Chat Boards

I'm afraid I have no idea who Patti Murin is, but this blog post makes her sound terribly unprofessional.

In the case of BWW, the trolling and general bitchiness had got out of hand and they've finally gotten around to doing something about it. Theatreboard and the old board are pretty mild in comparison, only certain threads like the Bend it like Beckham thread have been heated enough for mods to close it.

What's funny is the entire Nerds thread was the most civil, understanding, and sympathetic show-closure-related thread I had seen in a LONG time, and I've been reading that board since its inception.

Obviously Patti had has a lot of stuff to say about BWW for years (even though the term is generally not "chat board") and got it off her chest immediately after losing her job in a sudden way. Which is probably not the best time to ever look at a message board related to your industry, no matter what industry you're in. Take a look at her previous blog post about resolutions she made upon turning 35. I don't think you can say she kept some of them.

I also find it hilarious that Rob Diamond and Company doing a lot of this out of humiliation. There have been problems on that board for years and years, and yet one performer who had an unfortunate thing happen to her writes an emotional, misguided blog post, a few of her big-name friends agree with her, and suddenly they act. It's also interesting to see who has not said a thing about this... and who has lashed out despite being very well-regarded on the BWW board. That means you, Steve Pasquale.

(This even made it in the NYT because apparently it's a slow news week. www.nytimes.com/2016/03/12/theater/the-actress-patti-murin-takes-on-broadway-chat-board.html?_r=0 )

Murray creates a strawman, the problem isn't discussing theatre, what the problem is, is misinformation, lying and insults.

It's like a Trump rally on BWW at times.

It's always been this way. Before web chat boards there was Usenet, and before Usenet there was hanging around in groups spreading gossip. The only difference today is that modern forums make it trivially easy to obfuscate your identity and be more of a tool than you ever would if people knew who you were. Fortunately, most other people are smart enough to recognise these people for what they are and treat their comments accordingly.

It's not a problem with web chat boards. It's a problem with people. You're always going to get people who think it's clever to be destructive; people who don't care about any damage they cause so long as they get to have their bit of fun. You can't stop them, because if you block them in one place they'll just go elsewhere and carry on. But you can stop treating them as though their opinions matter.

To quote Larry Wall: “I do quarrel with logic that says, ‘Stupid people are associated with X, therefore X is stupid.’ Stupid people are associated with everything.”

The comment about Glinda's high C is quite funny 

The posts which are speculative (but passed as opinion) often by people who haven't yet seen a show (or before the show even hits first preview) do concern me. Along with the persistent posts belittling the opinions of others as less valid or lacking in taste.
I know I can be a bit OCD about shows I love but some posters seem hell bent on trashing shows they dislike. As if only liking very few shows automatically makes you more discerning. Tastes vary wildly.
The old board had lots of this but this one seems less so. Long may it last.

Because the discussion is mixed in with the lies, misinformation etc. and allowed to be seen as equally valid. If a board can't be trusted to have that sort of thing moderated then of course it should be closed down. Would you really disagree with that?

Just updating myself on the saga via the BWW board and they'd started putting together a blacklist of performers (which appears to have been nixed, so first strike to the new 'report button', followed by predictable outrage at such censorship). That 'The Crucible' with its McCarthyite witch-hunts is in previews there appears not to have got its message through.

I wasn't being facetious in my Trump references - the entitlement to say anything, however, untruthful or inflammatory, the 'us and them' posture, even (from only a few thankfully) the idea that 'their' musicals are being trashed by incomers (I had that directed at me a few times, especially when praising John Doyle's work, who was also routinely described as English (which would be news to him)).

I'm sure this is the case. They're afraid of losing ad revenue and of actors refusing to cooperate in their videos, interviews, etc. to contribute to the all-important content (quantity, not quality).

I've read (ok - skimmed, not really up to indulge that much drivel) the rest of the article now and really think she shot way off the mark. It reads like an emotional and entitled response against any form of non-positive criticism.

It's a shame that her valid points about speculative slander get lost amongst the point scoring against the apparently evil unwashed masses that frequent the Internet.

The fact that she is asking BWW to do a whatsonstage on their forum shows a level of intolerance that rivals and possibly exceeds that of the BWW trolls she condemns. Asking for decent moderation would be a positive thing for board that goes a bit over the top

Makes we very happy that we're a free forum for actual discussion instead of pre-approved fan-girling.

I saw a tweet when the closure of the WOS board was announced, saying something along the lines of 'Oh, dear, where will they go now to eviscerate us'. Looks like online discussion is seen as a bit of a nuisance in parts of the actorly fraternity

You want people to spread lies and misinformation? Please tell me I'm reading that wrongly!