mudcat.org: BS: Guest Postings
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Guest Postings

Catherine Jayne 16 Dec 03 - 04:55 AM
Dave Bryant 16 Dec 03 - 05:24 AM
Beverley Barton 16 Dec 03 - 05:36 AM
GUEST,Thornton Curtis 16 Dec 03 - 05:44 AM
McGrath of Harlow 16 Dec 03 - 05:47 AM
Oaklet 16 Dec 03 - 06:16 AM
Catherine Jayne 16 Dec 03 - 06:47 AM
Dave Bryant 16 Dec 03 - 07:04 AM
Sweetfia 16 Dec 03 - 07:15 AM
GUEST 16 Dec 03 - 07:26 AM
Sandra in Sydney 16 Dec 03 - 07:26 AM
GUEST 16 Dec 03 - 08:03 AM
GUEST,Free speech portal. 16 Dec 03 - 08:17 AM
Pseudolus 16 Dec 03 - 08:33 AM
Beverley Barton 16 Dec 03 - 08:37 AM
artbrooks 16 Dec 03 - 08:47 AM
Dave Bryant 16 Dec 03 - 08:47 AM
Bill D 16 Dec 03 - 08:55 AM
Rapparee 16 Dec 03 - 08:59 AM
Mickey191 16 Dec 03 - 09:02 AM
Amos 16 Dec 03 - 09:29 AM
Morticia 16 Dec 03 - 10:40 AM
Dave Bryant 16 Dec 03 - 10:44 AM
GUEST 16 Dec 03 - 10:52 AM
Catherine Jayne 16 Dec 03 - 10:55 AM
Amos 16 Dec 03 - 11:57 AM
GUEST,Mike Harding 16 Dec 03 - 12:00 PM
GUEST,Mike Harding 16 Dec 03 - 12:02 PM
harpgirl 16 Dec 03 - 12:09 PM
Clinton Hammond 16 Dec 03 - 12:12 PM
The Shambles 16 Dec 03 - 12:42 PM
Mrs.Duck 16 Dec 03 - 01:00 PM
John MacKenzie 16 Dec 03 - 01:05 PM
Bill D 16 Dec 03 - 01:14 PM
Peace 16 Dec 03 - 01:30 PM
Catherine Jayne 16 Dec 03 - 01:31 PM
Joe Offer 16 Dec 03 - 01:32 PM
Clinton Hammond 16 Dec 03 - 01:46 PM
wysiwyg 16 Dec 03 - 01:48 PM
Amos 16 Dec 03 - 01:56 PM
Peace 16 Dec 03 - 01:56 PM
GUEST 16 Dec 03 - 01:57 PM
Morticia 16 Dec 03 - 02:03 PM
artbrooks 16 Dec 03 - 02:05 PM
Amos 16 Dec 03 - 02:08 PM
GUEST 16 Dec 03 - 02:15 PM
Amos 16 Dec 03 - 02:19 PM
Joe Offer 16 Dec 03 - 02:20 PM
John MacKenzie 16 Dec 03 - 03:12 PM
Joe Offer 16 Dec 03 - 03:28 PM
Raedwulf 16 Dec 03 - 05:31 PM
Little Hawk 16 Dec 03 - 05:56 PM
GUEST,Ed 16 Dec 03 - 06:01 PM
akenaton 16 Dec 03 - 06:10 PM
Little Hawk 16 Dec 03 - 06:28 PM
GUEST,free speech portal 16 Dec 03 - 06:50 PM
The Shambles 16 Dec 03 - 07:24 PM
John Routledge 16 Dec 03 - 07:38 PM
GUEST,Russ 16 Dec 03 - 07:48 PM
Mrs.Duck 16 Dec 03 - 07:51 PM
Cllr 16 Dec 03 - 07:52 PM
Leadfingers 16 Dec 03 - 07:56 PM
Cllr 16 Dec 03 - 07:59 PM
GUEST,Russ 16 Dec 03 - 08:01 PM
Raedwulf 16 Dec 03 - 08:23 PM
GUEST 16 Dec 03 - 08:24 PM
The Fooles Troupe 16 Dec 03 - 08:40 PM
Jeri 16 Dec 03 - 08:43 PM
Cluin 16 Dec 03 - 11:44 PM
The Shambles 17 Dec 03 - 02:17 AM
GUEST,Another Guest. 17 Dec 03 - 04:12 AM
Linda Kelly 17 Dec 03 - 04:30 AM
Dave Bryant 17 Dec 03 - 05:07 AM
Catherine Jayne 17 Dec 03 - 05:12 AM
The Shambles 17 Dec 03 - 07:39 AM
artbrooks 17 Dec 03 - 08:09 AM
Dave Bryant 17 Dec 03 - 08:17 AM
harpgirl 17 Dec 03 - 08:20 AM
GUEST 17 Dec 03 - 10:55 AM
pdq 17 Dec 03 - 12:20 PM
The Shambles 17 Dec 03 - 01:26 PM
GUEST,Free speech portal 17 Dec 03 - 01:55 PM
Amos 17 Dec 03 - 02:08 PM
GUEST,Another Unwelcome Guest . 17 Dec 03 - 02:11 PM
John Routledge 17 Dec 03 - 02:15 PM
GUEST,Yet another unwelcome guest 17 Dec 03 - 04:03 PM
Joybell 17 Dec 03 - 04:09 PM
Joybell 17 Dec 03 - 04:15 PM
GUEST,Martin Gibson 17 Dec 03 - 04:34 PM
GUEST 17 Dec 03 - 04:36 PM
Amos 17 Dec 03 - 05:24 PM
Joe Offer 17 Dec 03 - 05:38 PM
GUEST,Free speech portal 17 Dec 03 - 06:07 PM
The Shambles 17 Dec 03 - 06:14 PM
Amos 17 Dec 03 - 06:42 PM
The Fooles Troupe 17 Dec 03 - 06:49 PM
Mickey191 17 Dec 03 - 07:15 PM
The Shambles 17 Dec 03 - 07:50 PM
Joe Offer 17 Dec 03 - 07:57 PM
Blowzabella 17 Dec 03 - 08:37 PM
Bill D 17 Dec 03 - 08:38 PM
Joe Offer 17 Dec 03 - 09:00 PM
curmudgeon 17 Dec 03 - 09:01 PM
Bill D 17 Dec 03 - 09:09 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 17 Dec 03 - 09:38 PM
artbrooks 17 Dec 03 - 09:41 PM
Bee-dubya-ell 17 Dec 03 - 09:42 PM
The Shambles 18 Dec 03 - 02:20 AM
Catherine Jayne 18 Dec 03 - 03:33 AM
Peterr 18 Dec 03 - 07:49 AM
GUEST,Prince 18 Dec 03 - 08:37 AM
GUEST 18 Dec 03 - 09:13 AM
The Shambles 18 Dec 03 - 10:14 AM
Jeri 18 Dec 03 - 11:46 AM
Bill D 18 Dec 03 - 11:48 AM
Bill D 18 Dec 03 - 12:04 PM
The Shambles 18 Dec 03 - 03:35 PM
The Fooles Troupe 18 Dec 03 - 05:39 PM
GUEST,Somebody else 18 Dec 03 - 06:02 PM
artbrooks 18 Dec 03 - 06:22 PM
Peace 18 Dec 03 - 11:21 PM
s&r 19 Dec 03 - 05:06 AM
The Shambles 19 Dec 03 - 06:00 PM
Joe Offer 19 Dec 03 - 07:11 PM
Bill D 19 Dec 03 - 08:05 PM
The Shambles 19 Dec 03 - 08:38 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 19 Dec 03 - 09:21 PM
The Fooles Troupe 19 Dec 03 - 09:26 PM
Joe Offer 19 Dec 03 - 09:29 PM
GUEST,Onlooker 19 Dec 03 - 09:38 PM
Joe Offer 19 Dec 03 - 09:40 PM
Sorcha 19 Dec 03 - 09:42 PM
Amos 19 Dec 03 - 10:06 PM
Joe Offer 19 Dec 03 - 10:06 PM
The Shambles 20 Dec 03 - 03:24 AM
John MacKenzie 20 Dec 03 - 04:39 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 20 Dec 03 - 05:35 AM
GUEST 20 Dec 03 - 08:41 AM
John MacKenzie 20 Dec 03 - 09:22 AM
The Shambles 21 Dec 03 - 02:12 PM
Amos 21 Dec 03 - 02:18 PM
Raedwulf 21 Dec 03 - 03:13 PM
Catherine Jayne 21 Dec 03 - 03:48 PM
The Fooles Troupe 21 Dec 03 - 04:21 PM
Joe Offer 21 Dec 03 - 05:03 PM
Peace 21 Dec 03 - 05:14 PM
The Shambles 22 Dec 03 - 05:36 AM
Dave Bryant 22 Dec 03 - 06:35 AM
The Shambles 22 Dec 03 - 06:40 AM
The Fooles Troupe 22 Dec 03 - 06:42 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 26 Dec 03 - 01:34 AM
Big Mick 26 Dec 03 - 02:38 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 26 Dec 03 - 02:54 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 26 Dec 03 - 03:02 AM
Big Mick 26 Dec 03 - 10:34 AM
John MacKenzie 26 Dec 03 - 10:48 AM
GUEST,Bogeyman 26 Dec 03 - 11:26 AM
John MacKenzie 26 Dec 03 - 12:13 PM
Amos 26 Dec 03 - 01:33 PM
Bill D 26 Dec 03 - 01:41 PM
GUEST,Bogeyman 26 Dec 03 - 01:55 PM
Bill D 26 Dec 03 - 02:33 PM
GUEST,Bogeyman 26 Dec 03 - 02:49 PM
Cluin 26 Dec 03 - 06:49 PM
Dave the Gnome 27 Dec 03 - 04:20 PM
GUEST 27 Dec 03 - 10:44 PM
artbrooks 27 Dec 03 - 11:36 PM
Liz the Squeak 28 Dec 03 - 06:50 AM
Dead Horse 28 Dec 03 - 08:38 AM
John MacKenzie 28 Dec 03 - 09:19 AM
catspaw49 28 Dec 03 - 11:09 AM
McGrath of Harlow 28 Dec 03 - 01:39 PM
Liz the Squeak 28 Dec 03 - 02:32 PM
John MacKenzie 28 Dec 03 - 06:18 PM
artbrooks 28 Dec 03 - 06:24 PM
Liz the Squeak 28 Dec 03 - 06:28 PM
Nigel Parsons 28 Dec 03 - 07:47 PM
akenaton 28 Dec 03 - 08:31 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 28 Dec 03 - 09:40 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 28 Dec 03 - 09:44 PM
GUEST,.gargoyle 29 Dec 03 - 12:42 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 29 Dec 03 - 12:50 AM
GUEST,Martin Gibson 29 Dec 03 - 06:04 PM
Bassic 30 Dec 03 - 08:54 AM
Big Mick 30 Dec 03 - 09:46 AM
Nemesis 30 Dec 03 - 07:16 PM
The Shambles 31 Dec 03 - 02:11 AM
Nigel Parsons 31 Dec 03 - 08:28 AM
Big Mick 31 Dec 03 - 09:51 AM
The Shambles 31 Dec 03 - 09:59 AM
The Fooles Troupe 31 Dec 03 - 10:09 AM
Jeri 31 Dec 03 - 10:12 AM
Big Mick 31 Dec 03 - 10:20 AM
GUEST 31 Dec 03 - 10:20 AM
artbrooks 31 Dec 03 - 10:23 AM
Jeri 31 Dec 03 - 10:35 AM
The Shambles 31 Dec 03 - 10:36 AM
Jeri 31 Dec 03 - 10:40 AM
GUEST 31 Dec 03 - 10:40 AM
Big Mick 31 Dec 03 - 10:41 AM
GUEST 31 Dec 03 - 10:49 AM
Big Mick 31 Dec 03 - 11:32 AM
Amos 31 Dec 03 - 11:39 AM
GUEST 31 Dec 03 - 11:50 AM
Amos 31 Dec 03 - 11:54 AM
manitas_at_work 31 Dec 03 - 11:58 AM
GUEST 31 Dec 03 - 12:08 PM
John MacKenzie 31 Dec 03 - 12:26 PM
GUEST,Folkie the Guest 31 Dec 03 - 12:55 PM
Amos 31 Dec 03 - 01:02 PM
John MacKenzie 31 Dec 03 - 01:22 PM
Amos 31 Dec 03 - 01:24 PM
GUEST 31 Dec 03 - 01:32 PM
Bill D 31 Dec 03 - 02:34 PM
GUEST 31 Dec 03 - 02:46 PM
artbrooks 31 Dec 03 - 02:51 PM
The Fooles Troupe 31 Dec 03 - 04:56 PM
GUEST 31 Dec 03 - 05:35 PM
Dave the Gnome 31 Dec 03 - 05:49 PM
Amos 31 Dec 03 - 05:51 PM
John MacKenzie 31 Dec 03 - 06:22 PM
Jeri 31 Dec 03 - 06:53 PM
The Fooles Troupe 01 Jan 04 - 12:25 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 01 Jan 04 - 12:47 AM
The Shambles 01 Jan 04 - 03:40 AM
Jerry Rasmussen 01 Jan 04 - 10:35 AM
Micca 01 Jan 04 - 10:59 AM
Amos 01 Jan 04 - 11:06 AM
Jerry Rasmussen 01 Jan 04 - 11:36 AM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Jan 04 - 11:52 AM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Jan 04 - 11:54 AM
Nigel Parsons 01 Jan 04 - 12:05 PM
Jeri 01 Jan 04 - 12:52 PM
GUEST,Martin Gibson 01 Jan 04 - 01:08 PM
GUEST,guessed. 01 Jan 04 - 01:12 PM
Micca 01 Jan 04 - 01:14 PM
Jerry Rasmussen 01 Jan 04 - 01:39 PM
GUEST 01 Jan 04 - 02:22 PM
GUEST 01 Jan 04 - 02:59 PM
McGrath of Harlow 01 Jan 04 - 03:38 PM
The Fooles Troupe 01 Jan 04 - 05:40 PM
The Shambles 02 Jan 04 - 09:45 AM
Bill D 02 Jan 04 - 10:50 AM
GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 10:56 AM
GUEST,guest 02 Jan 04 - 10:59 AM
Amos 02 Jan 04 - 11:20 AM
Bill D 02 Jan 04 - 12:59 PM
John MacKenzie 02 Jan 04 - 01:21 PM
GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 01:22 PM
GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 01:27 PM
GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 01:43 PM
Amos 02 Jan 04 - 03:47 PM
akenaton 02 Jan 04 - 04:16 PM
GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 04:20 PM
The Shambles 02 Jan 04 - 07:10 PM
GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 08:19 PM
Bill D 02 Jan 04 - 10:06 PM
Jerry Rasmussen 02 Jan 04 - 10:12 PM
GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 11:26 PM
Amos 03 Jan 04 - 12:33 AM
The Shambles 03 Jan 04 - 02:09 AM
John MacKenzie 03 Jan 04 - 05:44 AM
The Fooles Troupe 03 Jan 04 - 06:41 AM
GUEST,Gene Burton 03 Jan 04 - 07:20 AM
GUEST 03 Jan 04 - 08:30 AM
Big Mick 03 Jan 04 - 09:00 AM
Tinker 03 Jan 04 - 10:20 AM
Jerry Rasmussen 03 Jan 04 - 11:27 AM
Tinker 03 Jan 04 - 12:06 PM
Jerry Rasmussen 03 Jan 04 - 12:32 PM
The Shambles 03 Jan 04 - 02:34 PM
Bill D 03 Jan 04 - 03:25 PM
Tinker 03 Jan 04 - 04:17 PM
akenaton 03 Jan 04 - 04:29 PM
Ebbie 03 Jan 04 - 09:38 PM
The Shambles 04 Jan 04 - 05:22 AM
GUEST,Termagant 04 Jan 04 - 12:12 PM
Bill D 04 Jan 04 - 12:45 PM
GUEST,Termagant 04 Jan 04 - 01:28 PM
The Shambles 04 Jan 04 - 03:02 PM
Jerry Rasmussen 04 Jan 04 - 03:19 PM
Bill D 04 Jan 04 - 04:11 PM
GUEST 04 Jan 04 - 04:20 PM
GUEST,Sian........a real Sian. 04 Jan 04 - 04:37 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 04 Jan 04 - 07:07 PM
Nigel Parsons 04 Jan 04 - 08:34 PM
The Shambles 05 Jan 04 - 01:47 AM
GUEST,Jon Freeman 05 Jan 04 - 04:18 AM
The Fooles Troupe 05 Jan 04 - 04:32 AM
The Shambles 06 Jan 04 - 02:00 AM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 18 Jan 04 - 09:47 PM
Catherine Jayne 19 Jan 04 - 06:16 AM
The Shambles 19 Jan 04 - 09:33 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 19 Jan 04 - 09:45 PM
The Shambles 19 Jan 04 - 09:59 PM
Micca 20 Jan 04 - 11:59 AM
Nigel Parsons 23 Jan 04 - 06:15 AM
Catherine Jayne 23 Jan 04 - 06:22 AM
GUEST 23 Jan 04 - 09:05 AM
Splott Man 25 Jan 04 - 07:31 AM
The Shambles 26 Jan 04 - 04:39 AM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:









