Fun Police

[Otter]

Brlesq - 12/21/2018  2:08 PM

Cfickter - 12/21/2018  10:54 AM

Help help I'm being repressed!

Don't worry!  I put in a call to our local Congresswoman to help you.

 

[Brlesq]

toby2 - 12/21/2018  5:59 PM

yeah that one didn't get that far gone. i think that was a case of "premature lock down" i've seen thread go down the drain and into the sewer and nothin....

It was premature something . . .

[DonM]

toby2 - 12/21/2018  8:59 PM

yeah that one didn't get that far gone. i think that was a case of "premature lock down" i've seen thread go down the drain and into the sewer and nothin....

Has to be a CG record,  it only took 23 posts to get the thread frozen.  

[klamm143]

DRuff - 12/21/2018  12:53 PM  One word, goatse

Agreed............            

[Deener27]

DonM - 12/21/2018  5:23 PM

toby2 - 12/21/2018  8:59 PM

yeah that one didn't get that far gone. i think that was a case of "premature lock down" i've seen thread go down the drain and into the sewer and nothin....

Has to be a CG record,  it only took 23 posts to get the thread frozen.  

How far off are we here?

Quick, someone do something slightly objectionable...

[DonM]

Deener27 - 12/22/2018  11:18 AM

DonM - 12/21/2018  5:23 PM

toby2 - 12/21/2018  8:59 PM

yeah that one didn't get that far gone. i think that was a case of "premature lock down" i've seen thread go down the drain and into the sewer and nothin....

Has to be a CG record,  it only took 23 posts to get the thread frozen.  

How far off are we here?

Quick, someone do something slightly objectionable...

It appears that isn't very hard to do  

[tuck0411]

Kid Montana - 12/21/2018  7:43 AM

Somebody call the Whaambulance.  Poor lil tuck was getting dogpiled by a bunch of meanies, he needed rescuing.

Hardly.  From my angle, the "meanies" were dogpiling themselves and looking pretty silly in the process.  But it was all in the name of "professionalism", of course...  

[bstessl]

Tuck, the bottom line here is that you shouldn't turn a review into a watered down story.  Try to keep to pertinent information to the cigar itself.

[tuck0411]

bstessl - 12/23/2018  11:47 AM

Tuck, the bottom line here is that you shouldn't turn a review into a watered down story.  Try to keep to pertinent information to the cigar itself.

Says who?  My reviewing style is my own.  Everyone has their own style and who is any one person to say what's correct and what isn't?  You wouldn't like it if I critiqued your style and tried to tell you the right and wrong way to do it.  So, don't try and do that to me, please and thanks.  

Crimeny, this place is a bit more geeky than I had first thought....  

[appollo]

Heres my take.If you want to tell a story about smoking a stick ,I'm fine with that as long as you include details about the stick like wrapper,burn smoking time,smoke out put,taste you get,etc.it makes for a good story.When I read a review and it includes nothing like this its a waste of time.Sometimes the story for me makes a more interesting read,if its a good story I can picture myslf there.If you enjoy smoking the last half of the stick the next day,well"power to you brother"I know I'm not doing it,not my thing.This is your choice.Anyways that is my take on the review thing.

[tuck0411]

appollo - 12/23/2018  12:11 PM

Heres my take.If you want to tell a story about smoking a stick ,I'm fine with that as long as you include details about the stick like wrapper,burn smoking time,smoke out put,taste you get,etc.it makes for a good story.When I read a review and it includes nothing like this its a waste of time.Sometimes the story for me makes a more interesting read.If you enjoy smoking the last half of the stick the next day,well"power to you brother"I know I'm not doing it,not my thing.This is your choice.Anyways that is my take on the review thing.

Thank you, Stephen.  For the record, I am endeavoring to improve the quality of my reviews to include some of the details you mention.  I've been meaning to start including burn time, for example, but keep forgetting to record the time I light the stick.  I think that's going to end tonight, though, when I smoke another one of your bomb sticks.... Stay tuned.  

As for the story stuff, I really don't think I include all that much extraneous stuff, or at least not enough to warrant all the uproar in various threads lately.  But apparently some folks just aren't happy unless they have something to complain about.  And that's proven by the fact that no one's forcing them to click on my reviews when they show up in the list.  You don't like my stuff, don't read it, but I am going to keep posting it, so best to get used to it unless you just like making your blood pressure rise over stuff that's not really that important in the larger scheme of things.    

