Κανόνες και Όροι Χρήσης του Forum

[nefeli 1,116]

Δεν νομίζω ότι αυτό θα λειτουργήσει ιδιαίτερα.Είναι τελείως διαφορετικό το να μιλάς στον άλλο από κοντά και να μπορεί να υπάρξει ένας διάλογος(πολιτισμένος ή απολίτιστος,ήρεμος ή έντονος-δεν έχει σημασία) και τελείως άλλο το να επικοινωνείς με τον άλλο μέσω μηνυμάτων τα οποία έχουν εκ των πραγμάτων χρονική απόσταση μιας και η κοινότητα ούτε είναι και ούτε πρέπει να καταλήξει να είναι chat για προσωπικές διενέξεις.Εξάλλου αν επιδείκνυονταν από ορισμένα άτομα αυτό που αποκαλούμε συμπεριφορά μέσω φυσιολογικού ανθρώπου δεν θα χρειάζονταν καν να μπούμε στη διαδικασία θεσπίσεως κανόνων του φόρουμ.Ακριβώς το γεγονός ότι υπάρχουν ή μπορεί να υπάρξουν άτομα που ξεφεύγουν οδηγεί στην ανάγκη υιοθετήσεως λύσεων σαν και αυτές που συζητάμε.

[christos-regnis 57]

Πιστεύω πως υπάρχει διαφορά μεταξύ προφορικού (live) και γραπτού λόγου, και νομίζω πως όλοι το αντιλαμβάνονται αυτό.

Αυτό που συμβαίνει στη συνέχεια είναι το εξής:

- Υπάρχουν μέλη που αντιλαμβάνονται το γραπτό λόγο ως κάτι σοβαρότερο και με μεγαλύτερη βαρύτητα από το προφορικό. Θεωρούν πως ό,τι γράφεται σ' ένα forum πρέπει να έχει κάποια αξία και σχέση με το αντικείμενο του, μιας και δεν είναι μια κουβέντα που χάνεται στον αέρα αλλά μένει για πάντα και είναι προσβάσιμη από χιλιάδες ανθρώπους που μπορεί να επισκεφθούν τη σελίδα.

-Υπάρχουν και μέλη που χρησιμοποιούν το γραπτό λόγο του διαδικτύου για να πουν όσα δεν μπορούν προφορικά. Αυτό συμβαίνει είτε γιατί δεν τολμούν να τα πουν προφορικά σε κατ' ιδίαν συνευρέσεις με άλλα μέλη ή γιατί ίσως κανείς δεν θα τους ακούσει ή γιατί δεν έχουν καμία διάθεση να γνωρίσουν προσωπικά τα υπόλοιπα μέλη, και προτιμούν να κάνουν την κριτική ή γελοιοποίηση καταστάσεων από το σπίτι τους.

[Kate 42]

This is a translation of Apostoli's first post in this topic, followed by a brief summary of some of the points that have been made by members in the discussion that followed:

'This is a first draft of rules/terms of use for the forum. Give me your views on changes, amendments, deletions or additions. If anyone doesnt agree with rules, please let me know, and why

Terms of use

1. Personal disagreements, insults and attacks are not permitted, either in the forum or through personal messages.

2. Posts which could be considered insulting, intentionally false, threatening, offensive, or racist can lead either to the temporary suspension of the users account or to permanent disconnection. In extreme cases information about the actions of the user will be sent to the internet service provider through which the user is connected.

3. The administrators/moderators reserve the right in every case to alter, or to delete completely, insulting or improper posts or to lock the topic until further notice.

4. All Internet Protocol addresses are recorded and the creation of multiple accounts by the same user is not permitted. The creation of more than one account for different personal users from the same IP is admissible only after agreement from the administration. Anyone who infringes this rule will be removed from the list of members and will not be permitted entry to the forum.

5. If a user whose account has been temporarily suspended is discovered creating or using another account in order to continue writing in the forum both their new and old accounts will be deleted.

