2over1

Please refrain from telling me what I believe or what my motives are since you do not know. My motives are exactly as I've stated and nothing more. I wear my heart on my sleeve and may not be particularly good at politics, but almost always try to act in the interests of the greater good, whether you want to believe it or not. If you read in between the lines you might be able to figure out why this thread was necessary-- and it wasn't because I felt peeved. So PLEASE do not attempt to assess my motives-- your view of me is dead wrong. I stand by what I wrote. My memory is that you and Uday (mostly Uday as I recall) were not thrilled with the prospect of giving people the ability to prevent people from joining tourneys based on various criteria such as language or skill level. If I am wrong on that, it is a mistake of memory, not an attempt to misconstrue the truth. Perhaps the complaints came from others on this board. I do not recall-- but I HONESTLY thought that Uday stated on several occasions his contempt for the ideas of limiting things in such a way. The ONLY THING I wasn't clear about (and I was not being deceitful in any way) was that those restrictions applied to tourneys and not tables. If my memory is wrong, I apologize, but I do NOT like being accused of things that have no basis in fact whatsoever. You don't have to like what I wrote. Fine. I wish I hadn't had to post in the 1st place. But, I assure you, the reasons for the posting have far more to do with ongoing behavior rather than one isolated incident. I hoped bringing one absurd, ridiculous example to the front would perhaps get a dialogue going. It was a dialogue that should have started long ago, in the opinion of many. (Indeed, I volunteered to start a thread on this subject BEFORE the person did this stupid little thing-- and I am fully aware of its stupidity). Many, many people have complained for a long time. It is a constant source of both amusement and irritation amongst many. It was merely the launching point on a subject that should have been broached long ago.

Oh it was most definitely aimed at me-- ask the moderator. He was attempting to punish me for a perceived transgression from months ago (I learned this through a mutual friend). It was, indeed, as I've posted-- someone who was given some extra special power and that person abusing that power-- and then essentially mocking me in private. Trust me, I know not to swear even in private on BBO (since I've actually been banned for it once!). So I chose the word "pissant" instead to describe my feelings to this person. (And, I was aware at the time of my original posting of his intent to punish BTW). People have complained loudly and often of being treated like children by this individual. Lord knows, most of us are in our 50s or 60s or even seventies! Yet this individual treats many of us as if we were children-- because he's had the power of threat. (To be clear, I was never one of the "bad" guys, but I'd certainly been talked down to by this individual several times-- I'm almost 60 years old). Now, maybe SOME people deserve to be treated that way... but way too many people are treated that way at JEC and lots of people have been complaining for YEARS. Since the advent of the new extra powers, he had only gotten worse, since he had a new toy. Did this come to being because he had a new toy and wanted to show off how big and strong he was now?? The consensus amongst many who have discussed this is, indeed, that's all it was and the novelty would pass. This individual was given a chance to apologize to me privately before I went public with this. I did so as a preemptive strike because, instead he said he was going to report me to abuse. I figured if I posted the ABSURDITY of what brought about his threat it would (1). prod Uday to warn this guy to be a little more selective with his threats (cuz GAWD this is as stupid a reason to make a threat as I've ever seen)... and (2) maybe that individual would apologize to me (and to others who he'd made similar threats to recently)... and then I would have GLADLY apologized for whatever things I said in private to him. But, nothing. I will never refer to this person as anything but a little pissant again.

It is a sad commentary that BBO has been forced to build so many filters into the system. When the software first came to fruition, one of Fred's stated goals was to bring the bridge community together. He and Uday were adamant in their stance that BBO should be a place for people to play and socialize together freely-- perhaps a Utopian hope, but nevertheless a noble one. I was here at the very beginning, one of, perhaps, six original members still around (I actually got here about 6 weeks after BBO opened, but at that time even getting 2 tables together was near-impossible!). Of course, it didn't really happen as planned. People of various nations or different languages or skill levels didn't want to play with one another and, asked Fred and Uday to build filters into the system to help them avoid it. Despite their better judgment, Uday and Fred implemented these things into the software. If you go back through old, old posts on this forum (assuming they are still there), you will see time and again Uday posting that he was against limiting things in such manner, then acceding to the wishes of the masses. He knew he was opening a can of worms.. and those worms continue to propagate. I imagine that trend will never stop. The original "Utopian" bridge society envisioned by Fred Gitelman for BBO is long gone. But if people are going to be given special powers, then the least Fred and Uday should do is to set some limits on those powers. I would strongly argue that someone who takes the phrase "don't be afraid.. the water's fine" is abusive is someone who should not be afforded such power. This is so obvious it is, literally, scary.

