I have been a serious contributor to the HP Forum for the past 15 years, having contributed software, prototyping and ideas for a number of calculator models – especially the HP-41. The Forum is a part of the HP Museum – a resource dedicated to Hewlett Packard’s range of calculator products.
Lately something interesting happened, something that validates the OnePageBook “And?”. I got banned from the forum with this message:
A few weeks back, I referred to the “Do What the Fuck You Want to Public License“, twice. That got one of the moderators on the forum all riled up. He didn’t ban me but was fuming. Then, when another member posted his reimplementation of the Brainfuck programming language, I replied that he would get in trouble with the moderators for posting that. Now THAT got me banned – with the message above. The moderator then went postal and started manually deleting all my close to 600 contributions to the forum, missing only 8 posts along the way.
Now this wasn’t the first time the moderator had blown up. He has a history of being toxic with escalating conflicts with users in public. While that moderator has some clear anger issues, the root cause is that the forum owner, Dave Hicks has kept him as a moderator, even after a major debacle back in 2015 when the moderator went full frontal on another major contributing member. There has also been several deletions of whole threads of work – just because someone was offended by some words in there.
A very sensitive person. Someone who is easily hurt or offended by the statements or actions of others.
Don’t be a snowflake.
All this made me realize that I cannot trust posting any serious contributions to that forum. Who knows whan another random moderator would go batshit and start deleting my work.
I tried my best to resolve this back channel, but the moderators kept ignoring my messages. Then I was suddenly unbanned, but my posts were put in a censorship queue. Every new post were to be reviewed by a moderator before it got posted. A post where I criticized the forum owner got blocked. It included a message I sent to Dave just before:
As I posted in one of the queued posts, I cannot trust posting anything of value to this forum anymore. And with all my contributions permanently gone and with the level of censorship going on, there is no reason for me to remain. I saw Dave’s rant about Thomas and account deletions, but since I have basically been deleted from this forum, I would like to let you off easy: Rather than facing a few hours of work to retreive my posts, you will now go ahead and permanently delete my account and all the remaining posts of mine – along with the moderator thread discussing me. I am not mad or angry. I am not even disappointed. But as I said, Dave has lost my respect and I cannot trust the forum. I request the deletion of my account in accordance with GDPR. This is final. There is no regrets or need for any cooling period. Please send me an e-mail to email@example.com confirming the action. If I ever want to join the forum again, I will do so with a fresh account.
Dave then went on the forum saying I had been “mad at him since 2015”. While that is untrue, it only confirms my decision.
So, what can I learn from this? First of all, integrity trumps snowflakes. Secondly, it has helped me exercizing enjoying debacles. And thirdly, I should remember not to be too terse or succinct in my communication as it could be interpreted as harsh or angry – when I am really just trying to be efficient. Maybe more emoticons would help?
Alternative places to discuss HP calculators:
6 thoughts on “Snowflakes are dancing”
This discussion has been a long time waiting on the sidelines. Succinct and concise are maybe how you view yourself. Terse and laconic maybe how your blog posts are coming across if you are getting unhappy feedback. For me, when communicating, the difference is in to what degree I try to take the other person’s point of view before speaking or writing. Between those 2 sides of brevity, there is not only the good manners social difference but a very real difference in the reality one’s writing can be received.
It is of course also the point that I truly don’t care what others think of me. But I will be thinking of how to include enough description to ensure the points are understood.
I won’t assume I know what you mean by ” . . . truly don’t care what others think of me.” On its face, I do not understand that statement. For me, that’s an example of terseness without succinctness. Unless that’s what you really mean. Then that has far reaching ramifications.
If my own communications are worth putting out, then it follows that they are valuable enough to me to want them to be understood. And if I value them, then it follows that I will put enough effort into their presentation to make them easy to understand, palatable even.
That all good and understood. And I agree to that. But I really did also mean exactly what I said right there. I don’t care what others think of me. They may think whatever they want. I don’t care.
I am promoting to improve the ways in which we communicate to one another. Not by curbing the content, just modifying the delivery.