Okay forum members, please read this and think about it.

[peterivera]

Hey Ralph………………..you know……………………………………..​bm

[luke]

Isnt part of the problem that people booted just come back with different names? I guess it cant be avoided.

[soulster]

Just out of curiosity Ralph, why did you log into the forum on Easter? I think you should set boundaries for yourself that on certain days and occasions, you don’t log in here if being with family and celebrating a holiday or milestone is important. Or was your day interrupted by members calling you up or texting you to alert you of another flame war that had to be put out? IN the end, this is just a forum, and family and personal quality time should take precedence.
Also, your message seems to indicate you’re burned out. It’s been suggested before, but maybe you should consider getting a co moderator to carry the burden, or completely step down if you’re sick of doing the moderating job. That way you can spend more time with your wife, friends and family on days like Easter and the headache of running this forum can fall to someone else. You’ve been doing this job alone for a number of years..perhaps it’s time for a change?

He's the moderator and can do whatever he wants.

[soulster]

Isnt part of the problem that people booted just come back with different names? I guess it cant be avoided.

Yeah, they do come back, but Ralph has their IP addresses, and, can block them if their address is static.

[motown_david]

I'm with you, Ralph, on this Supremes issue. I long ago stopped looking at any thread to do with the group as I didn't join SD to be blasted by such Drama Queens on such ancient issues like the RTL tour. That was all so long ago now and no amount of agonising or argument on such issues will change a thing about it. Do what you have to do and let's get back to a joyful SD family, who love to share info about the best record label ever to come out of the States.

[ralpht]

I guess I'm somewhat overwhelmed by all of your responses. To try and address all of this:

I logged into SD on Easter Sunday because that is what I do every morning.

I considered a second moderator quite some time ago, but realized it might cause some confusion between me and the second moderator.

I don't think I'm burned out. Maybe a little tired of the BS at times, but in reality, other than the issues we are discussing, moderating is a piece of cake here.

An individual thread for Supremes et al wouldn't work, at least for me, because once the trouble started and it would eventually, I would be subjected to the same complaints I get now.

Pete Rivera: I owe you a phone call.

[ralpht]

So...I think it best to try what I suggested. Just ONE screw-up on a Supremes related thread and it will be history. No ifs ands or buts.

[glencro]

I can totally relate to your frustration Ralph. Back in 2000, I became the administrator for the now defunct www.theclarksisters.com, the official website for the gospel recording group The Clark Sisters. I had their full cooperation, traveled with them and created a site that would update their fans on their various endeavors and connect their fans to them. I had no idea how fast that site would blow up and how popular it would become. It was due to the message board which started off as informative, fun and the beginning of many friendships. Then things began to change. The posters were comparing one sister to the next as far as who sings the best and who dresses the best. Then came the personal attacks on each other, attacks on other members sexuality and flat out unwarranted name calling and this was a gospel music site. Being administrator of that site made me a good read of people. I could tell a lot about a person just by their posts. It was a babysitting job, which is why I'm sure that Ralph feels the need to log on weekends and holidays. It was frustrating to see the same mess started by the same people and I did have to ban some. The "messy" board got so out of hand until one of the Clark sisters asked that it be taken down. That was definitely the life of the website.
This is a place where music lovers come together. We are all old enough to agree to disagree without being disrespectful. I'm extremely thankful for this board. I have been educated on so many things musically through this site. I've been introduced to so many artists and music through this site. People let's grow up and let the music play.

[ralpht]

It all seems so simple, doesn't it, Glen?

[glencro]

It all seems so simple, doesn't it, Glen?

It really does but some folk's days are not complete without some sort of drama ...SIGH!!!!

[ralpht]

Well from now on, they can take the drama elsewhere. I don't want it here.

[P-Shark: The Revenge]

Do your thing Ralph

[P-Shark: The Revenge]

I understand all these Supremes fans all came from another forum that got shut down because of all the flame wars, and they all came over here. These guys need to find a new place. I'm sure one of them must have enough money to create their very own fan site.

Don't need money to start a forum> http://www.freeforums.org/
Or they can create a group on facebook. They have a choice to make it private or public and run any way they want

[Hotspurman]

As a relatively new member here, I've been surprised at how quickly virtually every discussion involving any aspect of The Supremes quickly degenerates into an online war. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I've seen Spurs fans conduct themselves on Arsenal websites with more self control, and vice versa! I've also noticed that there are several members of the SDF who have virtually left the forum and I wondered if the ongoing Supremes problem might have been the reason.

