If you don't have something good to say...
 

I wanted to bring something up with you guys that I'd like some opinion on.
Basically, when I come across threads that ask opinions about a certain band or artist, I don't have any reservations about stating an opinion, regardless of whether it's positive or negative.
However, in threads that are basically ABOUT a band or artist, I usually just don't say anything if I have a problem with them, regardless of whether my input may be well thought out or not.

The issue I have is there are often far less opportunities to provide a real opinion about bands or artists if one follows this strategy. I don't mean that I feel as though I don't have the opportunity to complain as much as I'd like to, but I'm very often filled with reasonable perspectives about bands that happen to run counter to the general consensus in those threads, but I feel like it wouldn't be taken well to voice them.

In a way, I feel like the only place people really don't mind it is if it's in a band that everyone collectively dislikes, in which case I wouldn't really be inclined to post in it, because what could I say that hasn't already been said?
So then I end up feeling like rather than stirring people up and causing conniptions in the more sacred-cow threads of common opinion and circle-jerking (where applicable), I'll usually just say nothing.

While most may think it's probably just easier to do that, I always walk away from a thread feeling like I'm basically not allowed to post there if I don't like it. I mean, I understand the point of not saying anything if it's not contributing, but I'm not talking about posting things like "I don't like them". I'm talking about offering up a thought-out, reasonable post that explains an opposing opinion and the reasoning behind it.

However, I get the feeling that even that would be basically perceived as an all-out assault on the unquestionably superior tastes of those by which such opinions did chafe.

Should I be censoring myself, and if so, to what degree?
I like expressing an opinion, but it gets too cumbersome if the cost of such a thing is defending it against an entire collection of people that cannot deal with someone not thinking like them, and or feeling as though opposing opinions are the equivalent of a challenge to their personal taste.

What are your thoughts on this?

You think too much about nothing.

I like turtles.

So You don't the feeling of restriction you get when you look through a thread devoted to a band you do not like, but that the OP poster does like?

Please explain.

Please have a look at our rules.

That's not what I was implying.
I'm simply asking if I should preclude personal opinions about a topic based on it being largely supported by members, as to not raise a stink. I'm asking if people think that's enough justification to censor yourself.

No its obviously not. Say what you want.

I often think about this as well. And I have been raped by fan girls before for saying the wrong thing. So yes, I agree with you. I personally think that as long as the comment doesn't come across as aggressive, its grand. Some people's egos are going to be hurt regardless, so just let the words flow I saw.

I can feel where you're coming from. I often feel bad for forging an opinion on something better left unsaid.

If you want to express your opinion, do so. If not, don't. My opinion is that this is hardly worth discussing and is a non-issue and in this instance I feel like expressing it. Sometimes I won't. It's not too complicated.

Also, it provides you with an example of how not saying something good affects the thread to aid you in helping make your future posting decisions.

Another opinion I feel like expressing is that I like turtles. They have shells and everything.

"Threads that ask opinions about a band or artist"
vs
"Threads that are basically ABOUT a band or artist,"

Confused at the difference between the two.

There isn't any. Basically this is a debate between posting in topics you care about or not.

I don't have a problem with people posting constructive criticism of an artist and neither do I mind a really creative insult about that artist.

I say if you're going to say something sucks at least be creative about it so people can at least be entertained with it.

I would prefer to be told why my band of choice sucks. I mean really, it's nice to have the stuff I'm really into brought into prospective-- if that makes sense.

And for me, when someone like you can express an opinion with reasoning behind it, whether that reasoning is based on your opinion or not, it's really not awful. I'm used to being told my musical tastes sucks, so for me this is really a non-issue.

The problem here is this is Musicbanter, not Opinionbanter. (I know the two are actually pretty closely related, but the point is being on topic)

If you go around posting off-topic stuff like "I like turtles" in a thread dedicated to a particular legitimate topic, you're not doing yourself any favors... which is clearly noted in our rules. You're new here, so I'll let you figure this out as you go along. Just saying, the rules are there to help. You should try them out.

I mean dedicated threads to a band or artist. Not threads asking opinions of bands. There may not be an objective difference, but in terms of practicality, especially here, there usually is. Which is why I bring this entire subject up.

I agree, however I feel that many people here may not, which is why I was wondering. If it was a forum filled with Urbans, there would be no point to this thread.

Yeah I agree wit Katsy, I would prefer someone to contribute to the thread I have made for the band I like as opposed to just glide through and not post. Whether or not they like the band.

Personally, I tend to stay out of threads that don't interest me, are about bands or topics that I have no real interest in. F'r instance if I see a thread called "I love Pet Shop Boys", I'd not go in because I DON'T love PSB, but that doesn't invalidate the opinion of those who do. It just seems counter-productive and anyway if the thread is pretty obviously an "appreciation" one then I'm likely to be up against it, being a minority of one. Even if I see something asking for opinions on something I don't like --- "Do you love/hate rap" --- I'll not bother, because I dont know enough about the subject to offer an opinion.

On the other hand, if someone makes a thread like "Marillion suck" or "Tom Waits couldn't compose his way out of a paper bag" I'd be in there like a shot.

