Where to post the pics...

sf2la · Post by **sf2la** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:24 pm

^ Yep to all

.. But just to make it clear, we can bash their choice of outfits - that kind of stuff

. It's in our DNA to critique those things

.

sf2la · Post by **sf2la** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:18 pm

This is only to go along with tboss's sneering Daniel avi post: I say go back to simplifying things, read the threads you want, don't read ones that don't interest you or disagree with.

He's getting some mileage from that sneer.

From today's PerezHilton:

JEC57 · Post by **JEC57** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:53 pm

poppy wrote:
honeyjes wrote:The way forward is to acknowledge that some like and dislike Sats, and some like and dislike Rachel and we should be adult enough to agree to disagree on occasion instead of every perceived slight being met with dummies being thrown out of the pram, finger pointing and pissing on others to prove a point to the detriment of everyone else.
well said

....and I agree. However, that is a little easier said than done.

I disagree with much written about RW, but being able to say it is another matter. I'm not talking about being disrespectful or rude or "bashing", no-one wants this place to descend into JJ. What I am talking about is a simple difference of opinion.

As an example - when someone posts "She is so beautiful"; from recent history, there is little to indicate that it would be accepted if another person then replies "Actually I disagree, I think she is rather plain".

To me, that is a difference of opinion, and there is a world of difference between saying "I think she is rather plain" to "what an ugly XYZ" a la JJ style. To me the former is a personal opinion, stated respectfully and without insult, the latter is a bashing insult.

I seem to recall someone saying that Sats' coral-coloured gown for the Oscars reminded her of curtains. I also recall someone who really didn't like that yellow plunge-neck dress, and I can recall another person saying they were not keen on the green one with the black collar.

I don't recall anyone saying "That's disrespectful!". But imagine if I said of RW, "I don’t like that coat, it reminds of something my mother used to garden in on a cold day". Based on prior experience of what happened around Xmas time, I would be apprehensive that such a comment would be met with calls of "disrespectful", and so I would not say it.

In fact more opposing opinions about Daniel himself have been voiced and discussed than have ever been attempted over RW and no-one "takes the hump".

Remember the prolonged discussions over his teeth for example, or "monk hair"? Great fun has been had discussing these things in tiny detail and no-one gets bent out of shape and no-one accuses anyone of Daniel-bashing.

It is as though RW has become an icon on the sacred alter of political correctness. I personally believe that it is possible to have an unenthusiastic opinion about something or someone, and for it not to descend into disrespect.

Of course, some out there may not want to contribute because they could not care less anyway, or do not have an opinion. But others just might like to say something, but feel they cannot.

GG hit the nail on the head yesterday when she commented that she had heard from some people who feel uneasy about posting, and so instead of doing so, they just don't say anything. I feel that is a loss for all concerned.

No-one is asking for carte blanche to insult or bash RW, the same as no-one is expecting this place to be an RW-free zone. But some members might appreciate the opportunity to be able to disagree once in a while.

And yes, back a couple of months ago, one member was holding her own, disagreeing, but was moved to ask at one point (paraphasing), "why do I have to explain so much?" in response to having to excuse her own opinion.

You may be reading this and thinking "So what? Who cares?". Well I care, for starters, and I know a lot of other people do too.

This used to be a place unique for it's wonderful atmosphere. We may never be able to recapture that, but it is a shame if some effort is not made to find a middle ground because a lot has been lost, and will continue to be lost, to the detriment of all.

Tboss also said something which resonates with people who are not speaking up; she actually said it in relation to history and Sats. But it is pertinent to the current RW situation, the fear that if people do speak up, and if what they say is considered to be "bashing", they will be banned.

And again I say, no-one wants this place to be like JJ, but "bashing" is a hard word for a difference of opinion, but few would want to be singled out as a "basher" and run the risk of being shown the door.

I think that some of this has happened because this place has become a little bit like a country club, and if one is not part of the current "in crowd", those people then have little motivation to post.

As a result of the lack of diversity, the risk is run that the same things are said over and over again, and dialogue is distilled down to a repetitive common denominator.