If Ralph threatening to get tough with the perpetrators cleans up the forum and leads to those causing problems to leave and those who have much to contribute coming back, then bring it on!

[soulstevie]

I support your idea, Ralph. I now usually avoid logging on and posting since new topics other than Supremes-related lose ground pretty quickly and drop in the list. I know, it´s stupid, I should post anyway.

[theboyfromxtown]

Luke makes a very valid point that whatever you do, it aint gonna be easy!

I have made some brave attempts at introducing "other" topics recently. They may not be as widely viewed as some others but I do find that they bring back some of the long time posters. I also see some of the individual clubhouse topics taking on a life of themselves. So it's not all doom and gloom.

I guess what I am saying is, it's up to all of us to make this work and maybe we all need to take that on board.

[ralpht]

I can use all the help I can get John. I'm sure there will be a couple of bumps, but if a problem arises I will get rid of it, in it's entirety.

[blkfrost]

I am a Diana Ross/Supremes fan and have been since 1964. That being said, I do not understand the constant baiting, fighting and personal attacks. As much I would like to open a DR/Supremes thread, I always hesitate because I really dislike the direction the thread usually head. There have been times when I did open a thread and to my surprise I was happy to find tidbits that I did not know. It was here that I learned of many unreleased songs. This forum should be about the music.

Maybe with the threat of being banned people will think twice and temper their comments.

[jobeterob]

What about this for an idea?

We have a "Supreme Hiatus"...........and no, that is not a Supreme Hernia. This means we drop all the Supremes topics til May 1. It's just a break ~ a long overdue Supreme Holiday. No new Supremes threads and Ralph deletes the first 20 Supremes threads on Motown Board and we sit tight til May 1.

My only other comments are some people take their connections to their Divas too seriously, in too heartfelt a manner ~ and we are talking Diana Ross, Mary Wilson, Whitney Houston, Aretha Franklin, Chaka Khan, Anita Baker and her quasi sister Shantel, SOS, and all the other Supremes.

To what end? These people generally don't know us. Some of them have been warned to keep their distance from this Forum and from some of it's members.

Does it all have to be taken so seriously?

Some of them might join in here a bit more frequently if we could back it off a few notches.

[juicefree20]

Ralph,

I kinda thought that such an arrangement would be cumbersome & add even more to your workload.

The one thing that no one can accuse you of is a lack of patience & tolerance, as this has been occurring with regularity for at least 5 years now. You have pretty much requested that adults simply behave as adults & honesstly, no one can ask for more than that.

That things have come to what you are proposing is no reflection on you, but rather on those whom for some ungodly reason simply can't reign themselves in & spoiling countless threads for others in the process.

For you to have to resort to this measure is sad, as there have been others whom have been upset at having to see decent threads go south & unhappy about some of the constant infighting & seeing many of their favorite artists constantly defamed, cursed & more. Despite that, you still allowed a place in the forum, only to have some prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they didn't appreciate the gesture.

And while I'm sure that some of the same folks will accuse you of "over-reacting", the truth is that no one can accuse you of jumping the gun, nor going off of the deep end here. All that was necessary to have prevented this was a little maturity, a little common decency & remembering why this forum was created to begin with.

I understand that reality shows are the rage these days, but SDF wasn't set up to be The National Enquirer, nor TMZ. It wasn't created to constantly bash Diana, Mary, nor Berry for crap that happened well over 2 decades ago, nor should that behavior be tolerated. I guess that you could say that SDF tried a grand experiment in trying to allow adults to behave as adults & some of them always choose to fail the test.

To be honest & I've said it before, I believe that this behavior proves that their actions have much less to do with any great love of any of the ladies & has more to do with supplanting these ladies as stars on their own personal stages. It's not about The Supremes, but rather, themselves & whatever attention they can garner by being as over-the-top as possible.

Seriously, what entertainer would really want to claim a fan whom has exhibited some of the behavior we've seen here? What entertainer would really feel comfortable with ANY fan who behaves as obsessed as we've seen some behave, while speaking as though they're some 14 year-old & we're still in the year 1972?

I don't know about anyone else, but that would scare the hell out of me.

I'm sorry to see that it's come to this, but sometimes when you give someone a yard of material, they can either use it to make a pretty bow, or to make a noose to hang around their own neck.

Personally, I'd have chosen the bow

I commend you for your patience, because if nothing else, you've shown a patience that I simply don't have. I support whatever you choose to do 1,000%.

