6

It says that the sub was saved for TheBuddha, if you don't know. In other words, someone set it up and held onto it for me, and I was invited here - by a number of people, but only one made the sub.

At times, I feel kinda like a spammer - even though I'm pretty sure my content is appreciated and I know some of you click through. (It tells me the referrer - it's right in the header you send to my server.)

You're a bit cliquish and I try to meander out of the guitar sub so that I can interact with the rest of you - but I don't really have time and seldom comment unless I also have time to respond to any replies to my comment. (I consider hit and run forum posting to be pretty much on par with a war crime!)

When I first showed up, I got some (legitimate) questions about why I was here - and that appears to be the end of it. Everyone kinda shrugged and went back to what they were doing and nobody has complained. Which is pretty cool, actually but I've always wondered if I'd have to explain it again.

Currently, I can point to the 'saved for TheBuddha' bit and say, "I was asked to share my content here on Phuks."

But, I still get that icky spammer feeling. I dislike spam as much as anyone else.

My question is, have we moved past that or do I seem like a spammer? I don't actually have any ulterior motives that aren't disclosed.

My ulterior motive is to interest you in spending ungodly hours learning to play a guitar, realize that the greatest factory-issued electric guitar is a Les Paul after years of study, and start a collection of them! For this, Gibson pays me zero dollars. However, it's a start that might get you interested in classical guitar and my absolute ulterior motivation lies there. I'm a shill for the Classical Guitar Cabal. They don't pay me and it's a labor of love/addiction!

I guess my question is, do I appear to be a spammer? I'm really just passionate about music and feel that I should have started this project a long time ago. It's such wonderful passion that I'd like everyone to understand it and decide if they want to take part in it.

But...

I do pretty much just submit links to my site, unless I have free time and gumption.

I welcome your feedback, 'cause I've been pondering this for quite a while now.

It says that the sub was saved for TheBuddha, if you don't know. In other words, someone set it up and held onto it for me, and I was invited here - by a number of people, but only one made the sub. At times, I feel kinda like a spammer - even though I'm pretty sure my content is appreciated and I know some of you click through. (It tells me the referrer - it's right in the header you send to my server.) You're a bit cliquish and I try to meander out of the guitar sub so that I can interact with the rest of you - but I don't really have time and seldom comment unless I *also* have time to respond to any replies to my comment. (I consider hit and run forum posting to be pretty much on par with a war crime!) When I first showed up, I got some (legitimate) questions about why I was here - and that appears to be the end of it. Everyone kinda shrugged and went back to what they were doing and nobody has complained. Which is pretty cool, actually but I've always wondered if I'd have to explain it again. Currently, I can point to the 'saved for TheBuddha' bit and say, "I was asked to share my content here on Phuks." But, I still get that icky spammer feeling. I dislike spam as much as anyone else. My question is, have we moved past that or do I seem like a spammer? I don't actually have any ulterior motives that aren't disclosed. My ulterior motive is to interest you in spending ungodly hours learning to play a guitar, realize that the greatest factory-issued electric guitar is a Les Paul after years of study, and start a collection of them! For this, Gibson pays me zero dollars. However, it's a start that might get you interested in classical guitar and my absolute ulterior motivation lies there. I'm a shill for the Classical Guitar Cabal. They don't pay me and it's a labor of love/addiction! I guess my question is, do I appear to be a spammer? I'm really just passionate about music and feel that I should have started this project a long time ago. It's such wonderful passion that I'd like everyone to understand it and decide if they want to take part in it. But... I do pretty much just submit links to my site, unless I have free time and gumption. I welcome your feedback, 'cause I've been pondering this for quite a while now.

15 comments

[–] TheBuddha [OP] 1 points (+1|-0)

I'll keep it in mind. I have had some great experiences and I do like to share 'em with people. I've even met a few goats, but I'm not really sure I have enough content to keep a more generic sub going. Hmm...

I'm actually cutting back on some of my Voat posting, largely due to time and (this is gonna make me sound really pompous perhaps) largely because you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. Which is a polite way of saying that it's pretty futile to explain political science to someone who believes the apex of debate is calling the other person a Jew and saying that they know now you eat babies.

I can only bang my head against a wall for so long before I get bored. It's pretty much reached the point where I don't even visit their science subs. I had pretty high hopes for Voat, and I legitimately like many of the users, and have an undying love for free speech. I'd go on, but I suspect I'd be preaching to the choir.

And, as I've been pretty busy lately, that's meant cutting back.

Which makes me think of something...

I am not sure how much time I can devote to it, but would there be enough activity for a "Weekly Musician Hang-out" (or similar) on Phuks? I probably can't commit to starting it weekly, personally - but I'd try to help provide content when time did allow. I do know that it's brought quite a few people together, and been a net-positive, on Voat - but this is definitely not Voat.

Until Voat dies, I'm pretty obligated to continue the thread there. I don't even get to attend all of those threads anymore.

Hmm...

[–] Hitchens 1 points (+1|-0)

can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into

One of my favorite quotes and also one of the main reasons I left voat.

I'd go on, but I suspect I'd be preaching to the choir.

You are but who doesn’t love a good reinforcement of ones own feelings.

A hang out thread or sub had its peak about a year and half ago on voat and it’s hard with voats shortcomings to keep hang out subs motivated. I believe a hang out sub or thread needs more then one passionate mod. You need a team or two or three. You could try that here on phuks but can’t think of a user here with that kind of dedication you have for music or sharing music.

Every passionate mod needs a helper. Just like most big thinkers have assistants and people to help pick up all the creative pieces.

Every picture needs a frame and every frame needs a picture, sometimes it’s just hard to find the right one to match.

[–] TheBuddha [OP] 1 points (+1|-0)

If you're not aware, I'm also involved with COF's project that is the site he links - the musicfor.us site. I mostly do the admin work and some editing.

I say that so that I can say that I think you're right and that it is probably as good an example as I have. It does really help to have someone else that's equally passionate, or even more passionate. I enjoy passionate and active communities and think the world needs more of them, at least the healthy ones.

As for reinforcement...

sighs

I had someone legitimately, as in not trolling, argue with me - and they kept this up well into a second day. Their position, and I made damned sure to clarify, was that it was more intelligent to believe things without evidence than it was to actually want data before reaching a conclusion.

An example they used was that they should accept the following statement as true: "I come from Oklahoma and people from Oklahoma are like x-trait." That's pretty close to verbatim. I think they used the word "something" as opposed to x-trait.

Because they come from Oklahoma, we should accept what they say as fact - without the need for evidence.

They felt this was the most intelligent way to form opinions and make authoritative statements. Efforts to explain selection bias, confirmation bias, sample size, or even how that's pretty much a textbook definition of an appeal to authority, had zero impact.

None... Not one shred of impact. They are convinced that their way is more intelligent.

Later, they decided to tell me that they'd been to (I'm not sure if they completed it) grad school in a technical field. I remain skeptical. Surprisingly, they didn't call me a shill or a Jew.

So, there's some ego stroking for you. I'd not mind, except this actually appears to be more frequent than an intelligent response.