[appollo]

tuck0411 - 12/23/2018  4:21 PM

appollo - 12/23/2018  12:11 PM

Heres my take.If you want to tell a story about smoking a stick ,I'm fine with that as long as you include details about the stick like wrapper,burn smoking time,smoke out put,taste you get,etc.it makes for a good story.When I read a review and it includes nothing like this its a waste of time.Sometimes the story for me makes a more interesting read.If you enjoy smoking the last half of the stick the next day,well"power to you brother"I know I'm not doing it,not my thing.This is your choice.Anyways that is my take on the review thing.

Thank you, Stephen.  For the record, I am endeavoring to improve the quality of my reviews to include some of the details you mention.  I've been meaning to start including burn time, for example, but keep forgetting to record the time I light the stick.  I think that's going to end tonight, though, when I smoke another one of your bomb sticks.... Stay tuned.  

As for the story stuff, I really don't think I include all that much extraneous stuff, or at least not enough to warrant all the uproar in various threads lately.  But apparently some folks just aren't happy unless they have something to complain about.  And that's proven by the fact that no one's forcing them to click on my reviews when they show up in the list.  You don't like my stuff, don't read it, but I am going to keep posting it, so best to get used to it unless you just like making your blood pressure rise over stuff that's not really that important in the larger scheme of things.    

Todd been reading your reviews and it is getting better brother I myself like the read and that is my choice

[Brlesq]

tuck0411 - 12/23/2018  10:54 AM

Kid Montana - 12/21/2018  7:43 AM

Somebody call the Whaambulance.  Poor lil tuck was getting dogpiled by a bunch of meanies, he needed rescuing.

Hardly.  From my angle, the "meanies" were dogpiling themselves and looking pretty silly in the process.  But it was all in the name of "professionalism", of course...  

Tuck, its hard to disagree with you that many of the comments lacked "professionalism".  There were probably better ways of getting the point across. But since these couple of threads began on 12/21, you have posted 4 more reviews, and all of them were much more about reviewing a cigar and much less about the ambiance, so that is certainly appreciated.  Personally,  I think that your scoring of cigars is fair and objective, and you rate dog rockets appropriately as dog rockets.  You certainly put an effort into writing the review, and everybody does them differently.  Keep doing it this way and I doubt there will be more objections.      

And please note, this particular thread (Fun Police) wasn't aimed at you or even about you.  It was about a having an admin freeze a thread that clearly has not gotten out of control, or an admin that deletes threads or posts that no longer suit them. Many of us view that kind of totalitarian censorship as a much bigger transgression than any review you will post, and the site has had a lot of good members leave because of this BS.  Four+ years ago this site used to have A LOT more forum activity and members posting, and was a lot more fun to visit daily.  Most topics were fair game unless they were clearly discriminatory or NSFW. And rarely did the front page have a stale or day old topic on it. But then the the pussyfication began, and the effort to make sure that everything was politically correct and that no one's feeling ever got hurt drove away some great guys.  So that's why many folks remain frustrated.

Oh, and IBTL!

[appollo]

Brlesq - 12/23/2018  4:32 PM

tuck0411 - 12/23/2018  10:54 AM

Kid Montana - 12/21/2018  7:43 AM

Somebody call the Whaambulance.  Poor lil tuck was getting dogpiled by a bunch of meanies, he needed rescuing.

Hardly.  From my angle, the "meanies" were dogpiling themselves and looking pretty silly in the process.  But it was all in the name of "professionalism", of course...  

Tuck, its hard to disagree with you that many of the comments lacked "professionalism".  There were probably better ways of getting the point across. But since these couple of threads began on 12/21, you have posted 4 more reviews, and all of them were much more about reviewing a cigar and much less about the ambiance, so that is certainly appreciated.  Personally,  I think that your scoring of cigars is fair and objective, and you rate dog rockets appropriately as dog rockets.  You certainly put an effort into writing the review, and everybody does them differently.  Keep doing it this way and I doubt there will be more objections.      