[juicefree20]

Three things which may help...

1. Forumers could simply refrain from posting the "______________ [[fill in the Supreme of your choice) SPOTTED IN THE FROZEN FOODS AISLE" or "________________ [[again fill in the blank) EMPTIES THE GARBAGE!!!" type of posts which add absolutely NOTHING of value to ANY discussion of The Supremes & seem to be posted simply in order to pump up the related thread count.

If one of the ladies are currently performing...cool! By all means put up that kind of information. But if it's one of those posts which isn't discussing anything which is an accomplishment or a performance, how about keeping that to a monthly kind of "update" post, in which one can post all recent such info in ONE SPECIFIC POST, so as to not deluge the forum with a bunch of "news" which edifies no one?

2. If someone posts a POSITIVE thread about Diana or Mary & you DISLIKE either of the two, the answer is quite simple...

KEEP YOUR A$$ OUT OF THE THREAD!!!

If you don't like either, then you're not likely entering a thread which is dedicated to them in order to spread a feel-good vibe. So simply allow the folks who like them to enjoy themselves & don't scratch where it don't itch.

Personally, I would ban ANYONE, FRIEND OR FOE, who chooses to go into a thread of a person whom we know that they dislike, because to me, that would be proof positive that they're only there to create a problem.

No less & no more!

And finally, number 3...

Leave the youtube B.S. over at youtube & don't drag it here!

I've seen some of what's been written on youtube & a lot of it is far worse than what goes on here. And I gather that some of the folks whom are writing that stuff are also members here. With that said, I don't know who's using what name elsewhere, nor is it so deep or important to me so that I would do any investigating into who's whom. All that I care about is that they don't do that crap HERE!

I don't care what anyone here does in their home, nor is it any of my business. If anyone has a gripe about what someone writes on youtube, yahoo or West Bubble whatever, then they can send private e-mails to expose r voice their displeasure over what is written elsewhere.

If it happened on youtube or yahoo, handle it there, not here. Personally, I would automatically suspend ANYONE, FRIEND OR FOE, who comes here & drags outside B.S. through these doors with them.

All that doing that serves to do is to keep the crap going in a circle. We have had enough headaches here for what's been written HERE. We sure don't need anyone pouring fuel on any fires by dragging outside crap here under the guise of "exposure" or "full disclosure".

Just a few thoughts & for ome who would say that Ralph's being too hard, you should thank your lucky stars because I'd have booted quite a few a long time ago. While we share the same odiac sign, Ralph has proven to be far more patient than I am.

It must be the wisdom which comes with a few grey hairs, in which case, I'm gaining on you Ralph. That is, the few hairs that I have remaining

[ralpht]

Good post Juice. It really seems so simple. the threads of no use that you mention will be just what I will be looking for. They are useless anyway and do nothing but breed trouble. Juice, I think you are comfortably enough behind me. 70 this July Juice............................................H ang onto your hair.

[Roberta75]

Three things which may help...

1. Forumers could simply refrain from posting the "______________ [[fill in the Supreme of your choice) SPOTTED IN THE FROZEN FOODS AISLE" or "________________ [[again fill in the blank) EMPTIES THE GARBAGE!!!" type of posts which add absolutely NOTHING of value to ANY discussion of The Supremes & seem to be posted simply in order to pump up the related thread count.

If one of the ladies are currently performing...cool! By all means put up that kind of information. But if it's one of those posts which isn't discussing anything which is an accomplishment or a performance, how about keeping that to a monthly kind of "update" post, in which one can post all recent such info in ONE SPECIFIC POST, so as to not deluge the forum with a bunch of "news" which edifies no one?

2. If someone posts a POSITIVE thread about Diana or Mary & you DISLIKE either of the two, the answer is quite simple...

KEEP YOUR A$$ OUT OF THE THREAD!!!

If you don't like either, then you're not likely entering a thread which is dedicated to them in order to spread a feel-good vibe. So simply allow the folks who like them to enjoy themselves & don't scratch where it don't itch.

Personally, I would ban ANYONE, FRIEND OR FOE, who chooses to go into a thread of a person whom we know that they dislike, because to me, that would be proof positive that they're only there to create a problem.

No less & no more!

And finally, number 3...

Leave the youtube B.S. over at youtube & don't drag it here!

I've seen some of what's been written on youtube & a lot of it is far worse than what goes on here. And I gather that some of the folks whom are writing that stuff are also members here. With that said, I don't know who's using what name elsewhere, nor is it so deep or important to me so that I would do any investigating into who's whom. All that I care about is that they don't do that crap HERE!

