BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Johnlock: The Official Debate

besleybean · August 27, 2016 7:37 am

Yes, I think we're all saying the same thing!
Of course the importance of Moriarty's TRF list, was that he didn't include Molly and that was his fatal mistake!

Vhanja · August 27, 2016 8:20 am

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

How so, when Magnussen explicitly said that he knew Sherlock was faking it? (The hapless, addicted junkie undercover role Sherlock was playing)

"I don't have to prove it, I just have to print it". Magnussen doesn't care if what he prints is true or not, only if it works as a pressure point. But printing Sherlock as a drug addict won't work because he won't care. Also, I think he likes to let Sherlock know that he's seen through him and don't believe the drug thing anyway.

Liberty · August 27, 2016 8:35 am

And John doesn't care much about being thought of as gay - he just gets a bit exasperated with it!

Vhanja · August 27, 2016 8:39 am

Yeah, if all Magnussen were threatening to do was to print a Johnlock story, I think both Sherlock and John would laugh all the way home to 221b.

Sherlock Holmes · August 27, 2016 9:58 am

Hi guys, sorry to get off topic again, but if I get another report about this thread and how people feel personally insulted, victimised, picked on, ignored/not listened to, opinions trampled on, disrespected etc, I will seriously consider closing this entire thread.

If you have a problem with someone or something they've said, PM them. If someone PMs you, ANSWER IT. It's impolite to ignore it. They PMd you for reason - because they want to keep it off the thread. Extend the same courtesy.

If the mods post a warning, don't just ignore it. Acknowledge it, and respect what they're saying. I will be choosing two more moderators over the next few days to lend support to the current staff, as a couple of the other mods can't get online very often.

Thanks guys and stay happy.

besleybean · August 27, 2016 10:00 am

Thank you, Boss.

Schmiezi · August 27, 2016 10:03 am

Well said, Boss. Thank you very much!

Vhanja · August 27, 2016 10:11 am

Agreed. However, I feel this thread is a minefield where we all have to weigh our words very carefully before posting because it takes very little before someone (myself included) gets offended or feel disrespected.

Perhaps all of us (again: myself included) could try to get a "thicker skin", so to speak? And still, of course, all do our best to word our posts in a way that doesn't include sarcasm, exaggerations, rudeness or other types of bad debate techniques and fallacies.

SusiGo · August 27, 2016 10:20 am

Thank you, boss.

Sherlock Holmes · August 27, 2016 10:32 am

Vhanja wrote:
Agreed. However, I feel this thread is a minefield where we all have to weigh our words very carefully before posting because it takes very little before someone (myself included) gets offended or feel disrespected.

Perhaps all of us (again: myself included) could try to get a "thicker skin", so to speak? And still, of course, all do our best to word our posts in a way that doesn't include sarcasm, exaggerations, rudeness or other types of bad debate techniques and fallacies.

The very essence of a 'debate' means that some heated words might be said now and again, because there's going to be two sides of an argument that people feel strongly about. I want people to be able to give their opinions, but at the same time, you understand I need to take some kind of steps/reaction if I get people lodging complaints about the tone of this thread.

Vhanja · August 27, 2016 10:37 am

Sherlock Holmes wrote:
you understand I need to take some kind of steps/reaction if I get people lodging complaints about the tone of this thread.

Oh, absolutely.

I think as moderators/admin, there is very little that is harder to work with than a "tone" in a thread. It's actually much easier for everyone involved if we had someone who resorted to name calling and being extremely rude and personal. That is easy to moderate. Moderating a "tone" and an atmosphere is not.

Because such things are very subjective. Some people might just have a way of debating that grate one someone else's nerve. It's not necessarily anyone's fault, just a clash of styles and tone. Such things are hard to both pinpoint and to do something about - for everyone involved.

SusiGo · August 27, 2016 10:38 am

I think it should be quite easy to distinguish between having a firm opinion and using sarcasm against others. I am glad the boss has addressed this since recently there has indeed been quite a lot of sarcasm in here. If people complain to me, tonnaree, and the boss, we have to act.

Last edited by SusiGo (August 27, 2016 10:40 am)

besleybean · August 27, 2016 10:40 am

Some people have been good enough to own their sarcasm, but I do think there have been some misunderstandings.

Schmiezi · August 27, 2016 10:54 am

I think it is good that all of us (me included) are reminded of how Bad sarcasm can be here in this heated debate.

besleybean · August 27, 2016 10:57 am

But as Vhanja has pointed out, are such things easy to prove and who gets to decide: the original poster or an individual who read the comment that way?
I can but repeat: humour does not convey well over the internet...heck it's even a minefield IRL!

Last edited by besleybean (August 27, 2016 10:58 am)

SusiGo · August 27, 2016 11:01 am

I think what the Boss said should be enough for now. People should be able to think before posting and to do this in a reasonable way. I find it hard to believe that after the Boss posts twice, we are now going on about what is sarcasm and who decides about it.
If people complain or feel insulted, the mods have to act. If people tell me they consider leaving the forum, we have to act. It is as easy as that.
And there are things that should just be accepted and considered, like what the Boss posted today.

Vhanja · August 27, 2016 11:08 am

I actually think such debates are healthy (but could perhaps be done in a thread of it's own). This is a tricky subject, and it might become clearer for some if we are able to discuss it. Because sometimes we can all post stuff that might offend without meaning to - and avoiding such things might become easier if we can talk about it.

I don't think the problem is accepting it. I think the problem is that we might not all have the same understanding about what it is we are accpeting. A discussion could help in that regards, I think.

But, of course, if the admin/mod team disagrees and decides this is not to be discussed on this forum, then of course I will respect that.

besleybean · August 27, 2016 11:10 am

The only thing I want to add to that is and of course we all understand we have to accept a staff decision.

Last edited by besleybean (August 27, 2016 11:10 am)

Schmiezi · August 27, 2016 6:03 pm

Well, why not continue debating Johnlock? :-)

There is something that makes me sad about the chain of pressure points, not only about John and Sherlock but mainly about them:

in every case it being a chain means that somebody means the world to you, so much you are highly vulnerable - but you don't mean the same to that person. He or she has another person as pressure point. *sniff*

besleybean · August 27, 2016 6:07 pm

Yes, you've hit on an interesting point there.
Though possibly it's just main pressure points and I guess with a pregnant wife...it's slightly more high pressurised.
But equally, both Sherlock and John were under threat at the Pool and John was prepared to lay down his life to save Sherlock.

Last edited by besleybean (August 27, 2016 6:07 pm)