Some topics fall into banned areas on BHO automatically or per se. It means “as such.” In other words those topics are political, or religious (or other banned topics) by their very nature—no matter the poster’s intent. “Slavery” is one such, so would be “Bret Kavanaugh.” Both are unavoidably political.
Edited by - Bill Rogers on 09/06/2018 15:04:05
Well......
I'm VOTING fer ...
YATES BANJOS....!
;0)
Thank you for posting this. I appreciate this site because it is a respite from the "noise" going on in most social media platforms.
This is Eric's private sandbox. Private.
You can do stuff that Eric allows. That is all.
So slavery is considered a political issue by Eric's minions ! Global warming isn't. Hard for us mere mortals to tell what is and what isn't. What else should we steer clear of that is sort of maybe political or religious ?
quote:
Originally posted by Bill RogersSome topics fall into banned areas on BHO automatically or per se. It means “as such.” In other words those topics are political, or religious (or other banned topics) by their very nature—no matter the poster’s intent. “Slavery” is one such, so would be “Bret Kavanaugh.” Both are unavoidably political.
Hi Bill,
As I tend to avoid the off topic areas this caught my attention and I would like a little clarity. Forgive me since I did not see what this is in reference to.
In the context of the 5-String banjo as we know it, it is impossible to discuss banjo history and avoid the topic of slavery. It just can't be done. The 5 string banjo is the descendent of enslaved African American spiked lute gourd instruments. The very reason of this website was inspired by instruments created and built by African slaves in North America.
The next step after the African American Gourd Banjo, the Wood Rimmed 5 String Banjo, was exclusively used by the popularizer (Joel Sweeney) in a grotesque (and racist) imitation of slave life. The connection between the banjo and slavery, and later southern (free and freed) African Americans, was so strong that thousands of popular banjo pieces were published with (often very racist) descriptive titles of the same subject.
The depiction of slave life (inaccurate as it was) in minstrelsy continued into the 1950s
So with a blanket rule against the topic of slavery you are banning a huge portion of the history of the reason for this website.
Could you clarify if this is the intent?
If the topic of slavery associated with the history of the banjo is in fact banned on the banjo hangout, that is a huge disservice to the oppressed culture that still managed to create something that we all love. Did I mention it is also the reason for this website?
Slavery is a divisive topic????
I guess so Jeff...
N here ..all this time ....
I thought everbody disapproved of it...
I know that...I do.. :0/
Is a discussion on municipal snow clearing political, per se, because the by-laws/policies/procedures were formulated/passed by politicians?
Edited by - Bill Rogers on 09/07/2018 11:12:33
Of course you can’t discuss banjo history without touching on slavery. That’s not a problem. I was referring to a primary discussion of slavery as a central topic—or one that morphs into a slavery discussion. Again, that’s because slavery, as such, is an inherently political topic.
quote:
Originally posted by OwenIs a discussion on municipal snow clearing political, per se, because the by-laws/policies/procedures were formulated/passed by politicians?
I wouldn’t call it political per se, but it could obviously go hat way.
Slavery is surely no more inherently political in today's world than celebrating Independence Day. Sure, both were political issues at one time. We literally fought wars to settle both those issues, roughly 150 and 250 years ago, respectively.
If slavery is a divisive issue, I would like to see someone on the 'pro' side step forward.
This being the policy, one would surely expect to see no more Merry Christmas or 'please pray for' posts, as they would be inherently religious by their very nature.
Seasoned Greetings.
quote:
Originally posted by AndrewDSo slavery is considered a political issue by Eric's minions ! Global warming isn't. Hard for us mere mortals to tell what is and what isn't. What else should we steer clear of that is sort of maybe political or religious ?
Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger are out.
Big and Rich are out for sure. Dixie Chicks were, but might be making a comeback.
Dallas Cowboys are dangerous territory.
I would bet that the St. Louis Cardinals are safe, right Bill?
Edited by - KE on 09/07/2018 12:04:39
Not so fast there KE... the law under which you place your bet undoubtedly had politicians involved in its formulation and adoption. 
I'll add my "Thoughts and prayers" to Brian's "Seasoned Greetings."...
Wasn't Saint Louis a religious figure? ............... that's out.
quote:
Originally posted by OldBlindGuyWasn't Saint Louis a religious figure? ............... that's out.
Dang! You may be right. Not only was Louis IX a saint, but the Cardinals are a full-fledged religious institution. A double whammy. Knowing Bill's impeccable knowledge of baseball, I'd still bet the Cards are safe at first.
Edited by - KE on 09/07/2018 12:37:17
PM Figmo.
Oy gevalt!
Discussing slavery is no more political than discussing murder. It’s a moral discussion not a political one. That being said. The rules are the rules :) There are non-policy violating ways to make political points :)
Discussing slavery is automatic sometimes and sometimes'' not at first'' .I guess the automatic "such as"needs a bit of time to manifest in an ongoing thread .
Are the rules and laws that the government goes by,considered politics? Is anything to do with a country's government off limits?
I suppose with my lack of formal schooling I am just not seeing the dividing lines too clearly yet.Anything to explain it t down to my level would be appreciated.
thanks
Tom
The mentioning of politics and religion on the HO are specified no more clearly than in the rules.
The way I see it, if someone here tries to force their religion/belief or political affiliations on someone else, they have immediately broken the rules. Mentioning politics or religion in the slightest is breaking the rules. BUT there are times, and hear me out, when even one good solid reply containing some sort of religion and perhaps politics, can make a HUGE difference. That doesn't change my basic understanding of the rules. Eric has never said that no members, moderator or no, absolutely do not have the right to put in a sensible word now and then, when the situation requires it. Eric does not mean to be mean with the said rules. I am sure there are some members who have the mistaken idea that Eric is a harsh dictator. FAR from it!
I am sure there is such a thing as a moderator being locked out. We all have strong feelings of some kind, that can come out violently, unless we check them beforehand.
I bet for sure that this very thread will most likely get locked. There have been several threads in the recent weeks, that Sherry has had to lock, and then hop over to another one and tell the members to keep it nice. The John Boulding thread was locked because of that very offense.
What amazes me is the members who will routinely launch into highly sophisticated and drawn-out replies, in an effort to crowd out the others. There are also the members who believe "I am right and you are wrong. Period."
Let's try and keep the rules unbroken, shall we?
Edited by - okbluegrassbanjopicker on 09/08/2018 16:36:49
quote:
Originally posted by Tractor1Discussing slavery is automatic sometimes and sometimes'' not at first'' .I guess the automatic "such as"needs a bit of time to manifest in an ongoing thread .
Are the rules and laws that the government goes by,considered politics? Is anything to do with a country's government off limits?
I suppose with my lack of formal schooling I am just not seeing the dividing lines too clearly yet.Anything to explain it t down to my level would be appreciated.
thanks
Tom
As lawyers say, “it depends....”. For instance, discussing the rules and regulations of the CITES treaty is fine. Arguing if they’re good or bad or need changing is politics. Same would go for tariffs on banjos. And some lines are blurred. We generally discuss those before making a final ruling. Eric is free to overrule, and occasionally does.
...anyone who can figure out the "it depends" part is a whole lot smarter 'an me. 
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Privacy Consent (EU/GDPR Only)
Copyright 2026 Banjo Hangout. All Rights Reserved.