I don't care what anyone here does in their home, nor is it any of my business. If anyone has a gripe about what someone writes on youtube, yahoo or West Bubble whatever, then they can send private e-mails to expose r voice their displeasure over what is written elsewhere.

If it happened on youtube or yahoo, handle it there, not here. Personally, I would automatically suspend ANYONE, FRIEND OR FOE, who comes here & drags outside B.S. through these doors with them.

All that doing that serves to do is to keep the crap going in a circle. We have had enough headaches here for what's been written HERE. We sure don't need anyone pouring fuel on any fires by dragging outside crap here under the guise of "exposure" or "full disclosure".

Just a few thoughts & for ome who would say that Ralph's being too hard, you should thank your lucky stars because I'd have booted quite a few a long time ago. While we share the same odiac sign, Ralph has proven to be far more patient than I am.

It must be the wisdom which comes with a few grey hairs, in which case, I'm gaining on you Ralph. That is, the few hairs that I have remaining

You just nailed it my sweet Juice.

Ralph........follow this incredible man's advice and your stress will be significantly reduced.

Fondly,

Roberta

[ralpht]

So I believe, Roberta.

[Roberta75]

So I believe, Roberta.

Believe it Ralph and keep the faith.

My best to you,

Roberta

[144man]

I'm worried about disagreeing with anybody nowadays in case I inadvertently start World War Three.

Anything you do, Ralph, to make the forum a friendlier and more enjoyable place gets my support.

[soulster]

Don't need money to start a forum> http://www.freeforums.org/
Or they can create a group on facebook. They have a choice to make it private or public and run any way they want

But, it's space on someone else's server. It takes a bit more to run your own.

[ralpht]

I'm beginning to feel a little like Gary Cooper in "High Noon".

[moe]

Hey Ralph,
If you need help ya might try to locate Paulie 3Shoes..........capice?

Do it.........

[soulster]

I have made some brave attempts at introducing "other" topics recently. They may not be as widely viewed as some others but I do find that they bring back some of the long time posters. I also see some of the individual clubhouse topics taking on a life of themselves. So it's not all doom and gloom.

I guess what I am saying is, it's up to all of us to make this work and maybe we all need to take that on board.

I found that the trouble with this forum is trying to find a musical topic that will be of interest. It seems like all anyone here wants to talk about is: Supremes related stuff, other female singers, or funk. Then, there are those who think only Detroit-related music and artists should be discussed, and those, like me, who believe that the scope of soul music should be wider, as there are almost no other places that will take soul music as seriously as we do.

[ralpht]

I've been thinking about that, Moe. And maybe the Kabong chicks as well?

[moe]

Front and center............

[soulster]

What about this for an idea?

We have a "Supreme Hiatus"...........and no, that is not a Supreme Hernia. This means we drop all the Supremes topics til May 1. It's just a break ~ a long overdue Supreme Holiday. No new Supremes threads and Ralph deletes the first 20 Supremes threads on Motown Board and we sit tight til May 1.

Can we make that May 1, 2014? The problem with this idea is that it would require constant monitoring of the forum, and Ralph does have a life. Would you want to sit here all day and watch for new Supremes threads? Also, any thread can be hijacked and morphed into a Supremes-related discussion. To stay on top of that would require crazy monitoring of each and every thread 24-hours a day!

My only other comments are some people take their connections to their Divas too seriously, in too heartfelt a manner ~ and we are talking Diana Ross, Mary Wilson, Whitney Houston, Aretha Franklin, Chaka Khan, Anita Baker and her quasi sister Shantel, SOS, and all the other Supremes.

You know, me being the curious type, attempted to find out what was behind it all in a not-so-politically-correct way. Apparently, enough people were offended that I would entertain the issue and Ralph pulled the threads. However, I did manage to get an honest answer from a forum member, so I finally left the issue alone.

To what end? These people generally don't know us. Some of them have been warned to keep their distance from this Forum and from some of it's members.

You have to say: who is "us"? I left the forum once largely because of all the Supremes nonsense years ago and then came back midst another Supremes blow-up. So, does that classify me as an "us" or a "them" in the oldsters' minds? I have loved Motown and was raised on it since birth [[i'm about the same age as Juicefree), but I am not as intuned to the inner-workings of the company or it's artists, and I did not come from Detroit. I have a very broad taste in music.

