debate ideas. But how about we focus on sharing musical and technical ideas

There are plenty of places to discuss religion and politics, but few to discuss Reason and Discover!!! This IS a Reason forum, after all.

I feel there's a thread lock in the near future if you guys can't get this thread back on topic. It's really easy to do - if you're not talking about "Discover" in this thread, it's off topic.

[jappe]

So should I take this to mean that you guys have run out of relevant conversation for this thread?

Hi Lunesis,

could you please reply to my question earlier in this thread about whether or not Yorick's post violated the religion related forum rule please.

[KEVMOVE02]

... religion can't be falsified because it's a matter of personal experience that in most cases cannot be reproduced ...

Hence why it's an awful topic of discussion. Just look at this thread.

These are the reasons I never created a forum. I have the servers and the software, heck I installed a forum for Reason months ago but decided not to because of the tough task of moderation.

I think the mods here are doing a fantastic job of making this a productive place. There may be a few sour feelings for some, but we have to make a choice as members whether we want this to be a productive place or an unproductive one.

Perhaps if we play nice we could have a religion and politics section (something I doubt would ever happen). But since we are a community it's only natural for us to want to exchange and debate ideas. But how about we focus on sharing musical and technical ideas

There are plenty of places to discuss religion and politics, but few to discuss Reason and Discover!!! This IS a Reason forum, after all.

I feel there's a thread lock in the near future if you guys can't get this thread back on topic. It's really easy to do - if you're not talking about "Discover" in this thread, it's off topic.

Please, please, please lock this thread, unless one of these conditions are met:

1. Someone is interested in discussing why a user of any online service in general, or Discover specifically, would not thoroughly read and understand the Terms of Service prior to enrolling in said service.
2. If it is true that users of Discover are granting limited usage rights that are exempt from royalty fees, wouldn't you want to know ahead of time?
3. Do the Terms of Service change, based on region?
4. Based on experience and intent, is this a case of much ado about nothing? There are few experiences that bring me more joy than sitting in on  a jam session where we are sharing ideas and musical phrases, waiting for serendipity to occur. Discover, in its purest and most innocent form, is a worldwide jam session. It would be quite a feat to have a Discover Jam session turn into a monster hit and somehow none of the artist involved in the jam session even know what happen, let alone be deprived of their fair share. For goodness sake, Pharrell and Robin Thicke had to "give up the loot" for lifting "Got To Give It Up". Smashing.

Also exempt from discussion are prior agreements that prevent you from participating in a collaboration service. If you signed a contract that makes your content exclusive to one party, Discover is definitely not an option and anything you may contribute is greatly biased.

[selig]

So should I take this to mean that you guys have run out of relevant conversation for this thread?

Hi Lunesis,

could you please reply to my question earlier in this thread about whether or not Yorick's post violated the religion related forum rule please.

Brent will have to answer that one.

But I CAN tell you this - because of the fact that religion has become a topic of this thread, it's gone steadily downhill and increasingly off topic.

IMO this thread justifies the ban on certain subjects and also suggests erring on the side of caution in the future. Something to think about, anyway.

Welcome to REASON TALK. Let's talk about Reason!

[jappe]

So should I take this to mean that you guys have run out of relevant conversation for this thread?

Hi Lunesis,

could you please reply to my question earlier in this thread about whether or not Yorick's post violated the religion related forum rule please.

Brent will have to answer that one.

But I CAN tell you this - because of the fact that religion has become a topic of this thread, it's gone steadily downhill and increasingly off topic.

IMO this thread justifies the ban on certain subjects and also suggests erring on the side of caution in the future. Something to think about, anyway.

Welcome to REASON TALK. Let's talk about Reason!

The thread is certainly off topic now yes.
In order to prevent that happening again, it would be good to know exactly how strict we are about the religious (or politics) rule interpretation. And also to think about why the thread went a stray like this.

IMO Yorick was on-topic until he replied to an off-topic question about his personal experience.
His reply involved the word G*d I guess because that is something he likes to relate to when asked about personal experience.
And after that, he was asked in the forum to not talk about religion. Which doesn't seem to comply with the forum rules/recommendations:
"If you witness any of these above violations send a private message to either myself or any of our forum administrators and we will look into it."

If the above rule(/suggestion?) had been followed then I don't think we would not have had these problems.

[EnochLight]

:frown:

 

[avasopht]

The thread is certainly off topic now yes.
In order to prevent that happening again, it would be good to know exactly how strict we are about the religious (or politics) rule interpretation. And also to think about why the thread went a stray like this.

IMO Yorick was on-topic until he replied to an off-topic question about his personal experience.
His reply involved the word G*d I guess because I guess that is something he likes to relate to when asked about personal experience.
And after that, he was asked in the forum to not talk about religion. Which doesn't seem to comply with the forum rules/recommendations:
"If you witness any of these above violations send a private message to either myself or any of our forum administrators and we will look into it."

If the above rule(/suggestion?) had been followed then I don't think we would not have had these problems.

Just apply common sense. Here's my edited version that gets the same message across:

"Some do yes. The success rate of Alcoholics Anonymous is testimony to that for example. With certain self-esteeming information - that who they are is valuable, that they have worth, that what they do matters, that their decisions have eternal consequences, yes, people can and do make decisions to act in ways that benefit themselves. I've seen it; and I've frustratingly seen people who stay in the same self-destructive cycles, unable to accept that they are loved, that they are valuable and who they are matters. It's heartbreaking."

Notice that it has not affected the conclusion, conveys the exact same message, shares the vital elements of answering in relation to experience and yet doesn't instigate religious debate


RIGHT AND NOW TO BRING THIS THREAD ONTO A MORE PRODUCTIVE TOPIC

Has Discover made you look at old songs you've made? Would you consider making a Refill or sharing some of your old useless loops and be happy if someone else makes a hit record from it?

[Gaja]

Actually yes I have. I'll see if I can find some old reason 3 projects

[selig]

Has Discover made you look at old songs you've made? Would you consider making a Refill or sharing some of your old useless loops and be happy if someone else makes a hit record from it?

Discover hasn't inspired me to start going through my old songs yet, but if it does it occurs to me I'll probably have to go through and put the songs into three major categories. The first, songs I plan to finish myself. The second, potential collaboration ideas where I'd like to choose the specific collaborators. And the third, whatever is left, which I'm obviously not planning to do ANYTHING with ever. The ideas from the third category are the ones I'd potentially upload to Discover, assuming I finish the workload from the first two categories first!

[KEVMOVE02]

IMO Yorick was on-topic until he replied to an off-topic question about his personal experience. 

This is not correct. The question "do people act in their own best interest?" was asked in the context of an individual actually taking the time to be informed about the terms of service for Discover and their individual copyrights. His response was not only a violation of the forum rules, but it was off topic. 

[selig]

IMO Yorick was on-topic until he replied to an off-topic question about his personal experience. 

This is not correct. The question "do people act in their own best interest?" was asked in the context of an individual actually taking the time to be informed about the terms of service for Discover and their individual copyrights. His response was not only a violation of the forum rules, but it was off topic. 

Indeed, and agreed, but it was not done intentionally as he was not aware of the rules at that time (the rule about religion was added after the forums were up and running). 

Now that we've gotten that out of our system, here's one more chance to get this thread back on topic before it's locked. 

[selig]

Sorry folks, nothing personal but I've been pretty clear.

Thread Locked.