Mod Squad Update for 11/05 -> 11/12...

A-g...
"But a majority of the posts there are not of that caliber--they are "Lucas has ugly children", "Hayden sucks", "Natalie can't act", "Carrie Fisher has saggy boobs"... If this sort of bashing is not allowed in the EU (which I'm not saying it should be), then it shouldn't be allowed in the Movie Forums either."

Well, this is not a straight-up valid comparison between movies and EU. For example, I don't quite see how a discussion of Tim Zahn's sagging boobs would be appropriate discussion in the Lit. forum.

Lucas' "ugly children" and Carrie Fisher's sagging boobs are an actual part of the movies, and are fair game for movie forum discussion. At least IMO.

Perhaps... perhaps... a discussion of Tim Zahn's sagging boobs would be appropriate for the Author's and Artists forum. But, even then I'm not quite sure how I feel about that.

And I suppose this all comes with a caveat with respect to EU creators. If Zahn or any other EU creator actually wrote their novels with their boobs, then perhaps whether they sagged or not might be a suitable discussion for the Lit. forum.

 

And I suppose this all comes with a caveat with respect to EU creators.

What about respect for the creator of the entire saga?

Have you seen the names they call Lucas in the Movie Forums? "Greedy bastard" is a milder insult they use for him.

Besides--Carrie Fisher does not act with her boobs. And comments about her boobs are just rude. They violate the section of the TOS in bold:

User agrees not to post material that is knowingly false and/or defamatory, misleading, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, that otherwise violates any law, or that encourages conduct constituting a criminal offense.

The posts about Lucas, particularly the ones in which posters like to name him "Luca$", violate the following:

User agrees not to use nicknames that might be deemed abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise inappropriate. User agrees not to use nicknames that might mislead other Users.

Why are we required to respect EU authors if we don't have to respect the creator and director of the movies?

 

You're actually not required to respect anyone. You are free to post whatever you choose to post. You, however, also must accept the consequences of what your posting may bring you, especially if it violates the terms you have agreed to.

If you show an excessive and unreasonable lack of respect for EU creators, then you also need to respect the fact that something may be done about such a display.

 

Why is something done about lack of respect to EU creators but not lack of respect towards Lucas himself?

 

"Example: I teach six classes. My students are all different, they are of different ages, usually taking different subjects, and have different needs. That doesn't mean that I make different rules for one class than another one."

But it's how the rules are applied that makes the difference. Having been a special ed. teacher, I find that many "problem children" are put into my regular 5th grade class. This is not a huge problem to me, but I do have to approach these kids differently than I do the rest of the class. They are held to the same rules, but not always to the same extent. Oftentimes, it would just make things worse.

I think "dynamics" pretty much sums it up. Some classes are better/worse than others. I may have a quiet class this year, and then a talkative class next year. I would be more lenient about "talking in class" with the first group, because I know they won't abuse it. The second class, I'd have to be on their butts all the time, to keep the talking from getting out of hand in the first place.

Just wanted to throw that in...

"You can't escape the fact that different people with different histories will act differently."

Agreed.

"Lucas' "ugly children" and Carrie Fisher's sagging boobs are an actual part of the movies, and are fair game for movie forum discussion. At least IMO."

From a certain point of view...

"Besides--Carrie Fisher does not act with her boobs."

True. Otherwise, she would not have used tape.

"Why are we required to respect EU authors if we don't have to respect the creator and director of the movies?"

Maybe because Lucas will never "officially" post here (even though he does.. )

 

There is no way I'd ever go editing out Luca$. It's not as extreme as the parts of the TOS you've quoted. It's an opinion that thinks he's greedy and that's the user's way of saying that.

 

I actually generally handle it the same for any SW creators - EU or otherwise in the EU forums.

It's just common sense that our EU forums are going to be more focused on EU creators in general than they are say, SW movie actors/creators/etc. Most of our discussion involving Lucas just mainly center around "canon." Same for McCallum, but not so much now that his "canon heirarchy" has been superceded by LFL.

And as a minor point of fact - Princess Leia's boobs (not Carrie Fisher's mind you), has been the subject of many a Lit. discussion as well as EU creator interview. Mainly with respect to how the character of Leia is drawn in the comics. And "sagging" is usually not ever mentioned within the discussion.

 

I'm not saying that there isn't a difference between EU authors who post here and actors and directors who don't. I understand the EU authors who post here are protected by the TOS. However...what about those who don't post here?

And I'm still opposed to attacking Star Wars related celebrities, even if they don't post here. Saying "Lucas has ugly children" is rude, vulgar, and contributes nothing to the discussion. If you want to criticize, say "Why did Lucas feel he had to use his daughters in the nightclub scene?"

As far as the classroom analogy--I don't think we should treat anyone on the boards like they are "special ed". Of course I also don't believe this bull-hockey they call "behaviorally educably disordered". Kids can be taught to behave, and I'm not going to treat them like they can't help it.

Everyone who signs up for these boards agrees to abide by the TOS. There is no reason for one poster or one forum to be treated differently than others.

