VCV Community Rules (previously called "Code of Conduct") moved to a new page and updated for 2021

Announcements
1

VCV Community Rules

VCV’s previous Code of Conduct document was based on the Contributor Covenant version 1.4. While the previous Code of Conduct appropriately handled most situations between members, it was designed specifically for contributers of open-source projects, not users. Therefore some changes were made to more accurately address all members of official VCV communities.

  • The document has been renamed from “Code of Conduct” to “Community Rules” (although there is still a Code of Conduct section) to improve its simplicity and increase the likelihood of being read. A few bureaucratic paragraphs were removed in order to further simplify the document. Straightforward rules will be added to the Discussion Guidelines section as they are needed in the future.

  • The word “contributor” has been changed to “member”, and “maintainers” to “moderators”.

  • The Contributor Covenant requires “professional” behavior, but VCV Community members are not paid to participate in discussions, so they should not be obligated to behave professionally. However, members should continue to engage only in behavior that maintains a positive environment.

  • Added Tips for Asking Better Questions section. More tips will be added as needed.

16 Likes
2

Thanks Andrew, I think it’s quite good now!

My only minor nit-pick would be with the point “Purchase a product that guarantees a level of technical support” which I don’t think is strictly true, at least not across the board. Or maybe it’s ambiguous and I’m reading it wrongly. Maybe you mean it in the sense of “if the product you purchase says you will get support, you probably will”?

Maybe in the tips section could be added: “Search before asking”? It can become quite annoying the 101th time :slight_smile:

3

My intention was that if you “Purchase a product that guarantees a level of technical support”, it’s okay to ask for favors from its developer pertaining to the product. I’ve rewritten the sentence so see if that works.

Added “search before asking” tip. That would definitely save 1000+ duplicate questions.

3 Likes
4

That’s great, and it’s quite clear now, thanks.

5

personally i think religion and politics have no place being discussed on this forum. it only leads to divisiveness. look at the recent activities where a religious fanatic and a self proclaimed former “anarchist-marxist-socialist-squatter” butted heads. is there a valid reason to declare your religion or former radical belief systems here on a virtual modular synthesis forum?

maybe we could include refraining from expressing these views and suggest keeping it to other communities/groups that are dedicated to it if certain members feel the need to proclaim their associations with such things. what do either of those things have to do with anything being discussed on this forum? unless VCV was divine intervention that is… :wink:

3 Likes
6

Discussing religion or politics can lead not only to divisiveness but understanding the other side’s point better too. Without discussion there is no way of changing an already divided state. If such a discussion starts on common grounds (for example modular synthesis), the sides have a better chance to listen to each other, much better than if both were forced to do this in their own bubbles or in “war-zones” where the sides are clearly defined and the only goal is killing the enemy. It’s alright to say that you shouldn’t talk about these topics in an uncivilized manner but that is true for any topic, isn’t it?

Simply banning the expression of one’s views sounds just as radical as thinking the Earth is flat or that anarchy is the solution to the worlds problems. Seeing how this community deals with such situations does remind me of divine interventions…

2 Likes
7

your point is well taken. the problem with religious conversations is they almost always end up getting heated when one side refuses to agree with the other. often times the hidden agenda of those conversations is to change the other persons opinion. they start off civil but as soon as one side realizes they cannot change the others way of thinking then animosity often ensues.

perhaps keeping religious/political conversation to an ‘off topic’ area of the forum could be a solution.

4 Likes
8

I wouldn’t say changing the other person’s opinion is a hidden agenda, nor that it should be. For example with my previous comment I openly tried to change your opinion about flat out banning religious discussions. Trying to change what others think is not inherently a bad thing but I agree that if people skip the part of getting to know the other person’s view first or jump into heated mud-swinging that is not healthy.

The problem with banning topics and silencing opinions is that it takes away the chance for that first crucial step. There is less and less space where this step has even the possibility of occurring which is why I think strict bans are more harmful on the long run even if they cut some corners on the moderating efforts needed today to remain civil.