Subject: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 04:55 AM

As we all know there have been a number of annonymous Guest postings that have been far from nice. This morning I have recieved a PM from Joe Offer requesting that I refrain from posting annonymously about a 'certain female on the mudcat'. As I replied to Joe it wasn't me who made the posts. I always sign my name if I can not sign onto my cookie. Everyone that knows me knows that I deal with my dirty work personally and straight to their face asking for advice if I need it. If I was inclined I could take the PM personally but Im not like it infact it reassures me that Joe, Pene and Max and the other clones are trying to combat the GUEST postings. Having had first hand experience of nasty guest postings and how they can be traced I would be silly to do it myself I ma a bit shocked that I have been accused but as I say reassured all the same.

I agree that not all GUESTs are the same and some have some very valid points and helpful hints to posts but something does have to be done about the malicious posts to avoid innocent catters being accused. Simply removing the posts doesn't seem to work.

Does anyone else have ideas??

Khatt


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 05:24 AM

In that case I'm surprised that Joe hasn't had a go at me, because one of my postings - a copy of which is still on another thread incidently, was recently deleted - and I don't think that it was rude or defamatory. If the lady concerned has complained, then that's OK - but it would be nice if she could PM me and tell me.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Beverley Barton
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 05:36 AM

I agree with catsphiddle. I had to have a SEX CHANGE to avoid naughty posts!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Thornton Curtis
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 05:44 AM

And a damn good job you have made of it dear!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 05:47 AM

I agree with catsPHiddle in finding it reassuring that there's an effect to hold off the nastiness we sometimes get here. And I congratulate him on being able to react like that to the mistake made in this case.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Oaklet
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:16 AM

CatsPHiddle is a bloke? El Ted had to change sex? You'll be telling me that Colin Thompson is a bloke next. This is a crazy world indeed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:47 AM

Trust me Oaklet....Im NOT a bloke!!!....I wouldn't mind trying it out though......just for one day!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:04 AM

No, catsPHiddle is definitely not a bloke - even if she is taller than most male catters. Micca's a lucky guy - when he dances with her it's not cheek to cheek - but it must be very comfortable - and stimulating !

I hope that Joe does feel that it's neccessary to delete this posting !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Sweetfia
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:15 AM

Personally i think that there shouldn't be a system where GUESTS can post. Everyone should be a member. No GUESTS. And i agree in that bad posts should be deleted. Especially ones from that idiot GUESTThorton Curtis, who deliberatly offended me, my dad and others when he doesn't even know us. So why he did it i really don't know. And he did it for quite sometime but wasn't deleted when he should have been. It just wasn't funny and we still don't know who he is...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:26 AM

Gests are peeple to.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Sandra in Sydney
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:26 AM

I have just been the target of a Guest (Guest 666, good choice of name). He doesn't like me, Bob Bolton or Alison so he gives us all a serve. I think Alison has met him (her greeting to him on the thread was something like "Have you sobered up from your bottle of wine?" ) but I have no idea how/when I offended him. And does he give Bob a serve! Maybe he's the person who attacked Bob several years ago.

