ShavingUniverse.com
Register a free account now!
If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
Closed thread
- Thread starter Bart
- Start Date
G
Guest
Belgians are famous for their diplomacy. Very commendable posts, both of them. However, I would like to point out a few things that I believe Bruno phrased ambiguously.
First, SRP is Lynn's ride. It's an unspoken truth we all know and do (or should, sensibly) accept. But I believe it begs repeating. Because when Bruno says, "'SRP' as an entity does not have an opinion. We don't have a formal system to decide what is true or not", the question arises who "we" is or are.
Likewise, "What we do have is people. Lots of them. And people have opinions." actually gets things backwards. I really thought when I joined SRP that SRP was a large group of people interested in straight razor shaving. And that the staff were actually behaviour monitors. And maybe it really was klike that, back then. But it is not any more, generally speaking. Because by his words, Bruno is distancing the membership from SRP, when instead he should be distancing the staff (or whatever "SRP" is). My personal interpretation would be as follows: "SRP is full of opinions just like any other website. Lynn wants the staff to push the membership in certain directions at times, but it doesn't always work. Sometimes that results in bans." And that is perfectly fine by everyone, or at least it should be. Because that is how social communities work. To claim otherwise - like Robert Williams does - is just trying to throw sand into the members' eyes. SRP is as much Lynn's site as CBE is Bart's, WSW Robert's, and so on. They hold the householder's rights, and they would be insane not to enforce them, not least because of the legal issues involved in running a public website.
Yet the same problem of ownership arises again: "what a minority thinks does not mean that they are backed by SRP" - who is "SRP" in this context? Lynn? Bruno & Dave, aka the administrators? The super or not quite super moderators? The mentors? All members?
And on a more surface level, the following statement is rather misleading: "the persons in charge of SRP are Dave Wessel and I, and neither of us makes any claim to hold the truth." Because part of the aforementioned householder's rights is the right to make sure your version of the truth is louder than any others. Bart cited a particularly disgusting example above, but again, this is nothing that is SRP specific - you will find the same, and worse, at B&B or any other forum with a sufficiently diverse member base, and with moderators whose technical skills are greater than their interpersonal ones. Nothing worth shedding a single tear over - it's just life.
But for the real problem, let's come back to the original post in which the original poster said, "I was reading at SRP and somehow, I don´t know whether it is worth looking there anymore. It´s all about Eschers, JNats and other fancy hones…" Now, what was he reading? Obviously, posts created by SRP's members. However, he did not say, "I don't like SRP because I don't like its members". To put this into perspective, an analogy would be the President of Razorland apologising for his country by saying, "The citizens don't represent Razorland, I do. So don't hate me and my administration. Hate the people!" Because in reality, it is the administration of Razorland causing the problems by pruning or bullying the citizens.
So there. Let me end this by stating, clearly, that the problems addressed in this thread are not specific to SRP. I think SRP is the best general shaving forum, and full of good information. But there is a number of people active in various forums with a vested interest in straight razors, and they do far more damage than good once they are given some power.
Regards,
Robin
First, SRP is Lynn's ride. It's an unspoken truth we all know and do (or should, sensibly) accept. But I believe it begs repeating. Because when Bruno says, "'SRP' as an entity does not have an opinion. We don't have a formal system to decide what is true or not", the question arises who "we" is or are.
Likewise, "What we do have is people. Lots of them. And people have opinions." actually gets things backwards. I really thought when I joined SRP that SRP was a large group of people interested in straight razor shaving. And that the staff were actually behaviour monitors. And maybe it really was klike that, back then. But it is not any more, generally speaking. Because by his words, Bruno is distancing the membership from SRP, when instead he should be distancing the staff (or whatever "SRP" is). My personal interpretation would be as follows: "SRP is full of opinions just like any other website. Lynn wants the staff to push the membership in certain directions at times, but it doesn't always work. Sometimes that results in bans." And that is perfectly fine by everyone, or at least it should be. Because that is how social communities work. To claim otherwise - like Robert Williams does - is just trying to throw sand into the members' eyes. SRP is as much Lynn's site as CBE is Bart's, WSW Robert's, and so on. They hold the householder's rights, and they would be insane not to enforce them, not least because of the legal issues involved in running a public website.