Some general advice for posting messages

1. Where an article is copied or extracts of an article from another website or from some other printed material or source is posted, the source of the article must be referred to at the end of the post in order to avoid breach of copyright.

2. Check your post before sending it (not just afterwards) for errors that affect its meaning. Use the Edit option to correct your posts. It is boring and tiring to do additional posts, simply to change some details.

3. Use the search facility on the forum before asking a question. Its possible that what you are looking for is already in an existing topic.

4. Dont demand, but ask politely for what you want as clearly as possible.

5. Remember that the other members of the forum arent obliged to answer and that sometimes there are no answers.

6. Its aesthetically displeasing to write only in capital letters. Try not to write either the title of your message or its contents in capitals. Writing in this way on the internet means that you are shouting and its unnecessary and continued use creates the danger of misunderstanding.

7. A post can be posted in whatever language is easiest for a user. But preferably they will be in Greek or English, which are understood by the majority of users. It is best to avoid writing Greek in the Latin alphabet (greeklish).

8. When replying to a message it is not necessary to quote the whole of the previous message, only the part to which you are referring.

Note

Every infringement of the terms of use is evidence of disregard for the other members.

Summary of discussion:

Rules of behaviour

On the whole those who have responded agree (with varying degrees of enthusiasm) that there is a need for some rules or principles that will set out standards of behaviour expected of members. The following observations have been made:

1. The underlying philosophy of the forum is predominantly democratic and self-policing and this should be retained as far as possible.

2. That in a forum of this small size there should be no need for a large number of strict rules of behaviour

3. This should also be reflected in the language of the rules, which should avoid over-prescription and rigidity.

4. The need to find a solution to recent difficulties difficulties in the forum has been recognised as a factor supporting the introduction of these rules/code of conduct.

5. Rules are unnecessary, since they run counter to the democratic spirit and philosophy of the forum and will not stop members who are determined to do so from behaving badly. It would be preferable if members were simply asked to treat each other in the forum as they would face to face in the company of forum members in an open, public place.

6. If there is an expectation that the administrator/moderators will take action against a member who behaves in an unacceptable manner, a set of rules provides a consistent and objective framework against which this can be done. It also protects the administrator/moderators from the accusation of taking arbitrary or unfair action.

General advice for posting messages

There is general agreement on the acceptability and usefulness of this. It has been emphasised that the language used should avoid any suggestion of prescription.

This is still very much a first draft so everyone is encouraged to make comments suggestions, additions or deletions.'

[Apostolis 2,082]

Great work Kate!!! Thank you very much for your translation!! It is very much appreciated!!

[vitaly2 9]

Μόλις χτες πρωτοσκέφτηκα:

«τι άραγε θα γινόταν αν λέγονταν στην παρέα μας live και δημόσια (σε κάποιο δρόμο, μαγαζί, αίθουσα συναυλίας) αυτά που γράφτηκαν από τον akritidis και την vitaly2 στα ποστ περί της αποχώρησής τους;»

Θα το δεχόμασταν; Θα τους λέγατε «μη φύγεις»; Αν σας τα έλεγαν κατάμουτρα;

Εγώ θα τους έλεγα «ντροπή σου!» και, αν επιμένανε, «δεν σε ξέρω!».

I did not want to interfere - not because I don't respect honest attempts to make this site a better place. But because of my chaotic way of thinking (some call it associative) I feel more comfortable (and maybe even useful) in a semi-private existential corner. The only reason is that my name was mentioned in a strange context that, in my opinion, is completely irrelevant to my humble person. I'll try to be as much logical as possible at that.

I am afraid it is going to be long - sorry about that. So, I will have to make chapters.

1. A comment touching upon personal issues..

Unfortunately, at this point there is no way to pretend that it can be avoided. Even if I won't answer directly to the person quoted in this post. I already said why I had to use this quote.