And please note, this particular thread (Fun Police) wasn't aimed at you or even about you.  It was about a having an admin freeze a thread that clearly has not gotten out of control, or an admin that deletes threads or posts that no longer suit them. Many of us view that kind of totalitarian censorship as a much bigger transgression than any review you will post, and the site has had a lot of good members leave because of this BS.  Four+ years ago this site used to have A LOT more forum activity and members posting, and was a lot more fun to visit daily.  Most topics were fair game unless they were clearly discriminatory or NSFW. And rarely did the front page have a stale or day old topic on it. But then the the pussyfication began, and the effort to make sure that everything was politically correct and that no one's feeling ever got hurt drove away some great guys.  So that's why many folks remain frustrated.

Oh, and IBTL!

Well put Bruce.

[tuck0411]

Brlesq - 12/23/2018  12:32 PM

tuck0411 - 12/23/2018  10:54 AM

Kid Montana - 12/21/2018  7:43 AM

Somebody call the Whaambulance.  Poor lil tuck was getting dogpiled by a bunch of meanies, he needed rescuing.

Hardly.  From my angle, the "meanies" were dogpiling themselves and looking pretty silly in the process.  But it was all in the name of "professionalism", of course...  

Tuck, its hard to disagree with you that many of the comments lacked "professionalism".  There were probably better ways of getting the point across. But since these couple of threads began on 12/21, you have posted 4 more reviews, and all of them were much more about reviewing a cigar and much less about the ambiance, so that is certainly appreciated.  Personally,  I think that your scoring of cigars is fair and objective, and you rate dog rockets appropriately as dog rockets.  You certainly put an effort into writing the review, and everybody does them differently.  Keep doing it this way and I doubt there will be more objections.      

And please note, this particular thread (Fun Police) wasn't aimed at you or even about you.  It was about a having an admin freeze a thread that clearly has not gotten out of control, or an admin that deletes threads or posts that no longer suit them. Many of us view that kind of totalitarian censorship as a much bigger transgression than any review you will post, and the site has had a lot of good members leave because of this BS.  Four+ years ago this site used to have A LOT more forum activity and members posting, and was a lot more fun to visit daily.  Most topics were fair game unless they were clearly discriminatory or NSFW. And rarely did the front page have a stale or day old topic on it. But then the the pussyfication began, and the effort to make sure that everything was politically correct and that no one's feeling ever got hurt drove away some great guys.  So that's why many folks remain frustrated.

Oh, and IBTL!

Thanks for the comments, Bruce.  Although, I haven't yet figured out what "IBTL" means, but I'm sure a light bulb will go off shortly...

I can't guarantee there won't be more "ambiance" stuff as I do enjoy adding context once in awhile.  Clearly, some like it and some don't.  Oh well, I'm not going to try and please everyone....

As for this thread not being aimed at me, noted, but Kid Montana did mention me in particular, which I felt was worth responding to.  As for censorship in general, yeah, I'm not a fan of it either, as evidenced by my resistance to writing my reviews a particular way.  I think if the other thread hadn't been frozen, we could have worked out our differences in a civil enough manner, or at least I hope we could have.  I'm certainly not here to make enemies and I hope no one else is, either.  And on that note, I think I'm going to go smoke one....  

[Brlesq]

tuck0411 - 12/23/2018  3:44 PM

Brlesq - 12/23/2018  12:32 PM

tuck0411 - 12/23/2018  10:54 AM

Kid Montana - 12/21/2018  7:43 AM

Somebody call the Whaambulance.  Poor lil tuck was getting dogpiled by a bunch of meanies, he needed rescuing.

Hardly.  From my angle, the "meanies" were dogpiling themselves and looking pretty silly in the process.  But it was all in the name of "professionalism", of course...  

Tuck, its hard to disagree with you that many of the comments lacked "professionalism".  There were probably better ways of getting the point across. But since these couple of threads began on 12/21, you have posted 4 more reviews, and all of them were much more about reviewing a cigar and much less about the ambiance, so that is certainly appreciated.  Personally,  I think that your scoring of cigars is fair and objective, and you rate dog rockets appropriately as dog rockets.  You certainly put an effort into writing the review, and everybody does them differently.  Keep doing it this way and I doubt there will be more objections.      