Yet the same problem of ownership arises again: "what a minority thinks does not mean that they are backed by SRP" - who is "SRP" in this context? Lynn? Bruno & Dave, aka the administrators? The super or not quite super moderators? The mentors? All members?
And on a more surface level, the following statement is rather misleading: "the persons in charge of SRP are Dave Wessel and I, and neither of us makes any claim to hold the truth." Because part of the aforementioned householder's rights is the right to make sure your version of the truth is louder than any others. Bart cited a particularly disgusting example above, but again, this is nothing that is SRP specific - you will find the same, and worse, at B&B or any other forum with a sufficiently diverse member base, and with moderators whose technical skills are greater than their interpersonal ones. Nothing worth shedding a single tear over - it's just life.
But for the real problem, let's come back to the original post in which the original poster said, "I was reading at SRP and somehow, I don´t know whether it is worth looking there anymore. It´s all about Eschers, JNats and other fancy hones…" Now, what was he reading? Obviously, posts created by SRP's members. However, he did not say, "I don't like SRP because I don't like its members". To put this into perspective, an analogy would be the President of Razorland apologising for his country by saying, "The citizens don't represent Razorland, I do. So don't hate me and my administration. Hate the people!" Because in reality, it is the administration of Razorland causing the problems by pruning or bullying the citizens.
So there. Let me end this by stating, clearly, that the problems addressed in this thread are not specific to SRP. I think SRP is the best general shaving forum, and full of good information. But there is a number of people active in various forums with a vested interest in straight razors, and they do far more damage than good once they are given some power.
Regards,
Robin
My thumb is healing slowly. That is to be expected I suppose.
You have no idea how much you use the tip of your thumb until you can't use it anymore. Things like buttons etc.
People say all sorts of things about coticules. Some of which I agree with, some of it I don't. For example, I do think that coticules are not consistent in the meaning that 'a coticule' (picked up from any store) can behave in different ways (slow or fast to name one trait) depending on which specific stone you got, whereas a Norton is pretty much a Norton no matter where you buy it.
Otoh I don't think a coticule wears faster. They're rocks. They last longer than the Norton 1000K for sure. And the norton 220 wears out by just looking at it. I can't compare with others though. I've heard that shaptons are harder than Nortons but I don't know. Compared with Japanese stones I think that my Nakayama is harder, and my Narutaki is softer. But with 2 Japanese stones and 3 Coticules (one which is fairly soft and the other pretty hard) I agree that the sample size is statistically insignificant.
It may be that Sham is doing everything to discredit coticules. But that is his beef. Not ours. When you were still a member, both you and Sham were mentors. That was not because or despite your or his opinion about coticules. Possibly he dislikes them as much as you like them. I've already mentioned that we don't step in to say who's right from the 'SRP' point of view. To do that would be to say that we know what is true. Even Lynn's opinion is just his opinion.
The point where I can agree with you in spirit is that having mods participate in forums has the potential for conflict of interest. Yet there is not much I can do. The only people willing to stick around and put in time are those who care about razors and shaving. They want to participate. I could muzzle them but that would just cause me to end up with no mods. That would be like asking you not to talk about coticules here because you are a moderator.
What I don't see is what commercial interests have to do with the coticule controversy. I don't see how anyone could benefit if people use Norton instead of Coticules?
Regardless of the previous paragraphs: You are indeed right that coticule users are not to blame for the problems. You just get the short end of the stick because you are the minority.
You have no idea how much you use the tip of your thumb until you can't use it anymore. Things like buttons etc.
People say all sorts of things about coticules. Some of which I agree with, some of it I don't. For example, I do think that coticules are not consistent in the meaning that 'a coticule' (picked up from any store) can behave in different ways (slow or fast to name one trait) depending on which specific stone you got, whereas a Norton is pretty much a Norton no matter where you buy it.
