FlyOnTheWall said:

disch said:

But by that token: What does it matter if the conversations around certain individual associates are consolidated into one thread per associate? Wouldn't that make it easier for the people who are interested in discussing that person to find each other/follow the conversation, and easier for people who aren't interested to skip past it (similar to the one Death Talk sticky on the PM&M page)?

[Edited 5/11/18 7:31am]

In fact, it's just the opposite. Trying to navigate those LONG sticky threads, often with dozens of pages, is very time-consuming. For that very reason, I seldom frequent the "Death" and "Estate" stickies. It is much easier, IMHO, to follow more narrowly focused threads.

I do think having a different thread for each new project and interview gets a bit confusing. I think those things could be combined into one thread.

disch said:

But the multple girlfriend threads AREN'T "narrowly focused." Take a look at the last posts in those threads and see if they have anything to do with the stated thread title.

-

If they each had a specific, truly distinct topic designated in the subject (a new music release, say, or an evaluation of an older release) and that's what people actually discussed that would be one thing, I think. And if they then allowed the conversation about that topic to run its natural course and the thread died, as all threads do, then, in my opinion, that would be fine.

-

FlyOnTheWall said:

In fact, it's just the opposite. Trying to navigate those LONG sticky threads, often with dozens of pages, is very time-consuming. For that very reason, I seldom frequent the "Death" and "Estate" stickies. It is much easier, IMHO, to follow more narrowly focused threads.

Just as in actual human interaction, threads will sometimes slightly deviate from the main topic. I don't see any harm in that. Now, it's different when certain Orgers target threads and deliberately set out to derail them by flame-throwing and making them so vulgar and profane that they turn-off other potential readers.

I'm talking about, for instance, like during an interview: the interviewer goes in with a set of "grand tour" questions, but during the course of the conversation, based on what the interviewee says, follow-up questions will naturally pop up. Like the interviewer, nobody, in real life, halts conversations because they are non-linear. Can you imagine what might be missed if we are constantly policing interpersonal discussions instead of actually engaging each other...and allowing the discussion to take its natural course? What I'm saying is this: Human interaction, at its richest, is curvilinear...and free.

pinkcashmere23 said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

In fact, it's just the opposite. Trying to navigate those LONG sticky threads, often with dozens of pages, is very time-consuming. For that very reason, I seldom frequent the "Death" and "Estate" stickies. It is much easier, IMHO, to follow more narrowly focused threads.

I do think having a different thread for each new project and interview gets a bit confusing. I think those things could be combined into one thread.

I agree. I'm not one to do that. What I'm saying is that, IMHO, the LONG sticky threads are prohibitive, to participation for busy people.

FlyOnTheWall said:

pinkcashmere23 said:

I do think having a different thread for each new project and interview gets a bit confusing. I think those things could be combined into one thread.

I agree. I'm not one to do that. What I'm saying is that, IMHO, the LONG sticky threads are prohibitive, to participation for busy people.

They are hard to keep up with,I agree. I also think having only one thread to discuss all topics concerning each associate could get a bit confusing as well.

The whole purpoose of threads with specific topics is to segment discussions so people can earily locate and partipate in the topics that interest them. These threads don't deviate sligthly; they go off into unrelated tangents.

-

If someone wants to have an open-ended, boundary-free conversation about a particular girlfriend, then one designated thread called "All About <whoever>" seems an appropriate solution. Or perhaps make one designated thread that's titled "Personal Relationship Between Prince and <Whoever>" and people can talk there about soul-mate status and what-not, and other threads can focus specifically that associate's professional work or life outside of Prince.

FlyOnTheWall said:

disch said:

But the multple girlfriend threads AREN'T "narrowly focused." Take a look at the last posts in those threads and see if they have anything to do with the stated thread title.

-

If they each had a specific, truly distinct topic designated in the subject (a new music release, say, or an evaluation of an older release) and that's what people actually discussed that would be one thing, I think. And if they then allowed the conversation about that topic to run its natural course and the thread died, as all threads do, then, in my opinion, that would be fine.

-

Just as in actual human interaction, threads will sometimes slightly deviate from the main topic. I don't see any harm in that. Now, it's different when certain Orgers target threads and deliberately set out to derail them by flame-throwing and making them so vulgar and profane that they turn-off other potential readers.

I'm talking about, for instance, like during an interview: the interviewer goes in with a set of "grand tour" questions, but during the course of the conversation, based on what the interviewee says, follow-up questions will naturally pop up. Like the interviewer, nobody, in real life, halts conversations because they are non-linear. Can you imagine what might be missed if we are constantly policing interpersonal discussions instead of actually engaging each other...and allowing the discussion to take its natural course? What I'm saying is this: Human interaction, at its richest, is curvilinear...and free.

disch said:

The whole purpoose of threads with specific topics is to segment discussions so people can earily locate and partipate in the topics that interest them. These threads don't deviate sligthly; they go off into unrelated tangents.