If I have something constructive to say I'll say it, but there are so many good threads I can post in, where my opinion and comments and views will be appreciated, why walk into the lion's den?

Same here.
Negative or not, at least some discussion is good. I prefer when it's controversial, but I definitely don't want some troll posting "no1curr" gifs or "I like turtles" as a response. That's not controversy. That's just lazy.

I have all to much experience in over thinking for the politically correct response balanced with just the right dose of my personality that the visceral response is forever gone with the wind. It's always a good idea to say whatever horrendous or wonderful thing pops in your mind - with the every intent of constructive honesty.

Sorry I really should spell check my posts. "They", not "the".

Yeah. I don't like people who post just for post counts. That **** really pisses me off, like it is an addition to their translucent ego.(online alter ego)

Very true. Most of the time I'm pretty much of this default value.
However, there are times when I either don't know much about a particular band or artist, read the thread, check them out, then am like "Ok, wow..." and would love to express an opinion about it. But most often I just relegate myself to silence and avoid agitating.

In the long run, it might save me time and grief, but I also wonder about how many opportunities I'm missing for some smart fellow to point out where I'm wrong and get me to look at things in a different light, which may not have been possible had I avoided the confrontation to begin with.

The problem with this, for me, is I'm a mod. I have to demonstrate at least a modicum of self-restraint, otherwise we're dealing with people up in arms about our abusive tactics. Believe me, there are people out there creating databases out of every time we say something remotely abrasive.

I just mean to say that, in the end, it's just easier to shut up and not have to deal with the fallout, even though it runs counter to what I actually want to do.

I really don't see a problem stating a negative opinion if it's constructive. I believe it's still contributing to the vision of the artist/s in question. A positive always comes out of a negative and vice versa. Are you talking about a problem because generally your opinions stated often turn out negative? You could view that as a thought-provoking way how musicians could better themselves which often gives a stronger emphasis of it. It's really how you look at it and what are the benefits of giving a negative opinion, if that's where you lead. People, when it comes down to it, take offence themselves and I don't really see that as being your problem. I guess that's what it comes down to, perspective, and if you're struggling with negativity perhaps questioning your attitude might help (not saying that in a negative sense).

No, you're right. I'm like 90 percent negative.
If I actually posted everything I thought on these forums, I would have been de-modded and banned a long time ago.
Do I think it's a problem? Well, not when I'm not posting negatively. But I do think some of my negativity could be constructive.
I just don't think most people are ready for it.

I am only here to meet women.

The problem is that you're talking about, and seeing it as, confrontation, and it doesn't have to be. It's surely all in how you approach and phrase things. Who could take offence, for instance, to "I thought this band really sucked but now I wonder if I was wrong. Could someone please enlighten me as to why you all think they're so great? What's a good album to start with?"

Then you're admitting the possibility that you may be open to having your mind changed on the subject. Even if you're not, I'd think that's a good way to break the ice and not step on anyone's toes, at least in the beginning?

Not sure if I'm understanding you very well but are you saying that it all should lead towards a positive direction? Negativity exposes flaws and that's important, because learning how to walk with it is about acceptance.

No, I'm saying you have to massage egos and tread carefully. If you come into a thread with all guns blazing no-one's going to give you much of a chance, whereas if you look like you're openminded, I would think you'd be received better.

Anyway, where's the percentage is just slagging off someone's favourite band or making that you know them better than they do? Default position for me: if I don't like the band don't contribute (unless constructively) and after that, adopt a softly-softly approach to see how the land lies.

That's just how I'd do it.

This.

I don't mind people saying they don't find an artist appealing, but it needs to be an intelligent post, not just 'that artist/band sucks'.

What if Janz, myself, or Batlord said "I like turtles"? Would you respond to them in the same manner? I know this is a bit off topic but it boomerangs back to how people should post on this board. I generally speak my mind on here and don't hold anything back unless it's a personal attack. That term should be defined by the way. Telling somebody that The Beatles are horrible and that they need to listen to better music may be brash but it is not a personal attack (I like the Beatles you serious music knights). However, if I told them that they're an idiot for liking The Beatles and that they probably poop in the bathtub, that would be a bit out of bound and grounds for deletion.

My point is that free speech should apply to this message board just like it should apply in real life. In order to maintain a clean and orderly message boards, mods such as yourselves need to decide what is trash and what is brash opinions. "I like turtles" while being brief and ultimately without much substance is still a post that he has every right to make. It didn't derail anything and I'm sure if Janz said it there would be a member who sucked his nuts over it, and deservedly so. Love you Janz.


Now Freebase, please go home because your music opinion sucks and you have no worth on this message board anymore.

I leave it up to you to decide whether I'm serious or not.




















I'm not.

Say what you will, and if it's delivered the least bit respectfully, I don't see where there's a problem.

Yes, actually. Although I wouldn't tell Janszoon to read the rules, as we all wrote them, so I'm sure he is aware of them. I also wouldn't delete his post, or yours, or anyone else's, unless it started to create a snowball effect of people joining in. I would, however, make some sort of a statement that the thread was intended for serious discussion, just in case it wasn't apparent in the OP for some weird reason, and remind anyone who might not be aware of our rules that they do indeed exist.