I feel like the architypical Briton of several generations back who does not agree with someone's ideas but will defend his right to express them.

I started here as a Guest, as did some of my friends & aquaintances & have read a lot of good stuff from Guests, but agree that some use their anonymity as a shield, or maybe even a battering ram. Some members also use similar shields & battering rams, but at least we know whe they are & can avoid their postings if we wish.

long live Mudcat.

sandra


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:03 AM

Being a Guest is no more of a shield than some of the anonymous handles seen here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Free speech portal.
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:17 AM

Occasionally people (members) fundamentally disagree with the self adulation and arse licking prevalent on this group.

The GUEST facility allows one to speak/write their mind, or, pose conflicting arguments without the fear of being sent to Coventry at their local folk club.

P.S If you already live in Coventry where would you be sent?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Pseudolus
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:33 AM

This guest thing has been an issue for as long as I've been around here, some saying that we should be a "members only" group while others supporting the rights of anonymity. The key to it all is to ignore any and all flame posts, guest or otherwise. I KNOW it's hard and I KNOW that none of us are capable of avoiding the knee jerk reaction to "post back" every time. But the bottom line is, EVERY post that is intended to hurt, flame, put down, etc., is successful if we respond, even if the response is a joke. Flamers want a reaction, ANY reaction, and if they get it, they've succeeded and will try again. Even mentioning specific posts in this thread feeds the flame.

I'm not posting this to get on anybody's case for responding but rather to say that I understand the temptation, I've responded in the past and I may respond in the future but I will always try NOT to.


Frank


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Beverley Barton
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:37 AM

Frank dear, you sound like a saint. Some of us are not so forgiving, nor are we likely to stop looking for a certain individual.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:47 AM

Well, Art Brooks is my name, and I'm in the Albuquerque telephone book. I have no particular secrets. If people prefer to use a 'handle', then I guess that's their own choice.

The inability to come in as a GUEST would preclude fun like some people are having on the Secret Santa threads and others. I fail to understand the mentality that uses that ability to deliberately hurt others, which, to me, includes incitement to riot. Oh well, it takes all kinds to make up the world. ANON.GUEST does provide some occasional and no doubt unintended amusement.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:47 AM

I like many other catters, first posted as a guest. Many of the lyric and music queries are from guests. When they've found out just how useful and how much fun Mudcat is (and how easy it is to join), they usually do sign up. For this reason, I wouldn't like to see an end to guest postings.

Many mudcat members (myself included) do sometimes post as guests, but in my case it's so that I can adopt an alta ego (ie in one thread about the devil, I posted as GUEST: BEEZLEBUB so that I could give the other angle). I also know a mudcatter who at one time had about four mudcat identities. In one of his threads, a very vitiolic argument errupted, which had many other catters calling for calm and moderation, before the thread was finally deleted. I happen to know that this same person was in fact BOTH of the antagonists, and I even made a tongue-in-cheek comment that people who had slept together often ended up having violent arguments - this was received with great criticism as the personas were both male !

I accept that there is a need for some "pruning" on the cat, but I'd hate to see it all milk and water. If anyone thinks that I have overstepped the mark in any of my postings, don't hesitate to PM me - you won't be the first by a long chalk. I would prefer it to be the person offended though, rather than some third party who often doesn't know the possible relationships concerned - I was once PM-ed and lambasted about some (fairly innocent) things that I'd said about another 'catter and had to explain that "Essex Girl" was Linda my partner !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:55 AM

I can 'sort of' see anonymous postings when someone needs to say something about *themself* that they might not want to be public...(medical problems...arrest records..etc)...but to hide behind "Guest" simply to make hateful remarks about others here, I see NO excuse for...NO MATTER WHAT THEIR OPINION!!!!

Some of the stuff posted would be grounds for defamation of character suits if said 'openly'..

I never liked nasty gossip when it was done over back fences...to be done in a world-wide public forum is beyond the pale.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rapparee
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:59 AM

My name and address are available to anyone who asks; in fact, I've even posted them. It's not unknown that I'm a library director and that fact has been posted several times so it's not difficult to find me.

Yes, I've logged out and posted under different name, most recently to the Secret Santa thread. If anyone wants to know what other names I've posted under (as Guest,xxxx) I'll tell them, as I have told others.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Mickey191
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 09:02 AM

All we really have in this life is our name. For that name to be slandered or libeled is serious stuff, I think. I requested the removal of two posts because I found the threads to be very hurtful to the lady.(I do not know her personally) The "Guest" is a malacious hider, who if identified, would not have made the scurrilous remarks.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 09:29 AM

I must have missed all this scurrilosity -- I don't read all the threads. But I am in favor of the ability to be a Guest. It should be known that the IP numbers of those using it are automatically logged. We should not require preregistration.

If anyone wants to know I have never used it, as far as I remember, except as a Secret Santa, or by mistake over on Mudcat Help.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Morticia
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 10:40 AM

I think you are being a bit saintly there, Khatt....I think I might be rather pissed off, to say the least, if I were accused of something I hadn't done. What evidence did Joe have for accusing you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 10:44 AM

Just to clear up matters, I was not at all unhappy to see a recent thread deleted - I myself complained on the thread about a GUEST's posting. What surprised me was that another posting on a Happy Birthday thread was also deleted.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 10:52 AM

I have always had the feeling that guests are unwelcome here. It seems to be that if you have a name, ficticious or otherwise, you can be as rude as you like but a rude guest is treated differently. This is a double standard that I find offensive. Many of the postings by guests are good and fun and certainly not harmful. If we are not wanted here, then just be done with it an block all guests posts, aliases and such..simple.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 10:55 AM

Morty.....I am pissed off but didn't want to rant.....I'll leave that for Mudchat later!

Joe didn't give me any ideas to why I was pin pointed. I know IP's are traceable but I do work in a bloody great 50 floor tower block in London and I know there are people in the said tower that post on the cat and know of the person I have supposedly slagged off. I must say the Joe wasn't nasty about it and just asked me to stop...but hey how can I stop something I didn't do in the first place!!! I am presuming that it will be the work IP that he is tracing as he hasn't sent the PM to Micca and we share a computer at home.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 11:57 AM

Well, will you stop beating Micca, then, duck?? Or not?

:>)

luv.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Mike Harding
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 12:00 PM


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Mike Harding
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 12:02 PM

You see, that is the trouble with GUEST posts, I mean , am I the real thing or not? And Iam not bloody short! I am quite tall actually!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: harpgirl
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 12:09 PM

What, another war between the sexes and I'm not in it??? How do I sign up?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 12:12 PM

Wow... what a whole lot about nothin'...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 12:42 PM

The thing with all witch hunts is that sometimes the wrong people are burnt. Not too much of a problem if it is always someone else who is wrongly accused - some here might say? More of a problem when it is you - maybe it may well be you next time?

Perhaps chasing and burning witches is not the right way to deal with the problem?

For the original crime may be unpleasant for the victim but it is not being burnt at the stake and is not terminal to the victim is it?

Given the problems presented by the so-called cure - perhaps the very best thing to do is just to ignore being called names and move on, rather than expecting The Witchfinder General (no matter how well-intentioned) to get it right?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:00 PM

I've had my fair share of not nice 'guest postings' at various times but would hate to be without the ability to post as a guest for many of the above reasons e.g. Secret Santa fun, posting at work, not to mention new people who may prefer to try out the site before they join up. I think Joe Offer does a reasonable job at keeping the nasties out of the forum but every so often there will be some that slip through. Best just to ignore their comments.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:05 PM

I also asked for two scurrilous GUEST postings on the Happy Bithday Noreen thread to be removed. It's a difficult one to police, and I don't have a solution, but in view of an earlier GUEST contribution to this thread I am seriously considering changing my Mudcat handle to my full given name. I for one am willing to stand by my posts, and only post as GUEST in fun threads. Not only that, but I live so far north you'd have to be seriously pi**ed off at me to travel this far up Scotland, just to beat me up.;-)
John "Giok" MacKenzie


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:14 PM

as we can see, it only takes a few really offensive "guest" postings to make the entire concept of anonymity precarious. Of course it should be possible to post with an alias, for reasons noted...but almost ALL abuse and extreme political ramblings in done without even an attempt at a temporary ALIAS.

(I have been tempted to do an entire thread, arguing with myself, to demonstrate how frustrating it is to not be able to tell one blathering 'guest' from another...but I'm sure it would backfire totally...those who agree with me are not guilty, and those who exult in their anonymity would just ignore me and keep on)

ah, well......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Peace
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:30 PM

The problem: Some GUESTS' posts are offensive. Can their IP address be blocked, permanently?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:31 PM

Well I have had an apology from Pene Azul of which I am truely grateful for. Hope the situation sorts itself out sooner rather than later.

I agree that there is a case for having the ability to post as a Guest. I have had so much fun with the Secret Santa thread and I only post as Secret Sanat Secretary...which is common knowledge seem as I have organised it for the past two years!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:32 PM

Actually, I didn't make any accusations. I just asked Cat if she was one of the people making anonymous posts, and if she was, could she please stop. Could all of you Brits please stop this nastiness, and be nice to each other? Mudcat is supposed to be a folk music forum, not UK Folkie Gossip Central. I've seen this backstabbing here at Mudcat from all sorts of UK people, and I saw it in person when I was in the UK last year. I met a lot of UK Mudcatters when I was in England last year, and this year at the Getaway, and I like almost every British Mudcatter I've met. You're wonderful people - why don't you like each other?

Don't you people have anything better to do with your time?

We don't go on witch hunts. We have no axe to grind. We don't allow personal attacks, so we delete them when we see them or when we get complaints about them. We would much rather spend our time on something other than settling personal squabbles and dealing with petty gossip. So, would all you children please grow up?