Otoh I don't think a coticule wears faster. They're rocks. They last longer than the Norton 1000K for sure. And the norton 220 wears out by just looking at it. I can't compare with others though. I've heard that shaptons are harder than Nortons but I don't know. Compared with Japanese stones I think that my Nakayama is harder, and my Narutaki is softer. But with 2 Japanese stones and 3 Coticules (one which is fairly soft and the other pretty hard) I agree that the sample size is statistically insignificant.
It may be that Sham is doing everything to discredit coticules. But that is his beef. Not ours. When you were still a member, both you and Sham were mentors. That was not because or despite your or his opinion about coticules. Possibly he dislikes them as much as you like them. I've already mentioned that we don't step in to say who's right from the 'SRP' point of view. To do that would be to say that we know what is true. Even Lynn's opinion is just his opinion.
The point where I can agree with you in spirit is that having mods participate in forums has the potential for conflict of interest. Yet there is not much I can do. The only people willing to stick around and put in time are those who care about razors and shaving. They want to participate. I could muzzle them but that would just cause me to end up with no mods. That would be like asking you not to talk about coticules here because you are a moderator.
What I don't see is what commercial interests have to do with the coticule controversy. I don't see how anyone could benefit if people use Norton instead of Coticules?
Regardless of the previous paragraphs: You are indeed right that coticule users are not to blame for the problems. You just get the short end of the stick because you are the minority.
Bruno said:
I think, the idea is, that "they" are trying to let honing look more complicated than it actually is, so that the beginner thinks twice about buying hones or sending his razor to a "pro". I am very careful with making such statements, I just tell here, what the whole commercial interest-thing is about.
Regards,
Tok
decraew
Well-Known Member
Bruno said:
Over here at Coticule.be we say that you can hone a razor using only a coticule. So strictly speaking you only need one inexpensive hone.
Then enter vendors who say: for this type of razor you need hone X, for that type of razor you get the best results if you start on hone x, then proceed to hone y and if you really want that super edge, you may also want to consider hone z.
In the first case, you only buy one inexpensive hone (I know, there are expensive coticules as well but, well, you don't need to buy an expensive one).
In the second case you end up with a gazillion different hones and an empty wallet (well, MY wallet would be empty)
tat2Ralfy
Well-Known Member
Tok said:
Indeed and dont forget that Nortons are easy and a Coticule takes real skill "if you are lucky enough to find one of the 3 in a thousand that works", there is even the "hone by numbers" pyramid method that opens up the dark art of skilled honing to a novice, should they be stubborn enough to insist on doing it them self, a useful myth if you happen to be in business selling Nortons.
Regards
Ralfson (Dr)
G
Guest
Hi, Bruno,
And many thanks for the frank reply. Much appreciated.
Let's take an example. Imagine you have a vendor X whose speciality is restoration & customisation. That vendor happens to also moderate a part of the site in which such items are put on display by members. Now imagine that a number of people disagree with X's choice of scale materials, or the fact that he puts a mirror finish on historical blades (including those who originally had anything but). What do you think would happen if a number of members stood up and said, 'Now wait a minute, I think the result of your commercial efforts is aesthetically questionable, a-historic, and all in all tacky.'? Now, you could say that this person's opinion represents a minuscule fraction of the site's members - but you would never know, because that person would be silenced faster than you could say 'custom scales for sale.'
Okay, so this example is not entirely fictional. I'll respect said vendor's wish to retain his anonymity, but here is the end of a discussion we had. One that, shortly afterwards led to my being banned from that site. The razor in question was a Henckels which was put into some garishly coloured acrylic scales for no good reason.
Bruno, you're a good guy, and I absolutely hate shooting the messenger. None of the above is meant to be taken personally, and you know my position on SRP. The problem isn't the forum, it's the people. And it is very bad style to discuss people in their absence.
Best regards,
Robin
And many thanks for the frank reply. Much appreciated.