Of course if everyone is happy with that, then so be it. But my mission yesterday was to ask (and I accept I may not have said it very tactfully!) whether there was room for others to join in - - in their own way, rather than just by following the "in crowd" - - and thus be able to join in the fun, which GG mentioned as being desirable.

The comment continues to be made “If you don’t like it - skim over it”. But consider this if you will. The majority of posts are across the busiest, and therefore the most popular of threads, such as News, Pap Pics and Daniel's latest filming threads.

Without fail, those threads end up referring to or mentioning or recalling RW. So skimming them to ignore everything that mentions her leaves little else to read or to comment on. My point is that it would be nice if everyone felt they could take part in the fun.

I'll go back to the topic of Daniel's teeth to illustrate this. 99% of people here love his veneers. I hate them! Spread over weeks and various threads I stood my corner loving the teeth au naturel. I got my leg routinely pulled, and with good humour, by the pro-veneer crowd for liking his old teeth. No-one called me disrespectful, and I did not call anyone else disrespectful, the same as the comments about Sats various dresses did not garner cries of "disrespectful!".

So why can that not be the same with RW? Why can I not say, "Rachel whatever and whatever", the same as I was able to say, "I really dislike Daniel's veneers" and the same way someone else was able to say, "I'm not liking the dress, sorry, it reminds me of curtains."

Yes, RW is Daniel's current girlfriend, and I reiterate, no sane person wants bashing and rudeness. But surely there is room for everyone to be able to have a say even when it is not in agreement with the RW-loving members? Honeyjes’s siggi is on-point: “It is easy to believe in freedom of speech for those with whom we agree.”

Sitting here, mostly in silence these days, I watch the play of posts back and forth and, unless I have missed something (- which is quite possible -) not one person now feels confident enough to say anything such as "I actually think……….." and offer a contrary opinion.

My problem now is that I feel I should apologise for posting yesterday. The only thing I have managed to achieve is to unsettle the forum and cause widespread exasperation.

I don't think I can add anything more, and certainly nothing that would be of any value, and so I'm going back to sit in my corner with my bowl of popcorn to wait patiently for the next glimpse of Daniel.

bumblebee · Post by **bumblebee** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:15 pm

But JEC - please do post when you don't like something she does/wears/says or just is. I'd like to hear it.

I don't know what happened in December - but I do recall there were a lot of emotions at play and a lot of positive and negative energies flowing about the big shift in his life.

A contrary opinion now would not shake the planet, would it?

And is it a country club, really? Surely the only way to break up the little club, if there is one, is to chime in?

chrissie65 · Post by **chrissie65** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:21 pm

@ JEC:

cheryl1700 · Post by **cheryl1700** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:26 pm

Cheers jec, I can see what u mean now, deffo think we should get back to live and live, and get our good humour back!

sf2la · Post by **sf2la** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:39 pm

I totally agree with Bee! There should be no difference than with Sats. I was looking at Rachel images yesterday and thought, 'My, how dowdy.' I'm not thinking that at present, but absolutely - bring it on. We are nothing if not style critiques for both of them.

It seemed to me that early on there was a huge dislike for her from day one because she was new and wasn't Sats. I couldn't understand that.

I think we are on the same page - the only rule is don't bash the person (unless that person truly deserves a bash, such as bring rude.)

chrissie65 · Post by **chrissie65** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:42 pm

I do have to agree with JEC, BB, it IS some kind of a country club. And why chime in to something where some folks are giving me the feeling I don't belong there from the start?

tbossmc2000 · Post by **tbossmc2000** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:46 pm

We did have some fun with Rachel's rain coat, it was all in good fun and I don't think anyone was insulted. I even made a comment to SF about her avi and when she was going to change Rachel's rain coat. LOL
All you say JEC is good, It comes down to their is no either or there is room for both. The site is so vast there is something for everyone to post, comment, artict creations, news and much more.
Maybe we need a "Looking out for Sats' welfare" thread
Mrs. B. couldn't it be in the other celebrity section?
I know there are several members following her and looking for information to stay current with her. It would be my suggestion.
Cheryl, I tend to go in the happy go lucky direction. Love our partie, funny stories and your LOL pic's.
JEC, your input is to important not to be voiced.