And please note, this particular thread (Fun Police) wasn't aimed at you or even about you.  It was about a having an admin freeze a thread that clearly has not gotten out of control, or an admin that deletes threads or posts that no longer suit them. Many of us view that kind of totalitarian censorship as a much bigger transgression than any review you will post, and the site has had a lot of good members leave because of this BS.  Four+ years ago this site used to have A LOT more forum activity and members posting, and was a lot more fun to visit daily.  Most topics were fair game unless they were clearly discriminatory or NSFW. And rarely did the front page have a stale or day old topic on it. But then the the pussyfication began, and the effort to make sure that everything was politically correct and that no one's feeling ever got hurt drove away some great guys.  So that's why many folks remain frustrated.

Oh, and IBTL!

Thanks for the comments, Bruce.  Although, I haven't yet figured out what "IBTL" means, but I'm sure a light bulb will go off shortly...

I can't guarantee there won't be more "ambiance" stuff as I do enjoy adding context once in awhile.  Clearly, some like it and some don't.  Oh well, I'm not going to try and please everyone....

As for this thread not being aimed at me, noted, but Kid Montana did mention me in particular, which I felt was worth responding to.  As for censorship in general, yeah, I'm not a fan of it either, as evidenced by my resistance to writing my reviews a particular way.  I think if the other thread hadn't been frozen, we could have worked out our differences in a civil enough manner, or at least I hope we could have.  I'm certainly not here to make enemies and I hope no one else is, either.  And on that note, I think I'm going to go smoke one....  

IBTL - In Before the Lock

Some ambiance is fine, but not when it becomes the majority of the review.

Kid Montana's post was aimed at the admin's over-reaction, not meant to be a slight at you (although I can see how you might read it that way.)

And I agree, we would have worked it all out had that thread not been frozen. Enjoy your cigar!    

[DRuff]

Tuck,

As much as you are entitled to write your reviews how you like, I am entitled to have my opinion of them and express it. I didn't feel it necessary to call you out directly, but you figured it out pretty quickly and responded.

Knock yourself out, talk about the traffic jams, and include as much extraneous info as you feel is needed to get it to the point you're looking for. I just don't get it.   

The locking of the thread was heavy handed and without merit, but that doesn't seem to matter these days.

[junglepete]

For the record, there has never ever been a thread here that has been frozen or deleted without Paul's consent or knowledge. I strongly suggest to anyone who has an issue with that to please contact Paul directly and express your concerns rather than to lay any blame where it does not belong.

[bstessl]

Tuck, I'm just trying to give you helpful advice, constructive criticism of you will.  As said by others, write your story, but keep it focused on the cigar details.

[tuck0411]

bstessl - 12/23/2018  3:12 PM

Tuck, I'm just trying to give you helpful advice, constructive criticism of you will.  As said by others, write your story, but keep it focused on the cigar details.

I always try to do that.  And I'd challenge anyone to point out a particular review where I focused less on the cigar details and more on other stuff.  I've never come remotely close to approaching DonM's parody review of his La Palina and I'd appreciate an acknowledgement of that fact.

That said, I'm about to post a parody of the parody, just because....  but I'd bet I still won't come close to what I've been accused of doing....

[tuck0411]

DRuff - 12/23/2018  2:32 PM

Tuck,

As much as you are entitled to write your reviews how you like, I am entitled to have my opinion of them and express it. I didn't feel it necessary to call you out directly, but you figured it out pretty quickly and responded.

Knock yourself out, talk about the traffic jams, and include as much extraneous info as you feel is needed to get it to the point you're looking for. I just don't get it.   

The locking of the thread was heavy handed and without merit, but that doesn't seem to matter these days.

Hey man, it's kind of ironic that I'm still being taken to task for my review style in a thread entitled "Fun police", eh?  I'm trying to have fun, both with the smoking and with the reviewing.  Is this hobby not supposed to be fun?  I get that some take it more seriously than that and think we should strive for "professionalism" with the reviews, but that just ain't me and never will be regardless of how many folks complain about it.  Like I said, if you just can't handle my style, don't read my stuff.  But I will read yours, if you'd get around to posting some, and furthermore, I won't give you any grief over your style, either, and that's a promise.  