That last sentence is a non sequitur. SRP (and B&B ) have several layers of moderation/guidance: Owner, Super Moderator, Moderator, Mentor/Steward. Both sides have a high percentage of vendors in all groups. And that is where conflicts of interest arise. Because as soon as you have a vested interest in a certain product, or range of products, chances are that you will be disinclined to point out their weaknesses, or have somebody else point them out.Bruno said:
Let's take an example. Imagine you have a vendor X whose speciality is restoration & customisation. That vendor happens to also moderate a part of the site in which such items are put on display by members. Now imagine that a number of people disagree with X's choice of scale materials, or the fact that he puts a mirror finish on historical blades (including those who originally had anything but). What do you think would happen if a number of members stood up and said, 'Now wait a minute, I think the result of your commercial efforts is aesthetically questionable, a-historic, and all in all tacky.'? Now, you could say that this person's opinion represents a minuscule fraction of the site's members - but you would never know, because that person would be silenced faster than you could say 'custom scales for sale.'
Okay, so this example is not entirely fictional. I'll respect said vendor's wish to retain his anonymity, but here is the end of a discussion we had. One that, shortly afterwards led to my being banned from that site. The razor in question was a Henckels which was put into some garishly coloured acrylic scales for no good reason.
Now, I won't tell you who X is, and in the end, it does not really matter. What matters is that this type of bullying happens. In the case of certain senior members, it actually happens a lot. Especially if their commercial interest are at stake, as in the example above. And there is nothing you can do about that, indeed, unless you solve the problem of being an admin of a forum (any such forum, not yours in particular) where there are strong commercial interests present throughout the entire forum structure. Since you're Belgian, you will understand this: http://www.gut-rasiert.de/forum/index.php/topic,9739.0.html. And this is how it should be. Vendors are welcome, but restricted to the vendors' section. They must not comment on their own products (yes, including scales for razors). Oh yeah, no commercial links of any kind in signatures, either. And yet these guys manage to run a successful wet shaving forum. One that, in fact, has a much higher signal/noise ratio then any of the international forums.
You have to see the big picture. It's not about hone x vs. y. It's about a vendor's daddy being bigger than my daddy, for example because he's honed thousands of razors, whereas mine hasn't. It's about discrediting, ridiculing, and bullying anyone who does not agree with the line of reasoning upon which your business model is built. And it's about profit margins.Bruno said:
How would you know that? "Us" (I would actually prefer not to be part of that group, because my honing skills would put any decent Coticule user to shame) being in the minority? Because two or more of your so called management team bully, threaten, or ridicule people who dare publicly state that for them, this hone works best.Bruno said:
Bruno, you're a good guy, and I absolutely hate shooting the messenger. None of the above is meant to be taken personally, and you know my position on SRP. The problem isn't the forum, it's the people. And it is very bad style to discuss people in their absence.
Best regards,
Robin
Bart
Well-Known Member
Good to hear it's healing well.Bruno said:
You may not know, but I severed the last digit of my index finger about a year ago. I'm still not quite entirely used to missing it. But it could have been much worse, so I'm not complaining.
Norton is a bad example, because it's reported that many of the Mexican produced 4K's need to be lapped a few mm deep before they start working well for razor use. But you're correct that Coticules vary. Even significantly. However, the inconsistency claim is made in the sense that one and the same Coticule delivers an unpredictable outcome each time it is used. That indeed happens, but that kind of inconsistency if in the user and not in the tool. The variance of Coticules is something that is dealt with on this website, primarily by providing paradigms that work for all of them, and by offering guidance to users with questions.Bruno said:
For the purpose of maintaining and sharpening a personal razor collection the wear rate of any type of hone is completely irrelevant. Every seasoned straight razor user knows that it is a non-issue. Statements like "I wouldn't want to waste my precious natural stone on raising slurry", are clearly only inspired by zealotry. JimR had to deal with similar remarks when he started talking about how Japanese stones were used according to his barber's tradition.Bruno said:
Bruno, that is a weird thing to say to someone who's banned on SRP.Bruno said:
It has been answered already, but I personally don't think it is the first or the most key factor to the current uproar. The factor is a clash of ego's. You may count my very own ego among those. To briefly come back to Sham, I don't think he dislikes Coticules as such. I think it is the idea of one-stone-sharpening, that he finds utterly unacceptable. Because he likes to go through his collection and fondle them all, each for their own virtues. With sharing a one-stone-method, I basically tell people that those virtues are all imaginary. I admit that I indeed think that for the greater part to be true, or at least that the qualification of a razor's edge is so personal that any comparison between hones is mostly insignificant. Nonetheless, I don't chime in on every forum thread about hone comparisons. In fact, I usually stay out of such conversation. But let's not digress. It is the sharing of my one-stone method that made me persona non grata on SRP. I won't bother you with the full history, but that aversion against all things "Bart", has not exactly calmed down, has it? Of course I have been annoyed by it. I know myself well enough to know that I have zero diplomatic inclination. Knowing when to shut up, is not my cup of tea. I like to believe that the honesty of my bluntness should make up for that, but I have learned, that particularly in the US society, knowing when to shut up is considered a rather important social skill. My bad.Bruno said:
But the truly sad part of this story is is that in this ongoing collision of ego's, Coticules are used as ammunition by one of the parties. There is this great legacy, that I hope will still live on when we're all gone and this website has long been lost in some major server crash. And there are a few of the noblest people I've ever met, without theirs passion Coticules would not even been extracted anymore. Both the legacy and these guys deserve way better than to be used to get even in some pathetic dispute. So unless, someone comes up with a better suggestion, my vote is to ban the dispute. Not because I am satisfied with the situation, but because the discussion doesn't serve a good cause.