Anyway, with the whole "rights" thing and freedom of speech as it applies to a private enterprise on the internet, I don't think I need to go into all that. It's obviously a matter of maintaining order without being oppressive, but I do think that the majority of opinion and flow of a community is what's going to ultimately dictate the restrictions being placed.
Below that, though, it's more esoteric when it comes to issues about not creating the impression of insult when making an opinion about something as subjective as music taste, which is why I was asking.

Liking turtles has nothing to do with it, and trying to make a point about the [mistaken] ability to say whatever you want could have been done easily without overt disregard for the subject at hand.

I really don't think massaging egos to please others by the way you respond is the best way to go. Firmness just fades and instead of making an acute statement strictly focusing on the debate, it becomes more personal. I think either is a respective way to post. I'm not encouraging one or the other. I post because the discussion is thought-provoking enough to contribute with a comment, not for attention. (I really don't care if my comments void or denied attention, it's just a good way to learn and expressing yourself). Making strictly negative comments does not mean points aren't considered whether you agree with them or not without stating so.

In terms of tip-toeing, the emphasis of respect anyone expects in all honestly, I do find somewhat arrogant and pretentious in turn. General acceptance preferably is how I approach it, and find more respectful. It would be nice if someone clearly states taking the responders into consideration, but I don't find it necessary for a discussion.

Nor do I find this necessary: From "This band sucks." to "I think this band sucks." "In my opinion this band sucks." "I don't like this band (states a reason people will get offended by anyway from the valid points)." It's really feckin obvious I don't know why people get so offended by it. Maybe because of defensive feelings from being threatened or insecure about their own taste, then the topic now becomes personal and just kills the topic anyway.

"This band sucks full stop." Sure doesn't seem constructive, but we're talking negativity here, not quality of posts.

i think it comes down to this actually. meaning, i disagree***. i think people have their own standards when it comes down to what "quality of posts" is defined as. so therein we see that each person - on top of having their own opinion on everything else that they have an opinion on - has a totally unique frequency when it comes to the potential of having a negative or positive effect by speaking their mind. so it kind of ends up being your own decision. it kinda becomes a different question, i guess, of whether or not you have faith in your ability or willingness to join in on a conversation that you don't like the subject of and not come off as "that guy" by being a dick.

personally i really appreciate when someone is willing to thoughtfully give their time to not liking something by explaining it. i mean, at least you formed an opinion. at its simplest, it's paying tribute to art as an entity or force that wants to evolve. and also, something always stands to be learned from both sides and on both sides, i find. ie. you might not like a particular metal band because too many 16th-note triplets on the kicks on too many tracks of their album leaves you with the feeling that the drummer's potential is beyond what little creativity he's engaged himself in, and all of a sudden you have to explain what a 16th note is and what a triplet is cuz the person you're talking didn't know and was curious and oh my we're learning. obviously, one silly hypothetical scenario can't begin to encapsulate the depth of learning that can come out of articulated thought.

and back to the first part, i don't think you in particular have anything to worry about. your express yourself as thoroughly and succinctly as can be expected by someone on a forum, i've found, and it seems like when you don't like something or don't agree you have a reason. that's good enough for me.

edit: *** i don't actually disagree. most of the post is congruent with what i think, i think. i just latched on to those last words as a sort of anchor for what i was thinking. which is basically to say that "quality of post" is what it boils down to.

I don't understand what you're disagreeing with. The first half my post is about the manner of which people state. The other half an example of how to take opinions.

I don't actually find "This band sucks" or "This band is good" much appropriate response for a music discussion board.

Having standards, and exposing opinions for conversation is fine. If that's what you're willing to do. But in another scenario, if I were to mention a band to a friend and they gave me a similar answer, I wouldn't disrespect them for not giving me one or a billion reasons just to look intellectually superior.

Edit: I just saw your edit. :P

People should be allowed to go into any threads and say "x band is rubbish", even if it's not constructive. If it's not constructive then they'll just make themselves look like a tit.

Internet forums do not work when you take away people's freedom to speak their minds.

I hate Marillion. For obvious reasons.

It's your loss, Kayleigh! Is it too late to say I'm sorry? Could we get it together again? I just can't go on pretending that it came to a natural end... :laughing:

Only to the degree that the opinion doesn't explain anything. If you're going to post "This band sucks" then don't bother, I'd say.

If you're going to say "This band doesn't do it for me because X, Y, and Z", well that's a jumping off point people can discuss from. To be its about having a conversation. I think a lot of the time I see "negative" posts around here its hollow, worthless commentary.

Having read the OP, a couple of things spring to mind:

- Some forums have rules against spoilers in threads. Although the rule is subjective, it does make for more overall civility. Some, but not me, would say it leads to anodyne threads. However, it certainly does not preclude personal attacks.

- As a fan, I get/got weary of some progressive rock bands being slagged off, especially on progressive rock boards. It is as if some people think their hackneyed remarks are unleashed on the world with sparkling originality. There should be a measure of respect, as I do not, for example, visit indie sites and criticise Radiohead and Muse.

It's just my opinion . . .