As an individual, I am completely incapable of taking impersonal attitude - I don't know how strange it may seem to others. I can't talk to a faceless mummy. All my relationships are strictly personal. I make generalizations based on my personal attitudes and responses from the environment. During the course of my life, in both real and virtual communities, I've had many more or less successful relationships on various levels: relationships with all kinds of human beings (including my boss).

I consider myself a human, meaning - looking at any other human met on my way as a complicated person, with interest and feeling of a warm-blooded creature toward another warm-blooded creature. Expecting a similar attitude - within limits defined by difference in personalities, mentalities, etc. One single time I failed to understand a human so completely that I had to give up attempts on communicating at personal level (I tried). Again, being just a human, I humbly assign this being a status of "super-human" and retreat.

Since it makes no sense to be enigmatic when you are trying to explain something that had happened out of the sight of the public, I have to add for clarity that from my side all attempts at communication with the super-human, both in general and in personal posts and messages were guided by good will, love, interest, attention and respect. Everyone has their character, their good and bad moments, their sympathies and antipathies, However, all things condsidered, the negative moments at my receiving end much exceeded any reasonable expectations, and were completely inadequate to my positive attitude. That's why I repeat that I failed to understand and stop at it.

2. My reply to the lines mentioning my name - directed toward the community

I came to the forum with open heart. My positive attitude toward a person described in the previous paragraph I can repeat with regard to this forum community. If someone takes a task to look up all my posts - it will be easy to see. My recent post regarding my intention of leaving the forum does not have any negative judgement, except mentioning that the forum became a little cultish, with narrow-minded views. It was written, as you can understand, under distress, and I take it back.

I had declared that I am leaving the forum only because of the censorship. And after Nikolas admitted that the deletion was unjustified, I was satisfied. I apologized to those why might have found themselves offended by the joke. I admit that it was in the wrong place and that's why misunderstood. As for the joke content - please tell me what is offensive? I personally would not mind to be referred indirectly as a "Mother or the Father of the forum" or implied that my friendship is a coveted commodity.

In just a couple other recent posts I did sound negative - when trying to defend myself or to defend the forum (I am not unconcerned about its situation and development): defend the forum from becoming a clean swept-out yard. That was my opinion - and discussion did not follow: maybe my own fault (way of thinking and expressing myself - see above).But that's enough apologizing: I don't see myself as faultless, but my general attitude has nothing to do with the quoted accusing lines.

3.Couple things to reply to specific persons

I think it makes sense to use this opportunity for making some personal replies and statements.

Maro said it seemed that "the joke was on us". My sweet friend Maro (You don't mind being called that?), it was on all of us - least we migrate from warm-blooded species toward the cold-blooded ones.

I repeat that I hope Apostolis don't hold grudges about the weekend event - not because of calculation regarding possible future favors, but because I just like him very much. You are free not to like me, Apostolis, it won't change my friendly attitude.

I think Nicolas is the best Father of the forum.

Christos-Regnis, why did you delete your post about existential matters? There was nothing bad in it. We can discuss more at your earliest convenience.

About a benefit of putting a face on the post - that's what Celeste said when we met. Hi, Celeste - I agree. Some faces appeared, and some got lost (or maybe they were masks?).

Now, I still have to answer to Geeske - regarding those two lines: you would say that you don't know me at a possible meeting? But you've already said it: that you don't have time/interest to know me. What's new?

And about "shame on me" - yes, the shame is on me. I feel ashamed for some other people - because I am not an island.

As for John mentioned in the same post: he can answer himself of course. The only reason I mention him is that a friend asked me to translate to her the exchange in Greek language regarding John's declaration. I found that most or the posts have been deleted - as an act of goodwill on the both sides. So, this forum is still in good shape.

4. Declaration

As many accused who had to defend themselves before me I am tempted to use this opportunity also as a tribune for a declaration.

I declare my love and interest to all the members of the forum - with all the consequences. I consider you all friends - without asking permission.

I am referring to Maro again - she said: Let's talk about George. Maro, we are talking about George, at this very moment.