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:46 PM

"Some GUESTS' posts are offensive."

You don't wanna be offended, don't go out in public...

Mudcat is a public space... It may be privately owned, but it's still a public space...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: wysiwyg
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:48 PM

I guess I didn't see most of the stuff referred to in this thread. As far as Joe's comments, personally, I can never tell if the posts that I figure are between UK members are jokes or attacks. Sometimes I can't even tell what the heck they are taking about at all-- real people in the news, actors or characters in TV shows, real people they know who are or are not Mudcatters, characters they are themselves or are making up....

And usually I just chalk it up to not being there myself-- and wonder if the UKers are as mystified about USers posts, or others. Culture is culture, and I don't pretend to understand everyone's, or my own for that matter.

Now, I am NOT proposing that we have additional prefixes within the Department of BS. But with only the one, it makes it hard to sort out what people are on about. But that's OK with me. A little mystery is not such a bad thing. :~)

~Susan


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:56 PM

Get it said, Mister Offer!! Amen.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Peace
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:56 PM

Clinton: Yes, you're right, it is 'public' space (in a manner of speaking), but even in public space, one doesn't have the right to shit on others. There are occasionally consequences. Maybe an answer is blocking the IP.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 01:57 PM

We need a mandatory UK prefix on them. -guest


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Morticia
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 02:03 PM

I imagine that, if you have noticed a predominance of personal remarks from UK catters rather than anyone else, it is probably because they know one another in 3d so very much more than in the US, therefore the opportunities to both make, and indeed lose, friends is much greater.

I agree it's a pity that they can't keep their differences off the Mudcat, or settle them out in the open with their names attached to their grievances and I suppose the ability not to do so by posting anonymously always will appeal to some.

I still think it's a pity that Khatt was singled out when she has done nothing wrong and indeed puts a lot of time and effort into supporting the Mudcat.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 02:05 PM

Maybe we can get the Cat set up so that whenever a message comes in from an ISP in the UK, the computer plays "Rude Brittania"....just kidding!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 02:08 PM

Morty:

I concur -- Khatmiss has my apologies as a member of a group that misjudged her. But if as Joe says he was asking her whether it was the case or not, perhaps it was a case of NOI, and not an accusation.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 02:15 PM

tHIS IS ALL VERY SILLY, AT EVERY LEVEL..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 02:19 PM

Who said that???

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 02:20 PM

I've been trying to figure out why there's this constant bickering and pettiness among UK Mudcatters who are otherwise very nice people. I've seen similar conduct in only two other places - in orchestras, and in church choirs.
Could there be a connection?
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 03:12 PM

The British Isles is made up of four nations.

1 The Scots, who keep the sabbath, and everything else they can lay their hands on.
2 The Welsh, who pray on their knees, and on their neighbours.
3 The Irish, who don't always know what they believe in, but are willing to die for it.
4 The English, who by professing to be a nation of self made men, take a great responsibility off the Lord's shoulders.

All that in such a small island,maybe this will go some way to answer your question Joe.

Giok


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 03:28 PM

Ah, Giok, you speak the truth. But individually, they're all very nice people. Just like the people in the church choir.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Raedwulf
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 05:31 PM

ROFLMAO at Giok's wonderful (& disturbingly accurate...) post!

Joe - I'm sure I've noticed some of you N.Americans having a right bitch at each other (usually over politics). Admittedly, if I can identify you as being NA, it means you weren't hiding behind the anonymity of Guestdom, but you do make it sound like it's only (& always!) us Brit's that squabble!

I am not against non-members being able to post on this board. Quite the reverse - I can see where it's both useful & desirable (e.g. in being able to post queries about songs/music, etc). What gets right up my nose is people who cower behind "Guest" to post controversial, or highly opinion-based (often both), views (usually in the BS section), particularly when internal evidence from their posts suggests that they are almost certainly Mudcat members without the spirit to admit to their views.

I admit that Raedwulf is not the name on my birth certificate. Someone can come in as a Guest & impersonate me (I do post occasionally without logging in), but no-one else (I hope!) can post simply as "Raedwulf". I am identifiable by that, if by nothing else. You can argue with me on the basis of having one obviously identifiable characteristic.

The problem I have is that I can never be sure if "Guest 5:00 AM" is the same someone that posted 5 minutes, 5 hours, or 5 days ago! In most cases, I can never be sure that one "Guest" & another "Guest " are the same person, which makes life very awkward in replying to them.

If it is technically simple to implement, there is a simple solution - make all guests adopt some handle. Many of you, I'm sure, remember "Guest, A Dreaded Guest"? He started as plain Guest, even if he was pretty obvious. Several of us (me included) badgered him to adopt some handle, & he even managed to demonstrate a sense of humour when he did! I doubt anyone thought any more of his opinions because of it, but I think most people appreciated the fact that he had made himself immediately identifiable.

If a stranger comes up to me & tries to start an argument, I can identify them by their face. If they were to phone me ditto, I could identify them by their voice. But on Mudcat, my only chance is a very tenuous "that looks like that Guest's style..." If this is not outright cowardice, it's certainly crass bad manners towards every named poster on the board. It isn't that Guests are unwelcome, but some of us would like to see you making some effort toward allowing us to recognise you, even if on a relatively anonymous basis!

Can we not make Guests offer some label beyond easy anonymity, Joe? I can understand why you want freedom to post on Mudcat, but freedom can also be abused, particularly on the Net, & it often seems to be here, sadly.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 05:56 PM

Some people would like to legislate a "perfect world"...meaning: a world in which everything is always exactly the way they want it and nothing bad or disturbing ever happens.

They will never succeed in that endeavour. Thank God. If they did, it would be hell.

If you want it all your way all the time, though, you can always become a librarian or a dictator, I suppose, if you meet the qualifications and there is a position open somewhere. (Come to think of it, Iraq needs a new dictator right about now, don't they?)

- LH


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:01 PM

but freedom can also be abused, particularly on the Net, & it often seems to be here, sadly.

Raedwulf,

Why not take a look at Amnesty International for real abuse, instead of moaning about an internet messageboard? You might save a life...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:10 PM

Raedwulf....Your attack on my opinions in another thread ....Without puting forward your own,was extremely "bad mannered"....Ake


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:28 PM

Freedom is frequently abused almost everywhere by immature people, and they pay a heavy price for so doing (but not necessarily right away). That's life. We all deal with it as effectively and creatively as we can. If our freedom were never threatened in any way, we would never develop the muscles and the maturity to defend it, and we would never even know we had it.

To surrender freedom in the name of "security and order" can lead to something far worse than the random immaturity of a few people here and there.

- LH


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,free speech portal
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:50 PM

Right on Clinty babe.

Do you support the use of eugenics too Brucie?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:24 PM

I've been trying to figure out why there's this constant bickering and pettiness among UK Mudcatters who are otherwise very nice people. I've seen similar conduct in only two other places - in orchestras, and in church choirs.
Could there be a connection?


From your saintly position of never having 'bickered' or been 'petty' with anyone - Joe you may have missed the obvious connection that Joe Offer was present and sitting in judgement, at all of the examples given above.

Am I really alone in finding these generalised and insulting comments about UK contributors more offensive than anything I have seen from any of our guests?

Comments that only tell us where Joe Offer is coming from. Are the witches only to be found and hunted in the UK? I rather think not but the UK witches do rather mess-up the ideal vision that Joe is trying single-handed to impose upon the forum. UK folkies (I suspect like folkies every where) are very nice people who have just always bickered and been petty.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John Routledge
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:38 PM

I don't think that we UK'ers bicker much more than others but boy when we do!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:48 PM

Gosh, is it time for another GUEST bashing already? Time sure flies.

Russ (still GUEST after all these years)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:51 PM

Don't be shy Russ join us we don't bite (well only sometimes)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Cllr
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:52 PM

I love maggie thatcher *snigger* Cllr


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Leadfingers
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:56 PM

The simple solution is for Catters to NOT respond to the inflammatory posts from anonymous guests. I started in here as a Guest and adding the Leadfingers as an ident,as it has been part of my gigging name for longer than I care to remember,then decided it was worth joining.
I would not deliberately slag off any other catter, and definately not anonymously.It just would not occur to me.If a thing is worth posting, my name goes with it.Then if you disagree you know who you are disagreeing with. And if you're not sure , check my profile. If you have nothing to hide,whats the problem? If you post anonymously, I for one will almost certainly ignore you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Cllr
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:59 PM

Terry (leadfingers) is rriight as usual, Cllr


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:01 PM

Thanks for the gracious invite Mrs. Duck, but I remain a GUEST on principle.

Russ (the unrepentant GUEST)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Raedwulf
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:23 PM

Why not take a look at Amnesty International for real abuse, instead of moaning about an internet messageboard? You might save a life...

Thank you for offering me a handle by which I might identify you, Ed. Without having checked your link, I will unreservedly concede that you are probably right. However, I am not a humanist (by choice, I support animal charities, not human ones of any description). To each their own. I respect your p-o-v, but reserve the right to speak on topics that move me.

I cannot empathize with the gross & anonymous mass of humankind represented by the internet. I can identify with the more specific mass represented by Mudcat. Perhaps I may save a life by more indirect means? Is this more or less valuable than subscribing to AI directly? Your call, I have no evidence on which to bae an opinion...

Regards

Raedwulf


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:24 PM

As often as this subject comes up, it must mean the topic is a very popular and satisfying one! No one is ever going to change the opinion of another, and no one should try. It's such a waste of time. Those who post anonymously will continue to, regardless what argument is levelled against them, and those who don't post anonymously will continue to hold their own opinions of anonymous posts, good or bad, regardless what argument is made to change their opinion. The words that made Rodney King famous come to mind .......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:40 PM

I usually add my name at the bottom of the post - unless I am just chi-aking around - like my hangle - er handle.... (Typos!)

My personal beef is poor spelling, but then who cares about that?!!! And anyway my micro motor control hassles annoy me when I DO know teh corect speeling and stuff it up anyway!