Bruno. I am totally comfortable with being part of a minority. And the short end of the stick suits me just fine.Bruno said:
Thank you for elaborating on this just a tad further. I genuinely believe that there are lessons to be learned on both sides.
Good luck! And always welcome!
Bart.
You did not cut it off yourself with a knife, I hope?
Your observation about people objecting to the '1 hone' principle are probably accurate for some people. Recently, someone was told that to maintain his razor, he needed the naniwa 1K, 3K, 5K, 8K, 16K and something else. But there were enough people calling BS and the person who said it dropped out of the discussion. Some people are indeed like audiophiles who are asked what the minimum is to enjoy a bit of music.
Since you mention your ban, that was not because of the honing angle, but because you repeatedly accused people in public of commercial interest when recommending hones and honing strategies. I am really glad that you mentioned it yourself, because that was indeed an occurrence of not knowing when to shut up.
Personally, I think the one hone method is a valid approach, even though it is not what I prefer. And I do hope it is preserved for eternity, because I am glad that we still have a functioning coticule mine. It is a living part of history, but no good if people have no resources for coticule usage.
But at least you (and the others of course) are still arguing about something tangible and measurable. Last week I discovered that some people are fighting intense flamewars about whether the balrog of Morgoth had wings or not... that is just sad.
Your observation about people objecting to the '1 hone' principle are probably accurate for some people. Recently, someone was told that to maintain his razor, he needed the naniwa 1K, 3K, 5K, 8K, 16K and something else. But there were enough people calling BS and the person who said it dropped out of the discussion. Some people are indeed like audiophiles who are asked what the minimum is to enjoy a bit of music.
Since you mention your ban, that was not because of the honing angle, but because you repeatedly accused people in public of commercial interest when recommending hones and honing strategies. I am really glad that you mentioned it yourself, because that was indeed an occurrence of not knowing when to shut up.
Personally, I think the one hone method is a valid approach, even though it is not what I prefer. And I do hope it is preserved for eternity, because I am glad that we still have a functioning coticule mine. It is a living part of history, but no good if people have no resources for coticule usage.
But at least you (and the others of course) are still arguing about something tangible and measurable. Last week I discovered that some people are fighting intense flamewars about whether the balrog of Morgoth had wings or not... that is just sad.
G
Guest
And the reason you mention this is because it's remarkable? In a place full of gear fetishists whose personal replacement for dick size wars is hone collection size wars? Sorry, Bruno, but I know are far too intelligent to insult everyone's intelligence here. This forum is full of seasoned users, many with several years' experience in various online shaving communities. And we've all seen what happens if you disagree with your fearless leader or one of his passive aggressive sycophants. Again, householder's right and all that. Nothing to complain about. Unless you try to sell it as something it's not.Bruno said:
You mean like this? Well, when your only tool is passive aggression, every problem looks like it's fine, no really, it's fine. I like the way that mentoring vendor of yours is bullying tok. Pure style and class.Bruno said:
And on a tangent: As far as Bart's ban is concerned, three people here know that you're stretching the truth quite a bit. Let's settle for your word against mine: This is not what happened at all.