I agree that these type of conversations do not belong to just any topic, but expressing your view that you feel is relevant should be tolerated. What I mean by that is if someone inside a topic about panel design says they like a certain module because the flat design of the panel reminds them of how flat the Earth is, that shouldn’t be censored as long as they aren’t trying to make the topic be about debating their views about the Earth (as this now lost its relevance to the topic). If other users engage in such an off-topic debate however while staying civil, they should all be put into a separate topic in Lounge.

Only harassment and futile fighting is what should be deleted, topics locked or users banned.

I understand that this ideal approach ignores the available energy of moderators but still felt the need to express these points.

2 Likes
9

outch we’ll have to add: “debating about the fact that debating about religion and politics can lead to divisiveness can lead to diviseness”

Modular is the only religion I agree to discuss. I agree to accept semi-modular people even if I don’t agree with them. I don’t know any other diviseness than clock division. Lorenz attractor moves in mysterious ways.

16 Likes
10

We all just hope for some pulses to get wider, but maybe we don’t need saws to remove the tooth that hasn’t aliased yet. But understandable attack, instead of trying to patch, maybe I should just keep my decay elsewhere in a more sustainable place where I can release it without having to sample and hold as this can often result in bursts and not everyone has a gaming PC. Control the volkage for a better separation of frequency bands and a cleaner sound!

3 Likes
11

but do we subscribe to an analog based religious philosophy here or is this a new age digital house of worship? can you tell the difference? :thinking:

@sotraphuka i agree that trying to convince someone to accept something they deny isnt generally a bad thing. friendly discussions from opposite ends of the spectrum are great when they can be done with no ill will afterwards but, unfortunately, often times when religion is the topic once you make it clear you are a devout non believer to the devout believer then they automatically cast you off as someone who is lacking morals and things deteriorate quickly. its unfortunate that most of the time the conversations cant be had with mutual respect and understanding.

i do agree with you that banning the discussions entirely is the wrong thing to do. i am actually not a fan of censorship. so i concede what i said about the topics having no place here but i do think they belong in an off topic section if they are going to be discussed.

btw- the earths not flat. its hollow.

2 Likes
12

Exactly: Lounge - Off-topic conversation held to high standards.

As always, no one need participate, if they don’t want to.

1 Like
13

I also have to wonder, @persy, how long that oddball little tune has been lurking in your memory, waiting for the right thread to come along. Memory is weird. Musical memory moreso.

14

haha… well we have a friend that went through a psilocybin induced conspiracy theorist phase. he was a temporary flat earther and this was the song we would play for him as a counter argument. never actually thought i would be posting it anywhere but here we are.

15

The discussion started about critiquing and or constructively (“this mod sucks” is obviously neither constructive nor productive) criticizing free modules, and as to whether this should be welcome on this forum. Both sides of the argument were completely valid and not without merit, leaving a very amusing and resilient @Squinky in the middle of the whole thing, more than happy to be there[cheers, squink]. The question turned towards the value of empirical and subjective criticism and dropped a quote by Pisarev, a Russian Nihilist - I could have quoted Mucha or Picasso on aesthetics- because while it was a ridiculous quote, from a rather loud, ridiculous and short lived radical political school, it happened to be rather poignant. The thread never started to become or turned religious, nor did I or any other member of the community espouse any political beliefs, radical or not.

Regrettably, however, I had previously referred to the manipulation of waves as “spiritual” (as in feeling a connection to the universe, or in this case, it’s building blocks) and was only trying to clarify that I meant this from a humanist “atheist” point of view.

Looking back, the here unnamed member who replied with christian rhetoric, was just trying to say out loud that he was christian, and that he was happy to be just that and maybe I was guilty of a similar offense, when I (once again regrettably) replied with a harsh letter, condemning all religions as equally false and dangerous, blah blah blah which I recognize to be anti-theist rhetoric. I am now apologizing for this behavior, but I don’t see how else one can responsibly respond (which is why I shouldn’t have), when a space thought to be safe from religion is shown not to be.