In a BS thread, like the preface suggests, I mostly ignore posts from anonymous posters labelled GUEST, unless I want to have some fun...

Posters who are not "members" but adopt a regular "handle" - I do envision them as real "virtual individuals" - do gradually acquire some legitemacy in BS discussions.

Posters in "music threads" who remain totally "Anony-Pompous" are a pain - you can't PM to ask them to please expand on what they said in order to find out if they really do know what they are talking about, or if they are just spouting ignorant crap! So perhaps you shouldn't post in a "music thread" without a handle! - some interesting technical issues there.... (now that doesn't mean that no facetious or misleading humour statements!!)

But that would only just give Max, Joe, Jeff, et all, a new different "set of rules" to work under... :-)

And from my experience in the real world, there are enough real hassles ... "sticks and stones can break my bones: but words can never hurt me!" ------ although words CAN hurt...

Perhaps it is the British roots in Australia culture that mean that we can see the difference from Americans. It's not unusual for Aussies to appear to be abusing each other but be close friends...

The Aussie folkore about the word "bastard" is elucidating here - it's probably already in a thread here somewhere, I'd be surprised if it hasn't been raised here before.

The problem is that throwing aound all these "friendly insults" can get out of control and backfire... turning "friends" into "enemies"... who carry on the same abuse - one can only tell the difference by the intensity...

Personally I have always wondered about the alleged sincerity of alleged "friends" who want to express their alleged "fondness" for me by "abusing" me and putting me down instead of expressing some genuine respect...


Robin
(still fitering the crap - "after all these years"!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jeri
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:43 PM

The last GUEST posting pretty much sums up my opinion very well and with a lot fewer words than I'd probably use.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Cluin
Date: 16 Dec 03 - 11:44 PM

Bitch, bitch, bitch...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 02:17 AM

I see that an apology was given by Jeff but I do not see one from Joe. Just the usually justification.

Actually, I didn't make any accusations. I just asked Cat if she was one of the people making anonymous posts, and if she was, could she please stop.

Now if Saddam were asked if he was responsible for using chemical weapons on his own people and if he had, would he stop doing it - we may well consider that to be an accusation. Unless Joe is still maintaining that it was the individual he accused - it was a wrong accusation. Perhaps he could be gracious enough to offer an apology rather than to find fault with all UK mudcatters?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Another Guest.
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:12 AM

The above goes some way to explaining why not everyone leaves a profile. A little information in the wrong hands is a dangerous thing. I personally would not appreciate being emailed and accused of something I did NOT do. And Joe's ungracious comments has done nothing to change my opinion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Linda Kelly
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:30 AM

As one who has always believed there is a greater reality outside of Mudcat than within, it seems fair to say that most UK Mudcatters have first hand knowledge of each other, have indeed introduced other catters here over the years and have an agenda based in the British folk scene rather than on screen. We have geographical rivalries, romantic rivalries and musical rivalries, all of which are based on real situations. We are probably unique in the Mudcat world that our friendships or otherwise, do not come about from our dealings in cyberspace, but from knowing and sometimes hating each other. Were the States a smaller place, then undoubtedly this would also be true over there. I changed my name from ickle dorrit because in reality many catters in the uk knew me by my real name and it always felt wrong as would using GUEST. I don't find Joe's remarks offensive just somewhat niave.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 05:07 AM

I think that this thread has said all there is to say on the subject and vote that it should now be deleted.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 05:12 AM

I think it should be deleted too. The matter has been delt with and I would hope that I still have the friendship with Joe and Pene that we had already established.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 07:39 AM

I can't speak for the other 30 or so contributors to this thread so far or the ones that may yet wish to make a contribution but I can see no reason at all why this thread should be deleted.

If certain individuals wish their own contributions to be removed they can certainly vote for this if they want to but I was unaware that we had a vote to remove the postings of others or indeed a vote at all.

The key is for us all to be tolerant and just to finally accept that is not necessary for Joe or anyone else to struggle "figure out" why people from the UK or anywhere else post what they do. It is just necessary for Joe and us to accept that we all post the way we do and try to enjoy our cutural differences and our occasional differences of opinion.

All the means that have been used to exert editorial control and make value judgements by Joe Offer about what Joe Offer will "allow" to be posted on the forum will fail and the attempt to do it is pretty obviously counter-productive and presents far more threat to our freedom of expression than any of our guests have ever done.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:09 AM

This thread is silly. Silly is good. Carry on!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:17 AM

I have swapped PMs with both Joe and Bill D about this issue, I was happy about the thread deletion from the start and I am quite satisfied that the deletion of my "Birthday Greeting" posting was due to a mis-understanding.

Khat has had a PM from Pene (who's the more technical guy when it comes to ISPs and IP addresses) apologising for the acusation which started this thread and PMed me to say that she was impressed - as well as stating that she's content in the posting after my previous one.

I saw (and objected to) the original posting on the deleted thread and realise that this probably started a protective chain reaction.

I would rather have one of my postings deleted than cause distress to another 'catter - well there are the odd exceptions: Mr Wellington-Jones of Twillingsgate - and then of course Breezy, McFat and Raggy are so bloomin' thick-skinned . . . . . .    :-)

. . . . Let's get back to Folk Music.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: harpgirl
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:20 AM

I personally, enjoy a good dust-up about GUEST postings. It's been ever so long since we've had one.

In organizations, structural changes usually solve personnel problems, as I have said to Max before. Of course, I would disagree with further censorship, however!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 10:55 AM

Another guest - who cares? But as Mr. Brooks stated - it is fun


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: pdq
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 12:20 PM

I seems like a natural progression to go from GUEST to regular GUEST to member, but people who drop their ID to post ad hominem attacks are another story.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 01:26 PM

Perhaps someone can explain to me why the preocupation now seems to have changed to one of deletions and lists of what is not allowed on the forum rather than contributions and what is to be encouraged or at least accepted?

It has been a subtle change over a period of years but I don't see it as being a change for the good or as one that cannot be reversed.

It is mostly up to us but it will not get any better if we keep asking for threads and other people's posts to be deleted - as it is pretty obvious that Joe Offer does not have anything better to do than to eagerly respond to them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Free speech portal
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 01:55 PM

Guests need to be loved too you know!

Paranoia amongst the fully paid up members of this excellent and indispensible group would become extinct if not for us!

As i see it there are very few GUESTS prepared to lower themselves to directly slagging other MUSICIANS off.

Only personal insults or slanderous remarks should be deleted.

                  Cheer up and read this.

On a golf tour in Ireland, Tiger Woods drives his BMW into a petrol
station in a remote part of the Irish countryside. The pump attendant,
obviously knows nothing about golf, greets him in a typical Irish manner
completely unaware of who the golfing pro is.

"Top of the mornin' to yer, sir" says the attendant. Tiger nods a quick
hello and bends forward to pick up the nozzle. As he does so, two tees
fall out of his shirt pocket onto the ground. "What are those?, asks
the attendant.

"They're called tees" replies Tiger.

"Well, what on the good earth are they for?" inquires the Irishman.

"They're for resting my balls on when I'm driving", says Tiger.

"Feckin Jaysus", says the Irishman, "BMW thinks of everything!"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 02:08 PM

The issue has never been Guesthood, or even anonymity. It has been craven covert hostility which uses anonymity as cheap cover. That is a very different thing. It is one thing to post a controversial but genuine communication. It is quite another to post generalized bad news, exagerrated condemnations, attacks on persons, and so on, and use anonymity to do so without responsible for the effects one is creating. Slaggers who foul up a decent forum with indecent communication do not particularly deserve protection, IMHO.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Another Unwelcome Guest .
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 02:11 PM

If "guests" are not welcome, then do not allow the facility to be one.

I will retain my right to guestdom, until the thought police find a reason to delete guests.

And for the record I did not know there was a facility for members to provide profiles. But then again I am not interested enough to read them . I use this as a public forum, and my extent of involvement ends there. I may respond to a thread that interests me, and enjoy reading the other responses. But do not wonder about your jobs, location, family etc, anymore than I feel the need to detail mine.

Obviously I don't have the time to dedicate to this as has been deemed proper, just like to occasionally pop in and out.

Please ignore me....I am not worthy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John Routledge
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 02:15 PM

Can I repeat Amos's last post in capital letters.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Yet another unwelcome guest
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:03 PM

The ability to post without any sort of handle just makes threads confusing at times.

On the other hand it is the registered catters with silly nicknames who are the most abusive in my experience. Always ready to flame a Guest for being "anonymous".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joybell
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:09 PM

Amen Amos. Joy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joybell
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:15 PM

On a silly note. Has anyone else noticed that the adds on this thread in trying to be relevant are for information about brain tumours and Eco FRIENDLY advice. I know they change so I'll keep looking - compulsive reader that I am. Joy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:34 PM

I am a guest who always uses the same name. I have been an active folk, country, and bluegrass musician for 40 years. That's why I read and post here when I have a comment or an opinion.

Regarding profiles, who I really am is really no one's business.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:36 PM

To say "the issue" is or isn't or was or never was x, y, or z, ignores the giant hodge-podge of hundreds of viewpoints expressed here over time. To say that the issue has never been "Guesthood, or even anonymity," means you can only be speaking for yourself. There are many, many paranoiacs for whom the issue is and always has been mere anonymity. -guest

That said, I'd say yes, it's been a long while since this fun topic has surfaced.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 05:24 PM

Well, Nameless one, I was obviously expressing my own point of view. I don't know any storm of ire that has been aimed at anonymity per se. It seems to me it has always been touched off by the abuse of anonymity -- using it for anti-social purposes, sniping, undercutting, ad hominem blathering and running down the participants in childish or evil ways.

I think if you look at every case where this damn issue came up it was prompted by this sort of abuse first -- and conversely if it had not been for the abuse, the issue would not have been meaningful enough to anyone to carry on about, it seems to me.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 05:38 PM

I hear all sorts of comments about Guest posts, but Max and Jeff and I still think we need to accommodate posts from people who don't want to register. We think it's the only way to keep this a growing, vibrant community instead of an inbred group of people drowning in their own smalltalk and inside jokes and bickering.