We're not arguing, we're hypothesising, testing, and documenting. While elsewhere, people are taking shiny pictures, claiming that they prove something. I wonder how someone as avidly interested in audio and science fiction can live with that approach.Bruno said:
Regards,
Robin
TM280
Well-Known Member
If I am sticking my nose in, just feel free to tell me to butt out.
I am interested because as a member of these forums I would like to know the dynamics. On the basis of Bruno's statements about Bart's banishment, I went through several months of Bart's last postings on SRP (an interesting but silly endeavour). Thinking that he must have been raving about commercial interests somewhat prior to his banning, I expected to find such behaviour. Needless to say, there was none. What I did notice was a consistent difference of opinion with the same central members of SRP.
If his views on commercial interests expressed on his own website (I don't know the timeline and will not be further searching forums for this purpose) caused him trouble on another forum, I think this is strange. Perhaps understandable, and everything here is public as well, so why not? I guess...
regards,
Torolf
I am interested because as a member of these forums I would like to know the dynamics. On the basis of Bruno's statements about Bart's banishment, I went through several months of Bart's last postings on SRP (an interesting but silly endeavour). Thinking that he must have been raving about commercial interests somewhat prior to his banning, I expected to find such behaviour. Needless to say, there was none. What I did notice was a consistent difference of opinion with the same central members of SRP.
If his views on commercial interests expressed on his own website (I don't know the timeline and will not be further searching forums for this purpose) caused him trouble on another forum, I think this is strange. Perhaps understandable, and everything here is public as well, so why not? I guess...
regards,
Torolf
BeBerlin said:
No, I mentioned it because it happens, and it is indeed similar to what others say about the 1 hone approach regarding coticules, but it is also not the norm. Do most of our users advocate the 1 hone method? To be honest, I have no clue. Probably not, unless you count the norton 4/8 as a single hone, which is what I still advise, based on my experiences. Usually people say something like 1 stone for metal removal and 1 for finishing. You may or may not agree, but it is a valid approach and valid advice.
BeBerlin said:
A lot more happened. Indeed. And it built up over a period of time.
But it was the direct cause of the ban. All the disagreement and head butting that went before it caused the outbursts, no doubt. But they were not the ban reason.
Had that not happened, there would have been no ban.
BeBerlin said:
Well, yes. But if you have an audio forum, you're going to have audiophiles.
If you run a SF forum, you're going to have people attacking each other over the hypothetical existence of fictional wings.
And you are right that if we enforced the scientific approach on all debate, we'd see different things. Maybe better things. Otoh: other problems would arise, no doubt. Look at the global warming debate. Scientists on boths side, evidence on both sides. You'd think they'd get to a common end result instead of trying to stab each other. If I could make the example: no matter what we do or which format we use, Bart and Sham would never, ever agree.
TM280 said:
Not quite, but an understandable mistake.
When the whole issue between Lynn, Sham and Bart exploded, a whole lot of posts were deleted.
We left all the 'technical' posts visible, but the parts that were going personal (both ways) were deleted.
We've always taken the approach that what happens on another forum stays in another forum and it is not our business. Of course: we keep it in mind for when it spills over to SRP. But what people say here for example is their business.
tat2Ralfy
Well-Known Member
Bruno said:
Mmm interesting that one, being as I recently received a rather hostile P.M from the same bullying Mentor/Vendor of yours, because he didnt like what I had written on this forum, a forum that he does not frequent, and I believe it reasonable to assume that he was given the heads up on my posts by someone else, hardly the approach you claim Bruno.
Regards
Ralfson (Dr)
Hello Ralf,
the mentors are not considered staff, nor do they have access to the administrative forums.
They are expected to behave though. Would you mind forwarding that PM if you still have it? Or at least let me know who it was (in private)? Because I most definitely don't agree.
I cannot help what 'any' other SRP members do or send you.
But I do expect mentors not to go harrassing other members via PM.
the mentors are not considered staff, nor do they have access to the administrative forums.