After the post was removed, as I have only recently learned about from a censor who made sure to comment on how lucky I was not to be sanctioned and how I had been warned; I can only imagine this was my warning, as I was just first hearing about it in the third person. I suppose it seemed to be, and was unfair to our christian friend that he was never able to respond to my apparently intolerable and offensive letter (that he didn’t find offensive) which is why he followed my comments to a long valuable thread that I had started on trying new modules. This valuable thread has now itself been censored, because the gentleman that I feel was rudely referred to as a zealot, and my new hero and comrade in arms, @sotraphuka got into an important but futile, and heated discussion about morals, ethics and etiquette (I don’t know who you are, but you’re awesome, mate).

So it’s clear, I do feel lucky. I am lucky to be a member of VCV community, where some truly brilliant minds come together to discuss their brilliant and free contributions to something they truly believe in. I am luckier still however, after attending Sacred Heart in Brooklyn, NY as a child, not to be one of the children raped by Father John Abrams in the “box seats,” as out of the three friends I grew up with that were, one took his life in 2009 and the other is serving a life sentence. Yes, this is my baggage (and statistically at least a couple other folks on here), and I recognize that, but as such, to say nothing of the dangers of religion when it’s brought up makes me feel part of the problem.

So I suppose what it comes down to, is whether VCV Community is the place to discuss politics, morality, and religion, because either it is or it isn’t, and while I was “warned” and my anti-theist(I prefer this term over atheist, as one implies I know there is no god, while the other simply states that whether there is or isn’t, all religions are a bad idea as they often lead to situations like the aforementioned if not worse) letter censored (by a censor named after St. Valentin), I am still able to read those posted by the gentleman with an opposing (some might say offensive or intolerable, but still christian) point of view.

I know this is not the States, and there is no 1st amendment to uphold, and this is certainly not some SocMed platform or rather soapbox for members to stand on, spewing whatever poison comes to mind, and I am happy to keep my discussions simply to modules and patches, if there is a rule saying that to be a member one has to do so, but with the state of the world today is that what anyone really wants? Haven’t mouths been shut to long about too many things? Drive far enough south in this country and there are white men on horseback with shotguns watching black prisoners clear brush. We have the death penalty still, and with the death of RBG it’s going to stick around and women may lose reproductive rights (all of that we have to thank religion for, well not the death of RBG of course). When I lived in Belfast there were other problems, and thanks to brexit they will soon return, but they all have the same roots… VCV is brilliant people making noise and beautiful music; I can’t think of anything that could put up a better fight against the world’s injustices and prejudices.

But, it’s not my community, and as I feel lucky and grateful to be a member, I will stay in my lane and keep my mouth shut if what I am saying breaks rules, just please be clear exactly what those are, and exactly what I can and can’t say so that I don’t say anything “intolerable.”

16

I don’t want to put words into Andrew’s mouth but it was always his intention, I believe, that this forum would serve as a searchable resource for Rackheads (and modular synthesists in general). That is why efforts are made to keep the discussion on topic here and why posts sometimes get deleted, moved, merged, split or renamed, or discussions removed or closed.

The amazing, and global, community around VCV has thrived, IMO, by staying on topic, being inclusive and by promoting civility and positivity (though that has, in my observation, come about very naturally).

When somebody does wish to share their religious or political views here then invariably the result of this is reporting by members of other members or their posts to the mod team.

If you do wish to discuss religious or political issues with fellow musicians then a good place for this in my experience is the Off Topic or Hyde Park Corner forums on KVR. Social media, likewise, has places where such discussions are carried out, even places where you can express your dissent at the management of VCV and its community (!).