5. Joke

That's what you've been waiting for, I guess. Actually, it is a natural continuation of the above declaration.

A rule of common sense proposed by Geeske (bravo!): "Let the members to behave as they would at any live civilized public place - and to expect the same from the other members".

Let's test this rule: Who will return my declaration to me? Or is it not sufficiently civilized attitude?

The last but not least

There was a claim in the pre-published rules (I think by Apostolis) that each member has right to post in his preferred language. I opted to English - but thought about translating eventually onto Greek (in spite of the insufficient language skills). But I have a better idea.

Geeske, why don't you do it? As a last favor to a condemned - or a good will step? You choose (no joke).

P.S. The purpose of this post was only to respond to mention of my name in a non-relevant context. I am not expecting any reply - and I don't want it, as it may cause further disturbance and annoyance and distraction from the subject of this forum whatever it may be.

I am even tempted to say that maybe this forum is not for me - considering the above? But I still remember the old forum... I haven't changed. A while ago I did not have a feeling of being in the wrong place.

[Geske 37]

Vitaly, I am unable to make sense of your post, much less translate it. I cannot help you.

[Kate 42]

I agree with Apostoli that it would be helpful to have a consensus on some basic standards of behaviour, and make clear what the consequences might be if these are not met. I think though, in keeping with the spirit of the forum, that it would be best not to use language that gives the impression of instructing members on how they should behave. As many have acknowledged it isnt the existence of these standards that will affect behaviour. A few probably wont be influenced by them, whereas the vast majority dont need them. But it does set a clear framework within which any action relating to unacceptable behaviour can be set. This must be to everyones advantage.

Its also helpful to remember that the forum already has behavioural guidance and sanction. We all agreed to this when we registered:

Every message expresses the opinions of the poster and not of the community as a whole. All opinions are welcome as long as they don't offend anyone and they don't contain insults or direct attacks to other members. There is no single person who decides about the decency of each message. Those are judged under the rules of common sense. By agreeing to this, you are expected to respect all fellow members.

Although nothing is said about what sanctions would be applied if someone failed to meet those standards, there have been a number of occasions when this has happened, either through the deletion of messages, and in at least one case banning.

Standards of behaviour

Under Apostolis suggestions the behavioural expectations would be:

Members will not engage in disagreements, insult or attack other members either in the forum or through personal messages

No post should be insulting, contain falsehoods, be threatening offensive or racist.

My thoughts about this are:

1. There is a difficulty with including personal disagreements as this makes no allowance for the possibility that someone may be unfairly provoked into a personal disagreement.

2. The addition of racism may be unnecessary since it should be covered by the wider category of insults or offence. This also avoids the possibility of requests being made for the addition of other categories such as sexism or ageism.

3. I suggest omitting deliberate falsehoods simply on the grounds that it would be almost impossible to prove.

4.Our current wording is probably almost enough.

Sanctions

As I said, these are already being imposed where the administrator/moderators* think it necessary. I think its very helpful to be explicit about the fact that sanctions might be applied and what they might be, both for clarity and to prevent the administrator/moderators* being accused of taking arbitrary or unfair action. However it may be better to be a little less specific (as in x will lead to y). This should give more flexibility in how they are applied.

Multiple registrations

I really dont know what to think about this. I have difficulty (which has also been expressed by others) in understanding why anyone would want to register more than once. But if its not causing any harm I suppose its not a problem. So maybe its best to link that issue to the one of someone trying to get round a ban by becoming someone else.

So putting this all together my suggestion is something on the lines of:

This forum is for the exchange of information and communication between members and is a place where all members are expected to respect their fellow members Every message expresses the opinions of the poster and not of the community as a whole.

All opinions are welcome as long as they don't offend anyone and they don't contain insults or direct attacks on other members either in posts or in personal messages. There is no single person who decides whether each message confirms with these requirements. However, if the administrator/moderators* reach a view that a member has insulted, offender or attacked another member, then action may be taken. This will include

The member being asked to voluntarily delete the post and agree not to repeat the offensive behaviour

The post or part of the post being deleted

The users account being temporarily suspended

The user being permanently deleted from the register of members and denied further access to the forum.