Does it all have to be taken so seriously?

On another forum I frequent, there are people who obsess over everything Beatles. The difference is that the threads don't degrade into nasty fights [[probably because of the huge international moderation team), but, trust me, some of the membership complains about the frequency of the threads just like this one does the Supremes-related threads. In that respect, this place is not unique.

Some of them might join in here a bit more frequently if we could back it off a few notches.

It has been made clear that some longtime members want to return to the year 2002, where they percieved this place as one small happy family where everybody knew each other. This place is too big for that now.

[tsull1]

I don't get all the Supreme fans here arguing. It's pretty easy to break it all down and call it a day:

1. Diana Ross was a major talent who was coddled and had an affair with Berry Gordy and therefore was the favored performer of Motown. Because of this, she has some ego problems. I don't have a problem with her. I like her music with and without the Supremes, and I've enjoyed some interviews I've heard with her. Yes, her voice can sometimes get annoying and sometimes it's great. Take one poor kid from the projects, throw fame and money at them and sometimes the results aren't what you want. For the most part, Diana seems like a good mom to her kids and a great performing artist.

2. Florence Ballard and others probably didn't get their due. That's show business.

3. Diana ain't coming back for a reunion tour.

Case closed.

[marv2]

Thanks for the immediate support, guys. Much appreciated.

Ralph, a belated Happy Easter. I support you too. I wasn't here yesterday, but I am here now. People use " the Supremes" as an excuse to get at people they do not like. People that had not agree with them in the past. I agree with you very much about these threads.

Marv

[soulster]

I don't get all the Supreme fans here arguing. It's pretty easy to break it all down and call it a day:

1. Diana Ross was a major talent who was coddled and had an affair with Berry Gordy and therefore was the favored performer of Motown. Because of this, she has some ego problems. I don't have a problem with her. I like her music with and without the Supremes, and I've enjoyed some interviews I've heard with her. Yes, her voice can sometimes get annoying and sometimes it's great. Take one poor kid from the projects, throw fame and money at them and sometimes the results aren't what you want. For the most part, Diana seems like a good mom to her kids and a great performing artist.

2. Florence Ballard and others probably didn't get their due. That's show business.

3. Diana ain't coming back for a reunion tour.

Case closed.

You know you're stirring the pot, cuz!

[marv2]

Yeah, they do come back, but Ralph has their IP addresses, and, can block them if their address is static.

The IP address is the best identifyer of the member/poster. In the old forum, the IP address appeared right beneath the name of each member. As it is now, people just make up a new name and rejoin. It is not REAL heard to determine who some of these people are because they "come back" with the same interests and bad attitudes that they left with!

[juicefree20]

Ralph:

Anytime at all. We've been down down pretty rough roads together & you know my opinion of you.

As Soulster said, Ralph does have a life. Tell you what....I'LL VOLUNTEER to moderate The Supremes threads. And if that were ever to come to pass, some would be begging for Ralph's calming presence. And as I have a ife, I wouldn't be here every 3 seconds to see what's going on either. In fact, just as now, you'd never know exactly when I'd show up. But when I did, if things weren't as they should be, people would just get the boot & I wouldn't hire Marcy Darcy to help to ease the news.

I wouldn't entertain even one e-mail because after all of these years, there would be nothing left to say. My rules would be simple...

1. Any cursing of ANY Supremes = Instant Ban

2. Any intentional provocation be it via posting of some 30 yar-old crap which has been rehashed 387,493 times or just posting the same crap from 20 year-old books, interviews, etc = Instant Ban

3. Any dragging here of ANYTHING negative which was/is posted by ANY member on Yahoo, Youtube or anywhere else, under the guise of "letting us know how they operate" = Instant Ban

4. ANY denigration of ANY performer who has done the EXACT SAME crap as other artists whom we've showered with affection here for years = Instant Ban.

This is not to suggest that we can offer opinions about people who are in the neews for doing some outlandish things, but the "TMZ-inization" of the forum really needs to go, as it serves NONE of us well. I was under the impresion that we were here to discuss & salute the artists, the music & the creators of the music, not to excoriate them for being as human & sometimes as F'd up as some of us, our family members or friends can often be.

Just because we can HAVE a negative opinion about folks doesn't necessarily mean that we have to always VOICE that opinion in an unnecessarily scathing manner.

5. Any chasing members through threads & addressing them in threads in which they ARE NOT participating in, simply in order to get a rise out of them = Instant Ban!