-

If someone wants to have an open-ended, boundary-free conversation about a particular girlfriend, then one designated thread called "All About <whoever>" seems an appropriate solution. Or perhaps make one designated thread that's titled "Personal Relationship Between Prince and <Whoever>" and people can talk there about soul-mate status and what-not, and other threads can focus specifically that associate's professional work or life outside of Prince.

FlyOnTheWall said:

Just as in actual human interaction, threads will sometimes slightly deviate from the main topic. I don't see any harm in that. Now, it's different when certain Orgers target threads and deliberately set out to derail them by flame-throwing and making them so vulgar and profane that they turn-off other potential readers.

I'm talking about, for instance, like during an interview: the interviewer goes in with a set of "grand tour" questions, but during the course of the conversation, based on what the interviewee says, follow-up questions will naturally pop up. Like the interviewer, nobody, in real life, halts conversations because they are non-linear. Can you imagine what might be missed if we are constantly policing interpersonal discussions instead of actually engaging each other...and allowing the discussion to take its natural course? What I'm saying is this: Human interaction, at its richest, is curvilinear...and free.

I think having having a thread dedicated to the discussion of the professional relationship and one for the personal is a great idea.

disch said:

The whole purpoose of threads with specific topics is to segment discussions so people can earily locate and partipate in the topics that interest them. These threads don't deviate sligthly; they go off into unrelated tangents.

-

If someone wants to have an open-ended, boundary-free conversation about a particular girlfriend, then one designated thread called "All About <whoever>" seems an appropriate solution. Or perhaps make one designated thread that's titled "Personal Relationship Between Prince and <Whoever>" and people can talk there about soul-mate status and what-not, and other threads can focus specifically that associate's professional work or life outside of Prince.

FlyOnTheWall said:

Just as in actual human interaction, threads will sometimes slightly deviate from the main topic. I don't see any harm in that. Now, it's different when certain Orgers target threads and deliberately set out to derail them by flame-throwing and making them so vulgar and profane that they turn-off other potential readers.

I'm talking about, for instance, like during an interview: the interviewer goes in with a set of "grand tour" questions, but during the course of the conversation, based on what the interviewee says, follow-up questions will naturally pop up. Like the interviewer, nobody, in real life, halts conversations because they are non-linear. Can you imagine what might be missed if we are constantly policing interpersonal discussions instead of actually engaging each other...and allowing the discussion to take its natural course? What I'm saying is this: Human interaction, at its richest, is curvilinear...and free.

I challenge you to point to ONE thread of multiple pages that discusses ONLY the title topic.

benni said:

I think there needs to be another forum: Prince and the Women He Loved

Leave Associated artists & people as "ex-bandmembers, ex-employees, people he collaborated with" instead of "ex-bandmembers, ex-girlfriends, etc..."

It is hard to come to this forum to look for information on band members when the number of threads discussing Prince's love life, who Prince loved more, which woman was The One, etc., seems to be the majority of threads over here.

Much of what is talked about in each of the threads involving the exes are the same pictures, the same articles, getting rehashed in each thread as proof to show this is who he loved more.

Personally, I think each of the women brought something to Prince and made him happy while they were together, and none of them were the LOVE of his life. I think they all were loved deeply at various times. I think he continued to care for all of them after the relationships ended, in the same way that we tend to care for those that we were involved with, after the relationships ended. At first, there may be some anger, confusion, and hurt feelings, but as time goes on, those feelings eventually mellow out and we tend to remember the better times more than we do the bad. We don't spend our lives (or at least I hope no one does, because that would be a very painful existence) lamenting the loss of the one that got away and pining after them for the rest of our lives. We may think of them from time to time, but we let them go and we move on with our lives and we meet someone else who we give all of our love to. The whole idea that Prince spent his time pining after this woman or that, that he never moved on from this woman or that one, I don't know how anyone could wish that kind of torment and pain on Prince. And if he were to have done that, that's not love, that's obsession and that is not healthy (nor romantic).

It's like the whole Mani episode, a lot of people blame Mani for the split from Mayte because she moved in on a married man. It takes two to tangle. If Prince were not open to cheating on Mayte, then Mani wouldn't have gotten close to him. Period. He was not innocent in that scenario. And Vanity/Denise was heavy into drugs, and if you've ever been around anyone that uses drugs like that, they have very unhealthy relationships. And Mayte was young when they met and was not fully developed emotionally, nor mentally, and as we all do, we change as we grow up and discover who we want to be as an adult. Those relationships from youth tend to be very emotional, needy, dependent, until we gain the maturity of handling a real relationship and it becomes more refined. None of the relationships Prince had were perfect. Each of them had their issues and Prince wasn't innocent. But people want to romanticize the women that Prince dated, married, had sex with. Prince was someone, when he moved on, he moved on. Too bad his fans couldn't.