However, that being said, if a nasty note is posted anonymously, there's something more frightening and ominous about it. Even if it isn't intended, an anonymous message of disagreement tends to take on a leering, threatening tone. There are very few messages from registered Mudcatters that are frightening, but such is often the case with our anonymous posts.

If a person posts anonymous information about music, or makes a positive comment, almost everybody can accept that easily. Anonymity is disagreeable only when the text of the message is disagreeable - and then that anonymity tends to amplify that frightening nature of a message.

Shambles can say whatever he likes about me, and it's very unlikely that his messages will be deleted - despite all his complaints about deletions, the only Shambles messages that get deleted are the duplicate ones he posts in two or three locations. I may not like what he has to say and I may be convinced that he's an idiot and a troll - but at least he has the courage to use his own identity when he speaks, and I respect that.

-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Free speech portal
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 06:07 PM

And we Brits were under the impression Americans had no sense of irony!

Well spoken Mr Offer.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 06:14 PM

The issue has never been Guesthood, or even anonymity. It has been craven covert hostility which uses anonymity as cheap cover. That is a very different thing. It is one thing to post a controversial but genuine communication. It is quite another to post generalized bad news, exagerrated condemnations, attacks on persons, and so on, and use anonymity to do so without responsible for the effects one is creating. Slaggers who foul up a decent forum with indecent communication do not particularly deserve protection, IMHO.

Yes we would most probably all agree with the above but the first post asked if we had any ideas on how to combat the problem you well describe. The only answer proposed by our guardians - that of clumsy and ill-directed censorship - risks throwing the baby out with the bath-water and of making things worse.

Not even considering any alternatives and just carrying on with this approach enables control freaks - who may be considered as well-intentioned - to plough on in shaping our forum to their own personal tastes and value judgements. All under the cover of protecting us from guests, trolls, flamers and just about any other form of bogey-man you can think of. It is a tactic that has always been used whenever someone wishes to seize and exert power or to deny us our freedom of expression. I am surprised that many here tolerate this but I am absolutely staggered that many appear to actively support it or appear frightened to even politely question it.

For Joe's ever increasing list of undesirables now seems to include anyone posting from the UK as well as all of his other little pet hates. Those he will not allow and will delete mainly because it offends his personal concept of order or because of those he can't 'figure out'....... What will be next on the list?

Yes hostilty is a problem but this hostility is not confined to anonymous guest postings. The hostility that concerns me is hostility expressed (if disguised) towards posters on the forum from those who feel they are in a position to pass final judgement and who do not hesitate to take frequent action based on that judgement.

Is this really what the Mudcat Forum is all about? Surely it should be about all of its contributors - not the just the opinions of its self-appointed Witchfinder General?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 06:42 PM

Well, Sham, I am sorry to say I find your arguments unfounded and a bit whingy. Joe never said being from the uK was undesireable, and you know it. He just wondered why the current lot of spitting and hissing was coming from there. So you're altering what he said, for rhetorical purposes.

As to what the Mudcat Forum is "all" about...it is about the interchange of ideas and viewpoints. Firstly musical ones, and secondly, others.   Not all of its contributors are interested in that -- some are interested in undermining each other. Some don't know the difference between carping and communicating. Some don't know the difference between understanding and drooling gleeful madness. But we (I mean Mudcatters in general to the degree I have observed them) try to be as tolerant as we can.

And I think by and large we do pretty well at it. That's my opinion.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 06:49 PM

It was pointed out to me when I was very young and impressionable, that my running around and ranting about the evil motives of others largely involved projecting onto others my own suppressed fears of what I might want to do. The brainwashing was mostly successful.

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Mickey191
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 07:15 PM

I'm wondering how many people read the two posts (on two different days) which were directed at one person. These were clearly defamatory. One post had been up about 6 hours - without a challenge, till myself and another asked that it be deleted. I'm just wondering how many people read it and made certain assumptions as to its' veracity. It was scurrilous
and hurtful - had it not been deleted I'm sure the coward "Guest" would have posted more. Feeling emboldened because he'd gotten away with it.

We're not talking about a guest saying Joe Blow is a lousy singer or a terrible fiddle player. We are talking about someone's core--their heart-- being raked over the coals. By a coward of the first order.
A shadow person, afraid of the light.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 07:50 PM

Well, Sham, I am sorry to say I find your arguments unfounded and a bit whingy. Joe never said being from the uK was undesireable, and you know it. He just wondered why the current lot of spitting and hissing was coming from there. So you're altering what he said, for rhetorical purposes.

Amos I am sure you realise that Joe and I have had a number of exchanges over the years and my view of Joe is not formed only on his comments in this thread. You may not have been party to all of these exchanges but I am sure you have the ability to read between the lines and perhaps you could address some of my points? For this is not personal - it is a serious point about the forum and about power. Joe's seemingly limitless power to do and say exactly as he wishes on our forum - and our lack of power.

Joe knows full well that my beef is not the deletions of my postings. He is now sure that the only posts of mine that he has deleted were the ones he refers to - the last time he contacted me he was not so sure. However, the point is that I am bloody sure that I have not deleted any of Joe's or anyone else's postings and I do not have to try and justify the grounds on which these were made. The point is that we are not communicating as equals.

On the forum, my views and yours Amos - are just that. Joe's views have slowly over the years become - the word of Mudcat law. Not just on abusive guests but on all his personal prejudices about what he will allow the forum to be. That is not the spirit of forum that I was attracted to many years ago and I do not believe it is the spirit that Max intended. I just question if it really has to be this way?

Many years ago Joe had his same wishes for the forum but confined these to suggestions, encouragement and by setting an example for others to follow. My wish is simply that he offers to hand back his edit button and returns to this model. For the example that he is now setting and others are sadly following is one of passing judgement and of minding everyone else's business and one of deleting rather than contributing.

Amos you still have not come up with any ideas or alternatives on how the forum can deal with its abusive guests without resorting to the clumsy measures which started this thread. For is it not possible that Joe's authoritarian posturing actually causes many normally peaceable posters to intentionally find ways of tripping him up?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 07:57 PM

    craven covert hostility which uses anonymity as cheap cover
Ooh! Nice wording, Amos! Wish I could have said it so well.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Blowzabella
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:37 PM

Shambles uses the phrase 'our forum' a lot and I suspect that he deliberately chooses those words. However, and I am not a particularly regular poster, I was under the impression that this wasn't a co-operatively owned forum, but a sort of gift - not a complete gift, but something one had to look after, show that one knew how to look after or the owner would step in and take over - seems reasonable to me...(waffling now, but I know what I mean...)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:38 PM

"..The point is that we are not communicating as equals."

if your point is that one who HAS an edit button has more 'power' than one who doesn't....of course! When the forum grew past what Max could deal with personally, he decided to trust several others with varying degrees of responsibility. On the whole, I think he made fine choices!

You, Shambles, have practically made a hobby of regular complaining and nit-picking, with Joe as your major target; and you seem bewildered that so many seem to continue believing that Joe does a pretty good and basically honest job!

this comment..
"..all his personal prejudices about what he will allow the forum to be." is just plain BS! Look at what utter nonsense and general crap ARE allowed everyday! If you want a forum where anything is allowed without oversight, YOU can start one ...and have the devil's own time running it.

and this-- "I do not believe it is the spirit that Max intended" ...ask Max! You don't think he communicates with Joe and the clones about how things are done? I have been in a room with Max, Joe, Pene Azul, and two other clones (on more that one occasion) and have spoken to them all, and I KNOW that they all do an astounding job of shepherding this amazing forum with minimal expression of their own personalities.

I, for one, am amazed that Joe 'usually' keeps his personal feelings so well controlled. I am not sure that *I* could approach all these issues with so much equanimity!..and I'll BET that you couldn't! It is not an easy job, and it is a VOLUNTEER job, with many more hassles than benefits.

Since I am not required to try to keep MY personal opinions neutral, I will note that I am pretty weary of this interpretation you seem to espouse that says, essentially ..if a decision is made counter to what YOU think should be done, it indicates power-mad despotism and rampant censorship! I truly cannot comprehend how someone can find cronyism and favoritism and elitism and personal vendettas in the relatively low-key and mild way in which this forum is overseen.

Yeah, I should spend an hour or two editing and polishing my little speech for errors and detailed referents...but since it will either be ignored or passed off as the babblings of one of Joe's bootlickers....here it is.

(Joe...you GOTTA start using a better brand of boot polish!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 09:00 PM

Hey, Bill, I haven't polished my boots since I left the Army in 1973. I live out in farming country, so I'll let you imagine what might be on those boots.
Keep licking....
-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: curmudgeon
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 09:01 PM

Huzzah !!! for Bill D -- Tom


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 09:09 PM

aww, shucks....
(maybe I'll quit boot licking and just kiss Joe's ***...no..that won't do, he has limits!..maybe just fawn attentively when he sings a camp song!)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 09:38 PM

I was going to stay out of this one, but..
Quote [The Shambles} "It is pretty obvious that Joe Offer does not have anything better to do than eagerly respond to them"
That;s bullshit!
I have personally requested that Joe delete certain offensive postings against members here, and make no apology for that!
I won't ssay who, or waht the postings was about, as that would defete the object of Joe deleting them, but lets say [for example ] that some idiot posted that The shambles is a thief, or a rapist etc, or some other made up shit, would you object if Joe deleted it?

The rule here, and as far as I know, it is the only rule, is that you can say anything you like, about anything you like, but you should not personally attack or insult another member, I can't see ny problem with that rule.

Joe has stated here, and it says somewere in the FAQ, if you see anything offensive here, PM JOe Offer, and he will try to sort it out. I have met Joe a few times, I have no need to stick up for him, he can do that himself!
But, The Shambles-I think you are been unfair to Joe
I have spoken to him , both in person, and via internet mesages, and I reckon, if i got the same amount of hassle and moans, that are directed at him, I would just give up, and think how much of a mess this place would be without him!

we should all bear in mind, that this is a free site, and all the work Joe does here is voluntry.