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:49 pm

Just came home and read the last posts. In a way, I can agree with all of them. Is that possible? Yes, it is.

@JEC - its agreed, she is IN the picture and no one can change that. Agreed on - we all should be able AND willing to post our opinion.
But - to have a conversation about things, there will ALWAYS be pro and contra arguments.

bumblebee wrote: A contrary opinion now would not shake the planet, would it?

And is it a country club, really? Surely the only way to break up the little club, if there is one, is to chime in?

So - THIS must be allowed without feeling personally attacked or limited in our freedom of speech. I feel, this has been a problem in the past. So - not only those, who feel comfortable with Rachel are asked here to be sensitive - its the others as well, who feel shut up just because someone had another opinion.
If all are able to see another opinion as just another opinion and not as a go at ourselves, we will work this out. Otherwise, I fear not.
There is so much on our plate in the next weeks and months - we maybe should concentrate on enjoying that.

I reopened this to try to have a conversation like this, to finally bring some things into the open as opposed to dwell in the dark. Either we pull it off now or we don't. Good will is the key word here...and no one is excluded of that.

EDIT: No one - has ever be banned for speaking up in a respectful or just normal manner. I feel, there is a bit of exaggerating going on here.

ITS PERFECTLY OK TO DISLIKE RW AND SAY SO - BUT PLEASE; BE ABLE TO ACCEPT ANOTHER OPINION:
Otherwise, how can we try to make this fair?

BOTH OPINIONS ARE ACCEPTED!

So far, all of this is just words - we only find out, if it works, when we post. Only those, who feel in the minority need to accept, that other will and have the right to disagree. I wonder, what is so terrible about that. I can disagree with a friend and still be a friend.

caramel · Post by **caramel** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:12 pm

sf2la wrote: It seemed to me that early on there was a huge dislike for her from day one because she was new and wasn't Sats. I couldn't understand that.

That was the impression I got earlier on - some posters making some negative 'observations' about RW based on a few pictures from their outing at Christmas... I defended RW on those occasions because it seemed unfair to say mean things about anybody without any proof. Otherwise TBH, I cannot recollect anyone telling the other off for not being a fan of RW.

Funny but was there even a choice or discussion like this when Sats was in his life?

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:29 pm

caramel wrote:
sf2la wrote: It seemed to me that early on there was a huge dislike for her from day one because she was new and wasn't Sats. I couldn't understand that.
That was the impression I got earlier on - some posters making some negative 'observations' about RW based on a few pictures from their outing at Christmas... I defended RW on those occasions because it seemed unfair to say mean things about anybody without any proof. Otherwise TBH, I cannot recollect anyone telling the other off for not being a fan of RW.

Funny but was there even a choice or discussion like this when Sats was in his life?

There was on many other boards - there were real hate boards for her. Only here it was never allowed to bash her in that way. But an " I don't like her" was never a problem and isn't now. But yeah - same goes for R.

honeyjes · Post by **honeyjes** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:47 am

I’ve read JEC’s post and the sentiments worded could apply to how some posters felt re Sats. The difference now is that the boot is on the other foot.

Some of us need to wind the clock back and remember that with Rachel’s arrival, verbal fire bombs were thrown, so it has made it difficult to take negative comments being made as only ribbing and banter.

The teeth veneer analogy comes from a different premise – we are Daniel fans and the ribbing is not malicious. Likewise not liking Sats dress was in the vein of not liking the dress as opposed to not liking her therefore the dress too is horrible.

The negatives being thrown at Rachel at the moment feels raw and has a different flavour which is, no matter what she’s never going to be accepted by me and any comments from me aren't likely to be complimentary. If anyone feels alienated they need to acknowledge that some of it has been self inflicted and only time and attitude will heal the rift.

tbossmc2000 · Post by **tbossmc2000** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:08 am

Honey, so well put.

sf2la · Post by **sf2la** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:15 am

I understand your position, honey, but I am at a loss as to why some people view her so unfavorably. Really, I am.
No one has come forward to express why that is. Would it be possible to identify the key reasons to help some of us understand what the grounds for the dislike are? Can this be done in a listed way that isn't hateful, per the forum's guidelines?

Edit: I'd even take a pm.