[DRuff]

tuck0411 - 12/23/2018  8:44 PM  

DRuff - 12/23/2018  2:32 PM  

Tuck,

As much as you are entitled to write your reviews how you like, I am entitled to have my opinion of them and express it. I didn't feel it necessary to call you out directly, but you figured it out pretty quickly and responded.

Knock yourself out, talk about the traffic jams, and include as much extraneous info as you feel is needed to get it to the point you're looking for. I just don't get it.   

The locking of the thread was heavy handed and without merit, but that doesn't seem to matter these days.

Hey man, it's kind of ironic that I'm still being taken to task for my review style in a thread entitled "Fun police", eh?  I'm trying to have fun, both with the smoking and with the reviewing.  Is this hobby not supposed to be fun?  I get that some take it more seriously than that and think we should strive for "professionalism" with the reviews, but that just ain't me and never will be regardless of how many folks complain about it.  Like I said, if you just can't handle my style, don't read my stuff.  But I will read yours, if you'd get around to posting some, and furthermore, I won't give you any grief over your style, either, and that's a promise.  

 

Interesting you say that, as I have done quote a few Geek critiques. Reviews are not really my bag, I much rather being part of a group review and comparing findings. Check out my feedback and you will see them, if you are interested. Feel free to give me grief, being from New Jersey originally and working in NYC, you would be hard pressed to hurt my feelings.

 If you'd like, join the hangout we are on now, the link is on the front page https://hangouts.google.com/call/g7msewchbgkjnnbt6x2kjljyjea?no_rd . It's a Google Hangout, all you need is a webcam, we'd be glad to have you.  

[SenorPablo]

Hey guys - don't blame Pete for this.  He pointed me to the thread and I made the call that it seemed like you guys had got your point across.  It started feeling like it was devolving to the point of piling on a new guy who seemed to have good intentions.  Sorry if I ruffled some feathers in shutting it down.  Now you can pile on me...been around you guys long enough that I have the thick skin to show for it.  

-Paul

junglepete - 12/23/2018  5:48 PM

For the record, there has never ever been a thread here that has been frozen or deleted without Paul's consent or knowledge. I strongly suggest to anyone who has an issue with that to please contact Paul directly and express your concerns rather than to lay any blame where it does not belong.

[tuck0411]

DRuff - 12/23/2018  5:54 PM

tuck0411 - 12/23/2018  8:44 PM  

DRuff - 12/23/2018  2:32 PM  

Tuck,

As much as you are entitled to write your reviews how you like, I am entitled to have my opinion of them and express it. I didn't feel it necessary to call you out directly, but you figured it out pretty quickly and responded.

Knock yourself out, talk about the traffic jams, and include as much extraneous info as you feel is needed to get it to the point you're looking for. I just don't get it.   

The locking of the thread was heavy handed and without merit, but that doesn't seem to matter these days.

Hey man, it's kind of ironic that I'm still being taken to task for my review style in a thread entitled "Fun police", eh?  I'm trying to have fun, both with the smoking and with the reviewing.  Is this hobby not supposed to be fun?  I get that some take it more seriously than that and think we should strive for "professionalism" with the reviews, but that just ain't me and never will be regardless of how many folks complain about it.  Like I said, if you just can't handle my style, don't read my stuff.  But I will read yours, if you'd get around to posting some, and furthermore, I won't give you any grief over your style, either, and that's a promise.  

 

Interesting you say that, as I have done quote a few Geek critiques. Reviews are not really my bag, I much rather being part of a group review and comparing findings. Check out my feedback and you will see them, if you are interested. Feel free to give me grief, being from New Jersey originally and working in NYC, you would be hard pressed to hurt my feelings.

 If you'd like, join the hangout we are on now, the link is on the front page https://hangouts.google.com/call/g7msewchbgkjnnbt6x2kjljyjea?no_rd . It's a Google Hangout, all you need is a webcam, we'd be glad to have you.  

Thanks, Doug, appreciate the invite.  I don't own a webcam, but if I come across a good deal on one, I may make an appearance in the hangout.

[Deener27]

Been busy getting ready for the epic Christmas dinners...what did I miss?

     

Keep it on the cigars.  It's just that easy.