They are expected to behave though. Would you mind forwarding that PM if you still have it? Or at least let me know who it was (in private)? Because I most definitely don't agree.
I cannot help what 'any' other SRP members do or send you.
But I do expect mentors not to go harrassing other members via PM.
tat2Ralfy
Well-Known Member
Bruno said:
I will P.M you both the message I received and my Reply Bruno, I dont for one minute think that it will come as any surprise to you to see it was gssixgun, a mentor/vendor who has a reputation for his lack of respect, I know of many members of SRP that choose not to go there (Myself included) because of this sort of going on, and for the record when I was asked by Lynn what the problem seemed to be, I was told it was all Bullshit, of course an afternoon spent reading posts that are not deleted should show to anyone with a reasonable grasp of etiquette that it is far from bullshit.
Regards
Ralfson (Dr)
G
Guest
Absolutely. As you know, I'm not a religious person when it comes to hones. I have never pretended to know much about them, either. I have a simple problem (blunt(ish) razors), for which want a simple solution. I never liked my Nortons, and I find that I get results I need from a Coticule. Which solves my immediate problem. Beyond that, I find the mechanics fascinating, and I appreciate the endeavours made here to scientifically approach this particular line of hones. What irks me, though, is when people discard scientifically derived information in favour of the results they achieved through meddling with their hones and razors, and then selling these results as a truth.Bruno said:
In the case of your mentoring vendor, that means that he is completely on his own with his results, but that will not stop him from bullying anyone who disagrees with him. If he were a user, this would be ridiculous. For a mentor, it is a bloody disgrace.
Maybe. Maybe not. To quote you from earlier on in this thread, only Dave or you would know, since you two run the site. Either way, this is all water under the bridge and of no immediate concern here, at least from my perspective. But since you came here to set things right that - in your view - were misrepresenting what was said about the forum you run, you will have to allow for a dissenting view. And since I happen to have a kept a copy of the deleted posts, I would like to point out that your interpretation of the events still differs from mine. Which is perfectly fine, what with eye witnesses being notoriously unreliable and all that.Bruno said:
Global warming is far too complex a problem to deliver useful results when used as a comparison. We are talking about pieces of metal (one of the best researched and documented materials on this planet) across pieces of abrasive materials (less well documented, but certainly not complex by any means). What I see are two groups of people. One group uses a scientific approach, another group believes in creationism.Bruno said:
There is a time and place for everything. 10 years ago, founding a forum specialising in straight razors was a revolutionary concept. Throughout its existence, SRP has been at the forefront of all things shaving. But a few years ago, a turning point was reached. The whole scene basically ran out of new things to discover. The Coticule honing method being a noteworthy exception, but an exception nonetheless. It would have made sense to manage that change through better documentation. One way would have been to conduct proper experiments. And we all know how various attempts to rationalise honing ended. Several users were banned, others left. I initially said that all forums undergo change. They fork, multiply, refocus - and that need not be a bad thing. But if you claim to be a leader in any subject field, you had better lead by example, rather than by threats, bullying, and behind-the-scenes scheming.
I respect your presenting yourself as a target by the way. But shooting the messenger still is not what will solve any of the problems you admitted to in your posts.
Thanks a lot,
Robin
Bart
Well-Known Member
Worse actually, because they would have put it back on. I used a wood planer to make my mess.Bruno said:
But on with the topic at hand.
I'm not overly fond of discussing my own particular banishment in public. It appears so narcissistic. Yet it illustrates a few of the points made quite well. So here goes.
First off, this is the first time I have been offered an explanation of why I was banned. I genuinely stand surprised. After my very last post, that contained, briefly summarized, nothing more then "Yes Lynn, I accept your different appreciation of Coticules, and no Lynn, I have no problem with admitting that my experience with other hones is much more limited than yours". The post was written late at night, and I went to bed with a good feeling, because I thought we'd finally managed to clear up a misunderstanding that stood between us since the "One Coticule honing thread".
Next morning, I tried to log in and had a cold shower.