Sape:

It's an opinion that thinks he's greedy and that's the user's way of saying that.

But is it or is it not rude, mean and disrespectful? If it weren't for Lucas, we wouldn't have this message board.

 

Why is something done about lack of respect to EU creators but not lack of respect towards Lucas himself?

Offhand? I'd say because we draw far, far more of the EU creators to our site for posting and it's counterproductive to allow author/artist-bashing when we're actively trying to promote an environment where they'd want to join us.

If Lucas posted here, he'd be afforded the same rights as everyone else with the TOS.

As most of the Lit folks know, I've got some... shall we say "choice" words about some of the recent SW authors. However, I'd never go so far as to bash THEM (their books, onthe other hand... )

 

"As far as the classroom analogy--I don't think we should treat anyone on the boards like they are "special ed".

I didn't say that at all!

"Of course I also don't believe this bull-hockey they call "behaviorally educably disordered". Kids can be taught to behave, and I'm not going to treat them like they can't help it."

So now you are bashing students with special needs?

See, it all boils down to opinion. Your comments can easily be construed as attacks against kids who don't even post here, especially since you clearly know nothing about the students I am referring to.

For one thing, many of these kids are not taught to behave - at least, not at home. It's tough breaking a kid of that kind of conditioning, and the options left to teachers are becoming fewer and fewer.

 

Yeah, I know all about that. And no, I'm not "bashing" kids with special needs--I work in a special-needs-population school. I go out of my way to accommodate kids with learning disabilities...I just don't think that one kid should receive a less harsh punishment for an infraction than another kid does just because the first kid wasn't taught at home...that's punishing kids with good upbringing.

But anyway--off topic but you're welcome to PM me about it if you want.

 

Naw, you understood my point.

 

George Lucas is not a member of these boards. And it may be disrespectful, but there is no way I'd moderate that. It's barely even minor, not a blip on the radar screen.

 

I invite everyone to come check out the EU forums.

In the EU, Lucas' children aren't ugly and Leia's boobs never sag.

 

...and Boba Fett falls into the Sarlaac Pit three times, IG-88 is the brain of the Death Star, Force Sloths and Force Invulnerable Aliens from the planet X battle Super powered Solo babies and Chewie and Anakin are dead. Well Anakin is alive and then dead, but don't worry it's a different one. Hutts control a Death Star, Cloned Emperors and Luke's, Three eyed kids of Palps, Luke turns to the Darkside, and Han Solo's cousin is a Dictator of his home planet. Oh and the favourite characters are another apprentice of Palps that couldn't have existed and a Blue skinned Sherlock Holmes/Spock Hybrid.

Not that I am disparaging the Merchandising Sci-Fi novels or anything.

UKS

 

UKS...
"Force Sloths and Force Invulnerable Aliens from the planet X battle Super powered Solo babies..."

Actually, it wasn't the Solo babies involved in the Planet X stories. It was C-3P0, R2-D2, Stuart Zissu and scientific research droid Forbee-X.

You can read about the Journey Across Planet X story, here.

 

George Lucas is not a member of these boards. And it may be disrespectful, but there is no way I'd moderate that. It's barely even minor, not a blip on the radar screen.

In which case, I think we ought to have the same standards for any author or artist who does not post here.

I understand different standards for those who do; however, we shouldn't protect one SW-associated person who does not post here more than another, especially when "the other" is the reason we have the saga in the first place.

 

If those authors register a name here, then all that would apply. And hey, sometimes it's good to let an author know that something they did flat out sucked so they have an honest fanbase reaction and not to do it again.

 

I hardly think Lucas should be regarded as "just another person who isn't registered here."

If one were to say Rick McCallum, Ben Burtt, Hayden, or whoever were regarded as such, that's understandable.

But this website owes its existence to Lucas for better or worse. I think he should be afforded the same respect (read TOS protection) that a registered author or other VIP does here, but that's just my opinion.

I mean it shouldn't matter that if it weren't for Lucas, TFN wouldn't exist....right?

 

Constructive criticism isn't a bad thing.

"Hey George...was it really necessary to have Jar-Jar step in poop?"

The negative comments about the dialogue don't even bother me.

I understand that sort of thing. I don't think we have to love every part of every movie to be fans.

I just think it does more harm than good to make derogatory comments about how someone's children look though. But that's just me.

 

But that doesn't mean he cannot be criticized in a constructive way, even if it means someone think he's greedy.

 

I have often argued strongly for the equal protection of ALL people here -- registered or unregistered -- but am usually roundly shouted down by many, many people.

 

Why is that? I'm curious to know what reasons people bring up.

 

"The TOS only applies to users."
"We can't moderate thought."
"Celebrities aren't protected."

etc, etc, etc.

There are better, more thought out reasons -- but most of those are locked away.

Suffice it to say -- I don't agree with any of them.

 

I agree that expecting you guys to moderate thought is a little much.

What's really sad though is that people don't realize that celebrities are human beings. I don't think they should be punished for taking a job that puts them in the public light.

I would even be in favor of only protecting Star Wars-related celebrities just to make things easier.