I can only assume you didn't read the original post-- perhaps you do not speak English as a 1st language... whatever. The reason BBO is being brought into this is specifically BBO imbued this individual with "exceptional" powers. When someone, such as a yellow, is given "exceptional powers" that person has the duty to act responsibly. When that individual acts IRRESPONSIBLY as here, then chaos inevitably ensues. To avoid chaos, BBO should ensure those individuals act within their proscribed realm. If you're argument is "it's his table, he can act irresponsibly", well let me tell you that was tried on BBO a few years back-- and all hell broke loose. I don't want to get into old, dead stuff here and I know I'm leaving a lot of readers scratching their heads, but the people who've been here a long time know what I'm referring to-- and so does Uday. By allowing a few individuals the right to have additional influence WITHOUT REGARD TO how they use that influence is allowing totalitarianism. And if you, or paulg, or anyone else, thinks that's a good idea, well I disagree. So do 40 million people in France..

Well I certainly didn't like being threatened TWICE IN ONE DAY for doing nothing abusive-- and I reallllllllllly don't take crap from anyone... as you know as well as anybody here.

“Freedom of speech has a downside-- we are stuck listening to everyone-- whether they have anything useful to say or are just stupid or annoying. Let's face it, some can be annoying-- me included at times. It is part and parcel of freedom to speak one's mind. I would denounce any person in any forum who advocates this. It has less to do with BBO per se than the rights of individuals in general. Elimination of individuals' rights leads to totalitarianism. As someone who lives in a free country you should appreciate how precious that is. Please appreciate my position-- had your request been granted it would inevitably lead to further hostilities. And I don't want to see BBO become more hostile than it already is. “ This is something I wrote in a previous thread when someone advocated giving table hosts the ability to close all chat. Indeed, BBO did integrate into the program the ability to turn off all spec chat. And that should have been it. No one liked it and few hosts used it. But it was made available as an “option.” But that wasn't good enough for Weedo and Llande. They wanted the ability to open or close chat at will at the JEC table because a VERY FEW people (of which I definitely was NOT one) would occasionally make trouble. Often pointing out “personal deficiencies” of one of the players (no need to name him here). Their previous option was to close spec entirely a few minutes to get the few bad ones to shut up. This was probably an improvement... SO LONG AS THE PRIVILEGE THEY ASKED FOR WAS NOT ABUSED. But, as I've pointed out previously, the axiom about absolute power corrupting absolutely has reared its ugly head again... Today I received THREE threats for making either innocuous or humorous statements at the JEC table. One of the threats was made openly for a VERY gentle bit of humor. I post the entirety of what was said below, with the included threat: 2over1->Kibitzers: test 2over1->Kibitzers: oh chat IS open 2over1->Kibitzers: why is everyone so quiet?? alan2220->Kibitzers: asleep BHNN->Kibitzers: we skeeeeeeeeeered:( 2over1->Kibitzers: apparently.. 2over1->Kibitzers: dont be afraid.. the water's fine Moderator>Kibitzers: If u wish chat to remain on, u might want to limit ur conversation 2over1->Kibitzers: ah? 2over1->Kibitzers: i guess i said something baddddddddddddddddd 2over1->Kibitzers: ill be quiet For obvious reasons I've omitted private conversations in which people spoke of the oppressive atmosphere and the chilling effect of censorship. I also took out some extraneous pieces of the chat that were of no consequence to what was going on. This was the SECOND threat I'd received from the moderator today. The first one was in private. The reason? I told someone to “bite me”. For further edification, I tell this person to “bite me” daily in public (I actually say it to two or three people, some aloud, some privately) as a funny greeting.. and one that the moderator has seen me make daily for many years now. I see no point to make the entire conversation public as that's all there really was to it. My answer was to tell the moderator to get his sense of humor back. The seeds of oppression had already been sowed months ago, but now with the threat of this new tool the moderator has chosen to abuse the very privilege he asked for by making threats against me (and, from what I've been told, against others). This is what happens when too much power is concentrated with too few. Now, let me make something abundantly clear: I feel that new tool was needed by llande and weedo to stop the very bad actions of a very few- and those who regularly kib JEC know who those half dozen or so individuals are. But, if they are allowed to threaten people at will for innocuous statements such as what I set out above (and trust me, I left nothing of importance out), then I say get rid of that power completely.. because BBO has now imbued a few individuals... a VERY FEW.. with the ability to control and censor at will without regard to what may or may not be “free” speech. And they have shown a willingness to abuse that power. Which tramples on the rights of every one of us whether we act good or bad-- and that's oppression, my friends. Sure, no one has the right to walk into that room and be abusive-- and I am not advocating complete freedom to say whatever one wants. But, when one is threatened for speech that no one in their right mind would take as abusive in the least, then something is very wrong with either the system or the administrator of that system. In this case, at least, the flaws lie with both. One more thing. I received a third threat when I spoke IN PRIVATE to the moderator who threatened me. I called him a piss ant and told him he was abusing his authority. The worst thing I told him was to screw himself. He's now threatening to try and get me banned. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. I have been threatened three times today-- maybe I deserved the final one for telling him to screw himself for making the first two... but, hey, he had it coming. This is what happens when you give the ability to abuse and bully many to few.