From my perspective, that's merely the equivalent of stalking, which I'm sure we'd all agree isn't a very desirable thing to have to deal with.

And finally....

6. Any future mention about how Berry screwed over whomever, any further mention about who slept with the boss in order to advance their career, any further reference about whom punched, slapped, or hit whom upside the head between 1959 to 2010, any reference about whom slammed whom in any damn body's book which was written before the millenium =

INSTANT BAN!

We've heard it all before, we can't do a damn thing about it & besides, how many of us were really there in order to know EXACTLY what happened?

The point is moot & has been since 1967, 1969 & 1986 or thereabouts.

That would pretty much be my criteria for moderating those threads.

[juicefree20]

Soulster"

I believe that some of us would like to revisit those days, for me it would be roughly from the end of 2003 through about 2005. But it's not just that the forum is too big, it's just that many of us have learned too much since those virginal days.

A bigger factor is Facebook, as it's the latest craze. Factor in the act that a person on Facebook can discuss whatever they choose to & can also communicate with friends & family members who just aren't into music forums, well, together that's something that has had an effect. That's why it'll never be exactly as it was then, but that doesn't mean that it can't be somewhat close to what it used to be.

I think it pertinent to add that the folks who've been arguing in these threads are not newbies, but have been members of our forum for years.

Strangely enough, contrary to what this thread may lead many to believe, the participants are basically a handful & it's been going on pretty much as far back to what we refer to as "the good old days".

[juicefree20]

Roberta,

Thank you & may God bless!

[P-Shark: The Revenge]

But, it's space on someone else's server. It takes a bit more to run your own.

Facebook has plenty of space. And its so easy to start a group discussion over there. He/she can run it any way he/she wants.They can talk about what Diana had for breakfast, Diana Ross for president, start a petition to erect a Mount Rossmore, Mary Wilson's affair with a space alien and other nonsense. Less headaches for Ralph, and more quality Motown related discussions here.

• How to Create Facebook Groups

How to Create Facebook Groups

By an eHow Contributor


Facebook groups allow you to further connect with friends on your network, creating a close-knit social network within the larger Web site. You can join any group on your network or create your own. From pets to football to computer programming, you can create a group on any topic that interests you.Other People Are Reading

• How to Have an Active Facebook Group
• How Can I Create a Calendar for a Facebook Group?

• 
• 
• Print this article

Things You'll Need

• 
  Facebook account
• 
  Computer with Internet access

Instructions

• Create a Facebook Group
  
  • 1Start by logging in to Facebook using the email address you registered with [[see Resources below).
    
    
  • 2Follow the "My Groups" link. You can browse through your current groups or look for new ones to join from this page.
    
    
  • 
    
  • 3Click the "Create a Group"' button if you do not see any groups you want to join. You can create a group for just about anything [[see the Facebook Terms of Service for limitations).
    
    
  • 4Fill in the form. Only the group name, description and type are required, but you will want to at least set the privacy level to one you are comfortable with. When you are finished, click the "Create Group" link.
    
    
  • 5Upload a photo that represents your group. The file size limit is 4MB.
    
    
  • 6Choose your officers by clicking the "Officers" tab. Don't forget to make yourself an officer. You can create any position you want.
    
    
  • 7Edit the details of your group at any time on the "Group Info" tab. Keep the basic information up to date.
    
    
  Promote Your Group
  
  • 8Click on "My Groups" when logged in to Facebook. Then click "Edit Group" to invite more members.
    
    
  • 9Go to the "Members" tab. You can choose to invite your Facebook friends to join your group by simply marking the check boxes by their name. You can also invite non-Facebook friends to join your group by adding their email address.
    
    
  • 10Import emails from your Yahoo, Hotmail, AOL, Gmail or MSN address book to quickly invite several friends at once.
    
    
  • 11Turn on your forums from the "Edit Group Profile" page. To gain more members, your group will need to offer something, so get the discussions started.
    
    

Tips & Warnings

• 
  Set your group's privacy level. You can allow only your friends or people in your network to join or you can create a global group that everyone can join.
• 
  The Facebook help section is a good place to look for more tips creating groups [[see Resources below).
• 
  Never post your password or personal information on a group's forum. Many groups include people who are not your friends on Facebook.Suggest item

[soulster]

As Soulster said, Ralph does have a life. Tell you what....I'LL VOLUNTEER to moderate The Supremes threads. And if that were ever to come to pass, some would be begging for Ralph's calming presence. And as I have a ife, I wouldn't be here every 3 seconds to see what's going on either. In fact, just as now, you'd never know exactly when I'd show up. But when I did, if things weren't as they should be, people would just get the boot & I wouldn't hire Marcy Darcy to help to ease the news.