As far s the original mesage of this thread goes, I can quite understand Catsphiddle been annoyed,
I was acused a while ago of posting as somebody else [I honestly can't remember who, but i think it was dorrie]
I said it was not me, [I have never posted as anything over than John from Hull], the reply was "sorry, your ISP numbers are similar"
i said, "no worries, we're in the same city, using the same ISP, confusion understood, end of story"

Lets all get back to normal, if we keep arguing, Max might say bollox to the lot of you, and switch it off!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 09:41 PM

Well said, JOhn.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 17 Dec 03 - 09:42 PM

No GUEST posts? It would mean the end of Twillingsgate as we know it!

We are blessed with many excellent writers on this forum and some of the most creative writing has been done anonymously by members who have created alter egos for themselves. I would hate to see the "GUEST problem" reach a point where Penelope Rutledge, freds or The Galactic Overlord can no longer share their wisdom with those of us deranged enough to listen to it.

Bruce

(Who has posted anonymously numerous times for creative reasons, but never for any other. If I wanna be nasty I sign my name to it. And my real name and email address are on my profile page.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 02:20 AM

Shambles uses the phrase 'our forum' a lot and I suspect that he deliberately chooses those words. However, and I am not a particularly regular poster, I was under the impression that this wasn't a co-operatively owned forum, but a sort of gift - not a complete gift, but something one had to look after, show that one knew how to look after or the owner would step in and take over - seems reasonable to me...(waffling now, but I know what I mean...)

The forum is (or was) a very fine gift. Max expressed the attitude of creating a garden for us to go play in. To me he always seemed honestly baffled that we couldn't just go and do that. He expected contributors to the forum to sort out the problems for themselves but was always being requested to step in and stop this or that terrible thing from happening or to prevent this or that poster from posting.

All of the things that have been undertaken to protect us have and are being done by fine people and for the very best of reasons. I am simply asking folk to take an objective view of where the forum is now and question if it really has to be this way?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 03:33 AM

I wish I had never started this thread and just handled it through PM. Joe is a good guy and does a Grand job here on the 'cat. Without him and Max and Pene and the other clones there wouldn't be a Mudcat. Shambles I am very disppointed in you, you are only one step better than the guests we complain about. You are attacking Joe which I feel is out of order even though you post as yourself.

Joe has been to stay at my house on his trip to the UK and I know the PM he sent me was not personal. I have dropped the subject so please why don't you and just get over it.

Lets get back to Music!

Khatt


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Peterr
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 07:49 AM

Children children......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Prince
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 08:37 AM

I like guest posts coz i can't spell my squiggle and i can use my old name.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 09:13 AM

Ah well, some people get it and some people don't. So what else is new.

"I find it's hard
It's hard to find
Oh well, whatever,
Nevermind."         -Kurt Cobain

(Jeri - nice to know the thoughts that rattle around in my head sometimes ring true in someone else's brain as well- Thanks!!)

Now back to our program - which is already in progress....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 10:14 AM

When the forum grew past what Max could deal with personally, he decided to trust several others with varying degrees of responsibility.

We have conflicting positions given about who is appointed to do what and when but more importantly about what the actual level of abusive posting and censorship really is. On the one hand we are told that the level is such that Max alone cannot deal with it. On the other hand we have Joe claiming that this action and censorship is minimal. Both of these cannot be so. It is either a large problem or it is a small problem. If it is not you who has their posts deleted or are wrongly accused – you may always consider it to be a small problem. If you are the unfortunate one – it can be a rather a larger problem.

We have the common if misguided belief expressed by John that. The rule here, and as far as I know, it is the only rule, is that you can say anything you like, about anything you like, but you should not personally attack or insult another member, I can't see ny problem with that rule. I say misguided as John recently had his posts deleted not because they were abusive but that Joe considered them to be incoherent.

Now if the above was the ONLY hard and fast rule set and enforced by Joe (who thinks it OK to call me an idiot in this thread) – it would still require someone to make value judgements as to when or if the 'rule' was transgressed. On these rare occasions it should not really present Max, as the owner of the site, with too much of a task.

But a scan of Joe's FAQ will show that it is far from the only hard and fast 'rule'. A look at past postings on the Help forum will also demonstrate that posts and entire threads are moved, deleted and justified for many reasons other than personal attacks. The list of our postings that Joe will delete from our forum if and when he sees fit is already long and shows all the signs of becoming even longer.

For example, where was the personal abuse or danger presented by my duplicate postings that required Joe to delete them? There are many such examples if you care to look in the help forum (or 'snitchers' corner).

The BS split

As a response to years of whinging about what other people should or should not be allowed to place on our forum - from a vocal few - the BS division was produced. In reality, this has done away with the need all this whinging and for censorship, deletions and for so many value judgements to be made, resulting from this whinging. The very few value judgements that may still remain to be taken can easily and non-controversially can be taken by our creator – Max who is the site owner and deserves all the credit for the creation of the forum. Although one can see why he would not wish to be involved in such tittle-tattle.

If the thread is not music related it will appear in the BS section or can later be moved there if is really thought to be worth the effort. So anyone looking through BS threads should reasonably expect to be confronted with BS. Should anyone then choose to open these and are then offended by what they read there – surely the fault is largely if not entirely down to them?

If we accept the above and are prepared to be a little tolerant of each other – the need for an omnipotent Witchfinder General – if ever there was such a need – is gone. If there is no one telling you what is not allowed - for you to struggle against – perhaps for some of our guests, it will not be as much fun to try and peace will eventually be allowed to settle at last upon the Mudcat forum……………...?

But if you liked being Witchfinder General (or like Bill D you liked to lick their boots) - you may have a vested interest in painting a picture of a forum awash with abusive postings that we needed protection from and peace would not really be a desirable objective?

As the present system cannot produce a satisfactory solution for all of us, an alternative where we are encouraged to respect each other's postings rather than currently where we are being encouraged to complain about, censor and judge them, must at least be worth a try?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 11:46 AM

"We have conflicting positions given about who is appointed to do what and when but more importantly about what the actual level of abusive posting and censorship really is. On the one hand we are told that the level is such that Max alone cannot deal with it."

No.
Bill said "when the forum grew past what Max could deal with personally" and you ASSUMED that meant the trolling/flaming, etc. Consider that most of what we do is fix stuff and answer questions.

I don't get generally involved in these discussions because it seems obvious you're trying to be seen as leader in a crusade against an 'enemy' you seem to be working too hard to create. I also believe that most people here are smart enough to notice you twisting words and attempting to make Joe look like the Evil Overlord. Yeesh!

You also said (way up there) "Amos you still have not come up with any ideas or alternatives..." For crying out loud, YOU'RE the one who's only complaining - YOU come up with the 'ideas or alternatives'. If you weren't so doggedly going after Joe at every opportunity, you might have the time to think of something constructive instead of simply trolling him and demanding others jump through your hoops. In a pissing contest, the most important thing is ego, and that's what this feels like to me.

It's obviously not outside your personal moral code to fabricate excuses to troll Joe. Shambles, you've pushed past the ridiculous, and the more you actively try to drum up a constituency by twisting things, making things up and taking enormous leaps of illogic, the fewer people will listen to ANYthing you have to say.

As to Joe, I may disagree with him at times, but he sticks to his own sense of right and wrong, is consistant, and does his damndest to be fair. I certainly can't think of anyone else who I might trust to do a better job.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 11:48 AM

"On the one hand we are told that the level is such that Max alone cannot deal with it. On the other hand we have Joe claiming that this action and censorship is minimal. Both of these cannot be so."

you quoted me, and then proceeded to mis-read or misinterpret what you quoted. I did not say the 'level' of abuse had increased; I said the "forum grew" beyond what one person could easily deal with. Abuse is only PART (and relatively, a smallish part) of the tasks of the editorial team, who spend much more time correcting errors and combining threads and just answering questions and being helpful.

" the need for an omnipotent Witchfinder General – if ever there was such a need – is gone. "...apart from the cutesy title, there is always a need for SOME oversight when there are abusive postings and repetitive incoherent postings. Do you really disagree with this basic idea?

"...painting a picture of a forum awash with abusive postings.."
and THIS is an example of a "straw man" argument, in which you attack, exaggerate or ridicule something which was never claimed. "Awash" is not the issue.....any abusive postings are too many. Would you TRULY want to see EVERY post, no matter how abusive or hateful, remain here?

In your last paragraph, Shambles, you make a VERY good point about respecting each other's posts, but then weaken it by claiming that we are "encouraged to complain"...(little remarks about " 'snitchers' corner" as a reference to the 'help forum' sure don't seem to ME to be conducive to friendly, peaceful coexistence)

You keep referring to Max, and how HE should deal with all this. Maybe...but delegation of responsibilities IS how he has chosen to deal with it, for the most part. If I could locate them, I remember several occasions on which Max has explained his decisions and noted his confidence in Joe, Jeff and the other editors. He also said not TOO long ago, that he would try to answer direct PMs...have you tried getting a final, definitive, personal answer from Max about your ongoing concerns?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 12:04 PM

well,Jeri & I crossed postings, and she made several of my points while I was typing...'nuff said...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 03:35 PM

Bill I think the 'staw man' argument is the basis of all of this. A vision of a forum under siege is created or prolonged to enable the only possible means of combating and uniting us all against these outside evils. In truth this only makes the problem permanent and insoluable and the Witchfinder General's position indispensible.

For the truth or nature of this terrible threat is never defined, quantified or established and anyone who questions either the size or true nature of the threat and the only proposed solution must - of course be part of this terrible outside threat.

All I am asking is that the problem is quantified, the suitability of the only suggested solution be evaluated and possible alternatives are seriously examined. To enable all the talents, imagination, skills, invention and humour of all of our contributors to be free from the need to conform to one individual's personal concept of what our forum should be.

This is not an attack - personal or otherwise. I am not against anything - I am very much for something very special which is in danger of becoming even less than ordinary...........


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 05:39 PM

Jeri, BillD, GUEST,

Alright who did it?