The reality is this: Prince is no longer with us, and, with few exceptions, the vast majority of the threads are retrospective. Meaning, if Prince.org is to continue its existence, there are bound to be repeat posts of articles and photos. What is the harm in that?

I think as long as the moderators have time to enforce such threads and keep them on track (something tells me the the "professional" thread would soon be bickering about soul-mate hierarchies as people insist that there are coded messages in the professional work and what not).

-

The moderators probably don't have time to police all this so I can see that they would just create one thread about someone and call it a day.

-

Look, the current professional lives of most associates don't lend themselves to robust conversation that lots of people will engage in. These are more, shall we say, niche topics that will appeal only to a couple orgers at this point.

pinkcashmere23 said:

disch said:

The whole purpoose of threads with specific topics is to segment discussions so people can earily locate and partipate in the topics that interest them. These threads don't deviate sligthly; they go off into unrelated tangents.

-

If someone wants to have an open-ended, boundary-free conversation about a particular girlfriend, then one designated thread called "All About <whoever>" seems an appropriate solution. Or perhaps make one designated thread that's titled "Personal Relationship Between Prince and <Whoever>" and people can talk there about soul-mate status and what-not, and other threads can focus specifically that associate's professional work or life outside of Prince.

I think having having a thread dedicated to the discussion of the professional relationship and one for the personal is a great idea.

disch said:

I think as long as the moderators have time to enforce such threads and keep them on track (something tells me the the "professional" thread would soon be bickering about soul-mate hierarchies as people insist that there are coded messages in the professional work and what not).

-

The moderators probably don't have time to police all this so I can see that they would just create one thread about someone and call it a day.

-

Look, the current professional lives of most associates don't lend themselves to robust conversation that lots of people will engage in. These are more, shall we say, niche topics that will appeal only to a couple orgers at this point.

pinkcashmere23 said:

I think having having a thread dedicated to the discussion of the professional relationship and one for the personal is a great idea.

True.Some of the music was also written with certain people in mind so talk about those songs could veer into discussion of personal lives.

benni said:

I think there needs to be another forum: Prince and the Women He Loved

Leave Associated artists & people as "ex-bandmembers, ex-employees, people he collaborated with" instead of "ex-bandmembers, ex-girlfriends, etc..."

A whole separate subforum. Because we all know that one thread per woman will never work. New people will come in and start brand new threads and so will those looking to troll the org.

A whole separate subforum where the stans can battle it out with each other

[Edited 5/11/18 9:29am]

benni said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

PennyPurple said:

I actually think it's because there are like 7 threads on AA, where it could be combined in 1. I don't think we need 7 different threads about a person. There are also numerous threads on Mayte and Natalya, when there only need to be 1.

Just to be clear, there are presently multiple AA threads that were started by FIVE different Orgers.

?? Who said you started them??

PennyPurple said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

Just to be clear, there are presently multiple AA threads that were started by FIVE different Orgers.

?? Who said you started them??

Excuse me, Penny, but what are you talking about? Where did I say that someone said that I started all of the multiple AA threads? I simply stated that they were started by multiple Orgers. Does that meet with your approval?

FlyOnTheWall said:

PennyPurple said:

?? Who said you started them??

Excuse me, Penny, but what are you talking about? Where did I say that someone said that I started all of the multiple AA threads? I simply stated that they were started by multiple Orgers. Does that meet with your approval?

You were acting like you were accused of starting 7 AA threads. That's why I asked, 'who said you started them'?

PennyPurple said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

Excuse me, Penny, but what are you talking about? Where did I say that someone said that I started all of the multiple AA threads? I simply stated that they were started by multiple Orgers. Does that meet with your approval?

You were acting like you were accused of starting 7 AA threads. That's why I asked, 'who said you started them'?

See, this is an example of the personal attacks I mentioned earlier. People do far too much of this on the Org. I think we need to be careful to read exactly what people write...and not project what we think they are really saying. Good grief. Please lay off me, Penny.

Who's Andy Allo? Never heard of her.

Sorry, (not sorry), couldn't resist.

I'm out of here, as you were,

FlyOnTheWall said:

PennyPurple said:

You were acting like you were accused of starting 7 AA threads. That's why I asked, 'who said you started them'?