In all cases members will be told in advance what action is going to be taken and why

In extreme cases information about the actions of the user will be sent to the internet service provider through which the user is connected.

Two other points

One issue that I think is worth thinking about is what members should do if feel theyve been insulted or offended. Should they, for example, be advised to raise it privately with the person they feel has offended them? Or just report it to the administrator/moderators* and leave the decision on what to do to them? On the other hand if someone has been publicly offended, should they have the right to point that out/defend themselves in public too? But would that then put them in the ranks of the offenders? Although my instinctive reaction to this is to think this is all too complicated for a small forum events of the past few weeks suggest that maybe it isnt. Not least because this also extends to the way in which the administrator/moderators* will make a decision about sanctions.

Ive also been wondering if there are any aspects of the forums architecture that (obviously unintentionally) has an influence on the relationships between members. Since the site is being redesigned it might be a good time to think about this as I presume that many of the forum topics will be absorbed into the new site (such as upcoming concerts, videos and photographs/still images). Although I doubt if there is any direct cause and effect between topics and disputes, I wonder if some topics give an unintended impression that the forum is a small, closed group that might hinder rather than help the development of a culture of openness and inclusiveness.

One example is the dedications topic. Although I know this was started with the best of friendly intentions, in practice it has become somewhere in which a relatively small number of members, who know each other personally, exchange dedications on a regular basis. So is it unconsciously creating a feeling of exclusivity? The counter-argument, I know, is anyone is free to post a dedication but in fact they dont and I think its better to deal with the is rather than the might or ought. I should make it clear that I think one of the joys of the forum is the way that it has been the catalyst for the creation of strong and lasting friendships. It just worries me when this loops back so that the forum becomes the forum of friends, rather than a forum in which friends are created. Anyway, its just a thought.

* Thought it might be worth mentioning that, according to the members' list (on 9 June anyway), that the moderators are Apostolis, Christos Regnis and 'dokimos'.

[Theodore 1,027]

Για να προλάβω αψιμαχίες και προστριβές θα ήθελα να πω τη γνώμη μου για δύο - τρία θέματα που αφορούν το φόρουμ.

Αρχικά να υπενθυμίσω πως το φόρουμ αυτό ασχολείται σε μεγαλύτερο ποσοστό με τον Γιώργο Νταλάρα και τις δραστηριότητές του, και εν συνεχεία με την μουσική και τους καλλιτέχνες γενικότερα. Πιστεύω λοιπόν πως όσον αφορά τον Γιώργο Νταλάρα, το φόρουμ πρέπει να καταγράφει μόνο τη δική του δραστηριότητα. Δεν έχει -πιστεύω- θέση εδώ η δραστηριότητα κανενός άλλου μέλους της οικογένειας Νταλάρα. Ό,τι μας αφορά και ό,τι θέλουμε να σχολιάσουμε και να προτείνουμε, μπορούμε να το κάνουμε καλλιστα στις σελίδες της γενικής συζήτησης όπως είναι το "Κοινωνία και πολιτική"

Με αφορμή λοιπόν τις εκλογές και την υποψηφιότητα της συζύγου του κυρίου Νταλάρα, προτείνω να αποφύγουμε να καταγράφουμε εδώ συνεντέυξεις της ’ννας Νταλάρα. Δεν αφορά αυτήν το φόρουμ, ούτε και το ότι είναι γυναίκα του Νταλάρα δικαιολογεί καταγραφή των δηλώσεών της.

Σε τυχόν δηλώσεις που θα κάνει ο Νταλάρας γι αυτήν την υποψηφιότητα, προτείνω να μπαίνουν κανονικά. Αλλά μόνο οι δηλώσεις και μόνο ότι αφορά τον Νταλάρα.

