Peter Rideout

All:

As a long-time friend and colleague of Peter's (though not as long as some), I must say I find some of your posts - all of which are heart-warming - nonetheless a bit "odd."  I refer to those posts that support that part of Peter's decision to leave which was based on the decreasing level of "civility."

I say this because at least a few of you (though certainly not all) were fervently (or otherwise) opposed to the two guidelines - for civility - that were recently implemented.  You need only read some of your own posts to that thread (which still exists in "important topics") to see why it seems to me that some of your posts on this thread come across as either disingenuous or downright hypocritical.  For those who are now "changing their tune" (to one degree or another) in this regard: Why did it take the loss of two senior members before you "saw the light" regarding the importance - no, the urgency - of maintaining civility on the site?  And why did it take Peter's comments about "sticking to the music" and "avoiding inflammatory topics like politics and religion" for you to "get it," when I brought up both of those things on my "civility" thread?

Note that I do not say any of this as "accusation" (though I realize it may sound that way), or to start a ruckus.  It is simply observation.  However, if I sound slightly "rankled," it is, frankly, because I feel a bit like Cassandra: I all but warned everyone that this (the loss of members) would happen if civility did not increase.  And don't get me wrong.  Max and I (and the rest of the admin group) are pleased - thrilled! - that those who didn't "see the light" before, see it now.  After all, better late than never!

Max and I have instituted only two basic guidelines for the site, which are discussed in detail on my "civility" thread.  It has been suggested by various members that perhaps further guidelines are necessary - and that the following of any and all guidelines should be "required" for membership.  We are open to further discussion on this issue.  This does not mean that we are contemplating further guidelines: none are in the works at this moment.  But if - as many of you have either said or implied - it is truly important to all of you not to lose any more members, and you have ideas for how to prevent that (beyond all of you following the existing guidelines), please do not hesitate to send me a PM in this regard.

I have stated (almost ad nauseum) that Progarchives exists to serve people who have an interest in and/or love for progressive rock music - to be a place where visitors and members can go to review prog albums, learn about the history of prog (from the site and from each other), and discuss prog-related subjects in a safe, welcoming and non-confrontational environment.  Anything we can do to further this goal is critical to maintaining Progarchives as the progressive rock website - one which will not just grow, but thrive.

As always, your participation, contributions, criticisms, comments and suggestions are truly appreciated.

Peace.

We Want Peter, We Want Peter, We Want Peter !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And some drinks.