See, this is an example of the personal attacks I mentioned earlier. People do far too much of this on the Org. I think we need to be careful to read exactly what people write...and not project what we think they are really saying. Good grief. Please lay off me, Penny.

Huh? That's an attack? ROTFL

I tell you what Fly, don't respond to me and I won't respond to you.

I can't believe you seriously thought that was an attack.

PennyPurple said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

See, this is an example of the personal attacks I mentioned earlier. People do far too much of this on the Org. I think we need to be careful to read exactly what people write...and not project what we think they are really saying. Good grief. Please lay off me, Penny.

Huh? That's an attack? ROTFL

I tell you what Fly, don't respond to me and I won't respond to you.

I can't believe you seriously thought that was an attack.

Taken alone, perhaps not, Penny...but, it's cumulative over the past few days. In the past, we have had amicable interactions here. I hope we can soon return to that. Peace.

[Edited 5/11/18 10:50am]

InThisBedIDream said:

Who's Andy Allo? Never heard of her.

She's Prince's last confirmed girlfriend.

FlyOnTheWall said:

InThisBedIDream said:

Who's Andy Allo? Never heard of her.

She's Prince's last confirmed girlfriend.

Well, you learn something new everyday.

Thanks for clearing that up, I'd never have known,

InThisBedIDream said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

She's Prince's last confirmed girlfriend.

Well, you learn something new everyday.

Thanks for clearing that up, I'd never have known,

No problem. Glad to help!!

Women have more emotions than Men do, and women tend to be more expressive about their feelings than most men, so everytime one of Prince's ex GF or wives are mentioned, all hell breaks loose! We all have a difference of opinion regarding all of Prince's women and we are passionate about how we feel. We are entitled to our opinions, but it's when we start attacking each other, and muddying the waters, so-to-speak, that we get off-topic and then things just go from bad to worse.

.

Prince had exe's, and that was for good reason!

cloveringold85 said:

Women have more emotions than Men do, and women tend to be more expressive about their feelings than most men, so everytime one of Prince's ex GF or wives are mentioned, all hell breaks loose! We all have a difference of opinion regarding all of Prince's women and we are passionate about how we feel. We are entitled to our opinions, but it's when we start attacking each other, and muddying the waters, so-to-speak, that we get off-topic and then things just go from bad to worse.

.

Prince had exe's, and that was for good reason!

I agree. And, the ONLY thing that will fix this problem is a strictly adhered to ZERO TOLERANCE policy prohibiting personal attacks, name-calling, and bullying. That should be the focus of the moderators, not trying to censor the volume of threads about certain Prince love interests. Without such a seriously enforced policy, certain Orgers know that they have a pass to target and cause mayhem on any thread they don't like.

And, without such consistent enforcement, limiting the number of threads about certain Prince love interests will not make one bit of difference. At all. Nothing will change. The band of disruptive Orgers will just do the same hateful things, only on super-long threads...which will still end up being removed/erased...which actually rewards the trouble-makers. It is a vicious, nonsensical cycle. And, it is taking a real toll on the credibility of Prince.org.

FlyOnTheWall said:

anangellooksdown said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

I agree. And, the ONLY thing that will fix this problem is a strictly adhered to ZERO TOLERANCE policy prohibiting personal attacks, name-calling, and bullying. That should be the focus of the moderators, not trying to censor the volume of threads about certain Prince love interests. Without such a seriously enforced policy, certain Orgers know that they have a pass to target and cause mayhem on any thread they don't like.

And, without such consistent enforcement, limiting the number of threads about certain Prince love interests will not make one bit of difference. At all. Nothing will change. The band of disruptive Orgers will just do the same hateful things, only on super-long threads...which will still end up being removed/erased...which actually rewards the trouble-makers. It is a vicious, nonsensical cycle. And, it is taking a real toll on the credibility of Prince.org.

HUH? R U kidding us? This thread most likely has to do more than anything with your obsessive, dominating posting and behavior, including really really hurting people for 2 years now, like REALLY affecting people with what looks like basically a sociopathic type of bullying and unkindness. And now you think you’re the Police? And you’re going to twist things to keep them to your satisfaction? I mean, how dumb do you think we are, Fly?

^^^^^I give you, Exhibit A. I rest my case.^^^^^

[Edited 5/11/18 14:58pm]

FlyOnTheWall said:

anangellooksdown said:

FlyOnTheWall said:

^^^^^I give you, Exhibit A. I rest my case.^^^^^

[Edited 5/11/18 14:58pm]

Lets be clear about something. There’s a difference between doing that to people and speaking out about it. Your remark was narcissistic. I rest my case.

Ok.

FlyOnTheWall said:

InThisBedIDream said:

Who's Andy Allo? Never heard of her.

She's Prince's last confirmed girlfriend.

No she isn't