I wouldn't entertain even one e-mail because after all of these years, there would be nothing left to say. My rules would be simple...

1. Any cursing of ANY Supremes = Instant Ban

Hi Juice,

The only issue I would have with your approach is that where do you draw the line between legitimate criticism of Diana Ross, or any other of the related Supremes figures, and bashing? It's very subjective. It seems to me that the better deal is to ban the member if they contribute to the mayhem.

2. Any intentional provocation be it via posting of some 30 yar-old crap which has been rehashed 387,493 times or just posting the same crap from 20 year-old books, interviews, etc = Instant Ban

This stifles any peaceful discussion.

4. ANY denigration of ANY performer who has done the EXACT SAME crap as other artists whom we've showered with affection here for years = Instant Ban.

Again, this is all-too subjective.

This is not to suggest that we can offer opinions about people who are in the neews for doing some outlandish things, but the "TMZ-inization" of the forum really needs to go, as it serves NONE of us well. I was under the impresion that we were here to discuss & salute the artists, the music & the creators of the music, not to excoriate them for being as human & sometimes as F'd up as some of us, our family members or friends can often be.

I understand where you are coming from. I also have no use for frivolous posts about what hand any of the women used to pick up the salt shaker with at lunch last Thursday.

Just because we can HAVE a negative opinion about folks doesn't necessarily mean that we have to always VOICE that opinion in an unnecessarily scathing manner.

Again, there is an issue between censorship and exchange of honest opinions.

5. Any chasing members through threads & addressing them in threads in which they ARE NOT participating in, simply in order to get a rise out of them = Instant Ban!

This should be extended to ALL members, friend of moderator or not, Supremes-related or not.

And finally....

6. Any future mention about how Berry screwed over whomever, any further mention about who slept with the boss in order to advance their career, any further reference about whom punched, slapped, or hit whom upside the head between 1959 to 2010, any reference about whom slammed whom in any damn body's book which was written before the millenium =

This is an example of baiting. Again, this stifles discussion. I do not believe Ralph wants to play the taliban here, he just wants the stupid arguing to end.

We've heard it all before, we can't do a damn thing about it & besides, how many of us were really there in order to know EXACTLY what happened?

I would say NONE of them! Some of those instigators claim to personally know and communicate with the singers, but closer to the truth would be that the singers have never heard of any of these fanatics. Frankly, I think they'd distance themselves from them, and this message board!

The point is moot & has been since 1967, 1969 & 1986 or thereabouts.

I was in kindergarten in 1967. I do not really care what happened with the Supremes. All I really care about is the music.

[soulster]

Soulster"

I believe that some of us would like to revisit those days, for me it would be roughly from the end of 2003 through about 2005. But it's not just that the forum is too big, it's just that many of us have learned too much since those virginal days.

A bigger factor is Facebook, as it's the latest craze. Factor in the act that a person on Facebook can discuss whatever they choose to & can also communicate with friends & family members who just aren't into music forums, well, together that's something that has had an effect. That's why it'll never be exactly as it was then, but that doesn't mean that it can't be somewhat close to what it used to be.

I think it pertinent to add that the folks who've been arguing in these threads are not newbies, but have been members of our forum for years.

Strangely enough, contrary to what this thread may lead many to believe, the participants are basically a handful & it's been going on pretty much as far back to what we refer to as "the good old days".

I would say that Ralph should extend the warning to ALL members in ANY thread who choose to insult another forum member, no matter how subtle or veiled, that they will be banned! He thinks we don't need detailed forum rules, but it's clear that we do not have adults in the room. People need clear rules, not guidelines, but rules on how to behave here. That way, there can be no excuse, and no favoritism.

[smark21]

Thanks for your reply Ralph. So in other words, though you have a voice in whom to pick as a co moderator, you don’t have enough faith or trust in any member here to be your co moderator as you’re afraid you’ll get into arguments and start fighting. And while I can understand your frustration with the Supremes fan wars, it was your choice to log on to here on Easter. If you had given yourself a day off, your holiday would not have been spoiled. You may want to consider giving yourself a day off from time to time, the forum won’t explode into pieces and you’ll be able to enjoy your day.

[smark21]

Ralph:

Anytime at all. We've been down down pretty rough roads together & you know my opinion of you.