Vbulletin_message said:
I contacted 2 moderators. Both told me the same. My banishment was a decision at Supermoderator level. It was not open for debate in the moderators' forum. They could (or would) not give me a reason. I wrote an email to Lynn, saying I regretted it had to come to this. It was not rewarded a reply.
About the heart of the matter: I don't recall to have ever voiced my opinion, on the SRP forum, about commercial inclined power abuse on that very forum. But regardless of that, it totally disproves Bruno's earlier point. The SuperModerator team of SRP is 2 things: it is very small, and it is completely populated with vendors. If a couple of vendors have the power on a public forum to ban a dissident for making statements about suspected conflicting interests, then they are boldly proving him right.
About posts being edited and partially removed. Luckily I type the majority of my posts in a text editor, because I'm often typing on a computer without internet connection (the advantage of not having to deal with viruses) and because I'm fond of my spell checker and thesaurus. As far as I can tell, my posts have never been edited. What has been edited though, is the initial harshness of some of Lynn's posts, so my response to it now appears as overly defensive. There was also an entire thread in which Lynn and I argued about the condition of a particular newly bought Dovo from a large vendor. The razor had weird and ugly hone wear at the spine. I was unaware that Lynn honed for that vendor and called it poor craftsmanship. He first chimed in to say that there was no problem with the razor. Later, when it came apparent that it was his job, he claimed that all Dovo's came from the factory like that. And he basically told me to shut up, because what did I know? I responded that I never saw such a flaw at any of the new Dovo's they have at the Koordenwinkel in Antwerp, and that there was no need to talk down on me. I suggested to contact Dovo. One of the moderators chimed in to point out that I owed Lynn more respect than he need to grant me. (this is of course my interpretation) An hour later, the entire thread was gone. Vanished of the face of the Earth. It seems to me that the SRP-mods had more work cleaning up the boss' act than they've had cleaning up mine...
Then there was the famous Gold Dollar incident. I was too busy with Coticule.be and never took part in that discussion on SRP, but it did cost me my mentor status.
Here's a quick resume: There was a time where Gold Dollar razors gained popularity for being a very cheap starter's razor. Some models had issues that needed to be solved, a fact that was well documented on the forums. There were several junior members recommending them to newly arriving members. That was not to the liking of a particular vendor/moderator and he started writing the Gold Dollars down whenever they came up (I am suddenly starting to see a pattern here...lol). It stirred a big dispute, with several mods ending up at the same side. But they were up against guys with both knowledge and experience, who were able to document the Gold Dollar case very well. Regardless of who was right, it was very clear that there was no consensus in the SRP community about these razors. Guess what happened? An official and public statement was issued by the SRP-leadership, containing a very clear refutation of Gold Dollar razors. Not surprisingly, the other side protested and refiled their defense for these razors, summing up the pro's and cons. Several of these members were silently banned. I write "silently", because SRP never puts "banned" under senior members names, obviously to avoid palace revolutions.
I was still a mentor back then, and when I found out about what I can only qualify as Banana Republic politics, I was genuinely disgusted to be involved with such an organization. For days, I discussed the matter with Robin, who still was an SRP mod back then. Purely coincidental, Paul recruited me to become a member at Badger and Blade where, according to his invitation, the spirit is much opener, a statement that I find to be true.
Eventually the Gold Dollar discussion spilled over to B&B, with the same SRP mod turning the conversation sour. It is in that thread that I publicly questioned the motives of a couple of SRP vendors, annex (super)moderators, for dealing with the Gold Dollar razors in the way they did. A couple of days later, Robin informed me that my Mentor status was revoked. I felt relieved to be discharged.
I almost completely stopped posting on SRP and confined myself to posting solely in technical threads on B&B, mainly offering advise when I felt the inclination to do so. And of course there was Coticule.be. From January till May 2010, I made 7 posts on SRP, mostly to offer clarification when one of my video's or statements on Coticule.be were questioned. When I was eventually banned, I could not escape the impression that someone had been waiting on the first opportunity to do so.
My story is not a solitary case. Being banned on SRP turned out to put be among good company.
Here's my goodbye e-mail I wrote to Lynn, a couple of days after I was banned. I still perfectly reflects my state of mind concerning SRP.