5 Likes
17

Btw, there were a few replies to your Post that were also deleted. I might have missed the suppresion of the original proselytist post (which also i think has no place here), and i apologize for it if you felt like the only person “targetted” by the Moderation team (well me in this case), whereas you were definitely not the only one in the wrong. (It was very late in my time zone).

Now, a more personal message, as both a French (we have a long history of anticlerical thinking), a Catholic that is not happy at all with a lot of things happening in the Church, but also as someone who lost some friends in the 2015 Terrorist attacks in Paris, i can definitely understand and even agree with some anti religion arguments. However, the formulation has a lot to do in how a message will be perceived, and the way yours was redacted was akin to bigotry against any theist person :sweat_smile:

Personally, i don’t think we should blame everyone for the acts of a few, or acts done in the name of a religion. IMO, that’s part of the inclusivity we believe in in here :slight_smile:. You might have your opinions on religion, which even if i don’t agree with i can respect, but if its formulation might be harmful to others, then maybe you should keep it private. (Just like i believe nobody here should try to proselitize you to any religion or school of thought btw)

Like Nik said, i’m also convinced Andrew doesn’t want this space to be a debate forum for any other subject than modular and synths. If you really want to talk about such subjects, i also agree with Nik about taking it to other spaces, or to private messages.

After all, we already have enough heated debates with “Analog vs Digital” :rofl:

18

“Proselitizing” people to your favorite VCV plugin, or favorite patching technique is always welcome though :partying_face:

19

If I may rant a little on this passionating topic (and hopefully not heated in this thread, thanks guys for your patience and respectful attitude, I love this community for this!): I don’t think we could nor should strip off any religious or political views from a forum about music.

Religion has always, for better or for worse, been part of the history of music, be it in christian european classical music, in gospel, but also in ritualistic african traditional music, tibetan mantras, etc. Etc. And non-theistic views as well. Politics also are often linked to music, just think of the heroica symphony!

Even simingly non-related movements can hold profund politic reflexion: The cybernetics theory that I try to apply to music is deeply rooted in marxist philosophy, etc. If you scratch the surface, you will find politics or religion behind every major movement in music history. We are just often too blind to see it, especially when the political/religious view in question corresponds to the norm of the culture we live in.

Yet people here come from many countries and cultures, and I’m sure that the norm for one would become a very strange opinion to another.

My point is, despite all this we should maintain a respectful ambience here, where one can learn why this or that religious view or political philosophy imbued such art piece, without offending each-other. It should be okay to state that this or that is done according to this philosophical or religious beliefs. It should be okay for one to be able to explain the particular philosophy, in order to enlighten others on its influence on some music.

What shouldn’t be okay - or perhaps in a dedicated, off-topic thread… I’m against censorship - is for one people to attack another’s opinions. There are other places for that.

After what I said earlier, you might consider me a marxist and attack me on that. But am I? And if I were, wouldn’t it be offensive from your part? And as it is influencial in at least some music, I think it should be ok to take some time to explain this philosophy and its impact. But of course, to some especially in the states, the mention of marxism could be considered offensive. Well it isn’t. It’s history and philosophy. And politics and in some regards a (anti)religious opinion. And it is relevant to the community. What would be out of place would be a straight attack to another philosophy, say capitalism for instance. Or an attempt to “convert” you to it.

To sum it up, I think we should accept the kind of religious or political debates I expressed above, but move to a dedicated section any offensive or proselytizing discussion. And if ones feels offended by say the mention of christianism or marxism or anarchy or liberalism or whatever, one should just ignore the topic and maybe rant it off in the off topic section.

20

Thanks for your long and interesting reply. Perhaps mine lacked clarity.

I certainly wasn’t against discussions where politics and/or religion might inform the history, aesthetics, sociology or technology (of music). Such discussions can be had without proselytizing or discussing off topic issues.

As I think we are all agreed, broader political and religious issues can be divisive (no pun intended). I have been communicating with members of this community for several years now and I have little idea about most of them other than their musical interests. I’m fine with that.

3 Likes