As Soulster said, Ralph does have a life. Tell you what....I'LL VOLUNTEER to moderate The Supremes threads. And if that were ever to come to pass, some would be begging for Ralph's calming presence. And as I have a ife, I wouldn't be here every 3 seconds to see what's going on either. In fact, just as now, you'd never know exactly when I'd show up. But when I did, if things weren't as they should be, people would just get the boot & I wouldn't hire Marcy Darcy to help to ease the news.

I wouldn't entertain even one e-mail because after all of these years, there would be nothing left to say. My rules would be simple...

1. Any cursing of ANY Supremes = Instant Ban

2. Any intentional provocation be it via posting of some 30 yar-old crap which has been rehashed 387,493 times or just posting the same crap from 20 year-old books, interviews, etc = Instant Ban

3. Any dragging here of ANYTHING negative which was/is posted by ANY member on Yahoo, Youtube or anywhere else, under the guise of "letting us know how they operate" = Instant Ban

4. ANY denigration of ANY performer who has done the EXACT SAME crap as other artists whom we've showered with affection here for years = Instant Ban.

This is not to suggest that we can offer opinions about people who are in the neews for doing some outlandish things, but the "TMZ-inization" of the forum really needs to go, as it serves NONE of us well. I was under the impresion that we were here to discuss & salute the artists, the music & the creators of the music, not to excoriate them for being as human & sometimes as F'd up as some of us, our family members or friends can often be.

Just because we can HAVE a negative opinion about folks doesn't necessarily mean that we have to always VOICE that opinion in an unnecessarily scathing manner.

5. Any chasing members through threads & addressing them in threads in which they ARE NOT participating in, simply in order to get a rise out of them = Instant Ban!

From my perspective, that's merely the equivalent of stalking, which I'm sure we'd all agree isn't a very desirable thing to have to deal with.

And finally....

6. Any future mention about how Berry screwed over whomever, any further mention about who slept with the boss in order to advance their career, any further reference about whom punched, slapped, or hit whom upside the head between 1959 to 2010, any reference about whom slammed whom in any damn body's book which was written before the millenium =

INSTANT BAN!

We've heard it all before, we can't do a damn thing about it & besides, how many of us were really there in order to know EXACTLY what happened?

The point is moot & has been since 1967, 1969 & 1986 or thereabouts.

That would pretty much be my criteria for moderating those threads.

Your dedication to freedom of expression is admirable JuiceFree.

[grapevine]

...I normally go straight to the Motown Forum ...just hit the SDF button and found this ...as most ...if not all ...Supremes threads are in the Motown Forum ...perhaps you should mention this there too Ralph ...looking forward to a calmer Motown Forum soon...!

Yesterday was Easter Sunday. I can't even spend a holiday with my family without coming home to some sort of stupid problem, generally related to the Supremes, Diana[[Diane) Ross, Mary Wilson or some other related to this category. In come all the complaining emails about some thing or some one that I need to try and smooth over along with the usual tripe that SD isn't what it once was etc etc.

So.....here is my solution:
All it will take is just One[[1) of these threads to go south and I will delete the entire menu of threads that relate to these artists and ban everyone that contributed to it's demise. Don't believe me? Try me! I am sick of it.

[ralpht]

Smark,
All that you mention in your last post is exactly how I intend to do things. As far as additional moderators, I would still like to depend on notifications from members if they notice a problem.

[soulster]

Thanks for your reply Ralph. So in other words, though you have a voice in whom to pick as a co moderator, you don’t have enough faith or trust in any member here to be your co moderator as you’re afraid you’ll get into arguments and start fighting. And while I can understand your frustration with the Supremes fan wars, it was your choice to log on to here on Easter. If you had given yourself a day off, your holiday would not have been spoiled. You may want to consider giving yourself a day off from time to time, the forum won’t explode into pieces and you’ll be able to enjoy your day.

Well, why did YOU log on Easter Sunday?

I notice you keep harping on this. Again, Ralph is the mod. He can log on any time he wishes just as you can. If you don't want him to see your part in these Supremes threads, don't post in them when they go bad.

[ralpht]

I logged in on Sunday because that is what I do every day. In spite of the time to time hassles, I love SD and the members that I have become friends with over the years. I realize the forum has become much too big for mew to read all of it, but, like the rest of you, I am a fan of the music and the era that I spent all of my younger days being an active part of.

[arrr&bee]

Shut it down and nail it shut[i got some nails here someplace].