Αυτά, χωρίς καμία διάθεση αντίδρασης και με μοναδικό σκοπό την διατήρηση της ηρεμίας στην διαδικτυακή κοινότητα

Περιμένω τη γνώμη όλων σας.

[ΘΑΝΑΣΗΣ ΠΟΛΥΜΗΧΑΝΟΣ 11,573]

Συμφωνώ στο να μην μπαίνουν οι συνεντεύξεις σε topics όπως "Αποδελτίωση" κλπ αλλά δε νομίζω ότι υπάρχει πρόβλημα στο "Κοινωνία και πολιτική"....Προτείνω μάλιστα να διαγραφεί από τις συνεντεύξεις η σημερινή συνέντευξη της Α.Νταλάρα στα "Νέα".

[Theodore 1,027]

Μα ναι! Κι εγώ αυτό προτείνω. Όποιος έχει κατι να βάλει ή να προτείνει, να το κάνει στο "Κοινωνία και Πολιτκη"

[megali_mpougatsa 687]

Συμφωνώ κι εγώ. Ό,τι έχει σχέση με την υποψηφιότητα της κ.’ννας Νταλάρα μπορεί να μπαίνει άνετα στο Κοινωνία-Πολιτική.

Βέβαια, νομίζω πως οι δημόσιες αναφορές της στον Γιώργο Νταλάρα, όπου υπάρχουν, ίσως να έπρεπε να καταγράφονται στην αποδελτίωση.

[EKOSTEL 8,742]

Συμφωνώ κι εγώ. Ό,τι έχει σχέση με την υποψηφιότητα της κ.’ννας Νταλάρα μπορεί να μπαίνει άνετα στο Κοινωνία-Πολιτική.

Βέβαια, νομίζω πως οι δημόσιες αναφορές της στον Γιώργο Νταλάρα, όπου υπάρχουν, ίσως να έπρεπε να καταγράφονται στην αποδελτίωση.

Σκοπός μου -σε καμία περίπτωση- δεν ήταν να διαταραχθεί η συνοχή του forum. Ελπίζω να έγινε αντιληπτό. Και νομίζω πως έγινε.Την συγκεκριμένη συνέντευξη επέλεξα να την καταχωρήσω στην ''Αποδελτίωση'', επειδή ακριβώς υπήρχε αναφορά στον Γ.Νταλάρα (έστω και μικρή αλλά σημαντική ως προς την ουσία της).

Γνωρίζετε -επιπροσθέτως- την λόξα μου με την αποδελτίωση του τύπου.

Να τονίσω και κάτι άλλο.Πάντα είμασταν προσεκτικοί σε σχέση με την οικογένεια του Γ.Νταλάρα και τον ίδιο. Η οικογένεια όμως του Γ.Νταλάρα δεν είναι κάτι ξεχωριστό από τον ίδιο ,εμπεριέχεται ο ίδιος. Και -πολλές φορές- οι δραστηριότητες των μελών επηρρεάζουν και τον ίδιο.

Αυτά τα λίγα όφειλα να καταθέσω, χωρίς να διαφωνώ με την μεταφορά της συνέντευξης στο topic ''Κοινωνία και πολιτική''.

[Theodore 1,027]

Ελίνα δεν το έγραψα για εσένα προσωπικά. Το έγραψα για να προσπαθήσω να θέσω κάποιους κανόνες για να τους ακολουθούμε όλοι. ’λλωστε και άλλοι ασχολούνται με την αποδελτίωση.

[EKOSTEL 8,742]

Το ξέρω,Θοδωρή, πως δεν το έγραψες για μένα προσωπικά. Όπως επίσης ξέρω πως δεν έχω το μονοπώλιο της αποδελτίωσης. Αλοίμονο!

Την λόξα για αποδελτίωση έχω.

Μπήκαν κάποιοι όροι, κοινώς αποδεκτοί. Όλα καλά κι όλα ωραία!