Have you hidden Shambles' Qualude again? Tut, tut, tut!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Somebody else
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 06:02 PM

"We think it's the only way to keep this a growing, vibrant community instead of an inbred group of people drowning in their own smalltalk and inside jokes and bickering."

Priceless, Joe!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 06:22 PM

Judging by the level of incoherency and the unjustified namecalling, perhaps Mr. Shambles is running for President on the Republican ticket.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 03 - 11:21 PM

GUEST: free speech portal,

It's one helluva leap from anything I wrote above to eugenics.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: s&r
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 05:06 AM

Guest postings to me are one of the strengths of mudcat. The guest Marcus (above) who had his question delightfully and promptly answered is a case in point.

I started as a guest, and found the Forum and the Database invaluable: some of the threads from members and guests were of less value, but I ignored them; you don't have to respond. Some of the threads are full of 'in' jokes from subsets of the community. That's OK, I have my own groups too.

Abuse and vituperation are not only found from guests, nor even from UK mudcatters. Too much of a response to this by way of deletion of posts or rejection of guests could lead to throwing the baby out with the bath water leaving a much less vibrant and interesting forum.

My friends know me; I am reluctant to post too many personal details on the web, just as my phone # is ex-directory since my work is involved with offenders and we are advised to be 'discreet'.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 06:00 PM

-there is always a need for SOME oversight when there are abusive postings and repetitive incoherent postings. Do you really disagree with this basic idea?

Yes………Because this is our forum…. Should our forum not give a true reflection of what we contribute to it? Is it of any real value, if our forum does not give a true reflection of what we contribute to it, both the highs and the lows? Is it really too difficult for us to encourage each other to post respectfully by example and to just ignore all posts that do not show this respect?

We might not always like what we see when we look into a mirror but is it really wise to attempt to deny that evidence? If you see in the mirror that your zipper is undone, you can then adjust your appearance and practically, this may have prevented you going out and being arrested. Just asking someone to clean (or dirty) the mirror for you is never going to enable this protection or ever reflect back an image of Tom Cruise.   

"Awash" is not the issue.....any abusive postings are too many. Would you TRULY want to see EVERY post, no matter how abusive or hateful, remain here?

I would always want the world (and our forum) to reflect the very best of all of us but I am not deluding myself into believing that because I don't actually see the worst of us all – that the worst does not exist. Today it is generally thought sensible - if not a very pleasant task - to warn your children of the dangers that some adults and some situations can present to them.

I can't say that I would WANT to see every abusive posting but it does not necessarily follow that I (or anyone else) would see every abusive posting even if they were all to remain on the forum. Unless of course we went out of our way to look for them amongst the BS, just in order to inform The Witchfinder General on the Help forum. It would appear that currently a few people do spend their time doing just this and they are not discouraged by being asked if they can't find something better to do with their time, or asked to mind their own business.

But everything has its price. If the price of The Witchfinder General removing "any abusive postings" is the arbitrary removal from our forum of ANY CONTRIBUTION - if and when they see fit – for me it is far too high a price. For if "awash" is not the issue then "minimal" censorship is not the issue either. Even one non-abusive post deleted by The Witchfinder General or edited without the poster's permission is one too many – especially if that one and only posting happens to be yours.

But whatever our wishes may be – is it not a proven and demonstrable fact that the current approach simply has not prevented - and cannot prevent abusive postings? However, the witch-hunt to seek them out will divide us, shape and deprive our forum of contributions that are not abusive – if and when The Witchfinder General decides.

But shouldn't our forum be about encouraging all our contributions? Should it (even in part) be about getting other people's contributions deleted or edited, or of making or asking for value judgements to be made upon other people's contributions?

Ewan MaColl There's no Ogres, Wicked Witches
Only greedy sons of bitches……


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 07:11 PM

So, Shambles, I guess you have me over a barrel. For me to defend my actions, I'd have to post the very messages I deleted. I'm not going to do that.

We delete messages for two reasons:
  1. They hurt somebody
    I'm especially troubled by messages that target people who are facing death or other personal tragedy, or the ones that are clearly racist.
  2. They cause trouble, discord, consternation, or other problems for our community
    I know you've seen this happen. There have been times when things can get pretty nasty around here.
Generally, we delete messages in response to complaints, but we also delete some messages before they give people reason for complaint.

You question why our posting guidelines have increased over the years, and I guess I'd say we didn't anticipate the problems we'd have, and we didn't want to post a list of suggestions for the troublemakers. Generally, I think our guidelines and our editing work pretty well. I don't think we're too strong in our editing, but I suppose that's a matter of opinion. Whatever the case, I certainly don't think our editing fits the dramatic descriptions you've given. From the picture you paint, one would think we were the Holy Inquisition, or something.

I think the environment at Mudcat is what I'd call "controlled anarchy." We leave most things alone, but have to help things along here and there. If you find that's too restrictive, feel free to go to rec.music.folk. We certainly wouldn't want you to waste your time here if you feel uncomfortable. We don't want you to be unhappy.

-Joe Offer, Witchfinder General?-
    I know we have beaten this topic to death, but the logical and verbal gymnastics involved are fun. Besides, I don't take Shambles seriously... ;-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 08:05 PM

I was not going to say more, but since it is my post you are answering, I will say only: we must agree to disagree, it seems. You have made your point, but, as I read the comments, the general sentiment leaves you a vocal minority.
I am aware that you feel strongly about this, much as you did with the PELS issue...but strong opinions do not mean it should be constantly argued. (I have some opinions on 'definitions of "folk" for relevance in posting here, but the management chooses not to interfere with what I think is 'off topic', so I confine myself to low-key philosophical debate occasionally.) I would hope, that with both management and general opinion disagreeing with you, you might ease off on the complaints...and especially on the use of labels like "WitchFinder"! That sort of thing serves more to fan flames rather than change minds.

If complaints are limited to specific items, rather than sweeping condemnations of policy, they will likely be treated with more concern. I really can't think of any more to say...*shrug*...you have to decide.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 08:38 PM

Joe I don't want to see you over barrel - it is where you keep placing yourself with these attempted justifications. I would like to see you back contributing to our forum, where we could argue or agree on equal terms once again. I truly never doubt your good intentions. But........

Where do the deletions of my duplicate postings appear in your reasons 1 and 2?

Where does John's so-called unintelligible thread appear in your reasons 1 and 2?

They are not covered by these examples are they? What 'trouble' can these two non-abusive examples really bring to this community that you must delete, edit, move or make personal value judgements on our contributions to decide their suitability to appear on our forum?

Is this kind of heavy-handed action taken against honest contributions and being justified by references to protecting us from things like racist attacks - not creating even worse trouble and showing little respect for the whole concept of our forum? Is it really honest to attempt to make these claims.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 09:21 PM

Mr Shambles, why the hell would you want your duplicate postings to remain here????

My post WAS uninteligable, [it was a music thread, but it was a drunken ramble, and did not make sense!
BTW my drunken ramble was not deleted by JOe, so don't blame him for that!, it was someone else, I was sent a copy of the deleted post via PM, invited to tidy it up, when i sobered up, and submit it again.
No problem.
PS. I was also PM'D a list of similar threads to the drunken thread that I started, which were already on the forum, but I was too drunk to find!

I don't see this as cencorship, just tidying up, ie sweeping litter away.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 09:26 PM

Surely Shambles is not a relative of "Elsie, The Folk Police Woman"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 09:29 PM

Actually, Shambles knows very little about folk music...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Onlooker
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 09:38 PM

Sharp intake of breath....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 09:40 PM

Actually, I think Shambles enjoys the verbal gymnastics, too.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 09:42 PM

Oh, stop it, both of you. You both know better.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 10:06 PM

Joe has been entrusted with the amount of authority needed to keep things moving smoothly, and the right to exercise his judgement for the common good. It should be obvious that he believes he is pursuing the common good. I for one see no occasion to disagree.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 19 Dec 03 - 10:06 PM

I suppose you're right, Sorcha. I do enjoy the verbal jousting, but I suppose Shambles is serious about what he says and doesn't see the silliness of all this. I quit.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Dec 03 - 03:24 AM

John this was your original complaint/request.

Why are my threads been deleted

We may accept that you are now happy - however, it would be fair to say that you did not appear to be at the time. But perhaps you could provide an answer to what is preventing threads from dislexic, or other posters, that may not have quite the expected command of written English, from being deleted simply because a Witchfinder General may not be able to 'figure it out'?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Dec 03 - 04:39 AM

Anyway if the IP address for the deleted posts was the same as Khatt's, and there are several people in her large office who post to the Cat, are we any nearer finding the real culprit? Or has all the general arguing and semantics given him/her a chance to diappear??
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 20 Dec 03 - 05:35 AM

Qoute "john-it appears you are now happy, though it appears you were not at the time"
I was pissed!, This issue has been resolved via PM, why are you dragging up old stuff?
As far as Joe purposely deleting stuff from dislexic [sic] members or others with learning disablitys, or users of english as a second language, thats bullshit!, it just does not happen.

The only stuff that gets deleted here are duplicate postings, offensive stuff, off-topic cut and paste stuff and spam, and useless crap from me that does not make sense.

I have been a member of this forum for 3 years, I have seen very little deleted, I have actually requested that a few [less than 10 in total] posts were deleted, and if you saw them you would understand why, though I do NOT go looking for posts that need deleting.

Jow has stated his opinion here [which he is fully entitled to do], on the appropriateness of certain threads, [Healing threads, Birthday threads, etc], BUT, as far as I know, he has not deleted any of them.

It seems that everyone else here is happy with the way this site is run, Shambles-can i suggest we let this thread die, and if you still have concerns about the cencorship policy here that you PM Joe or Max?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 03 - 08:41 AM

A palpable hit with a 9 iron I think.
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Dec 03 - 09:22 AM

That was me BTW
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 03 - 02:12 PM

The Governor General is a term used at the BBC. I use the term Witchfinder General as it perfectly sums up the expectation and function currently undertaken on our forum by Joe, but is also an attempt to separate a fine chap from the role to enable the role to be examined. However he seems to have proudly adopted and claimed the title….?

It would be a term I would use in the rather unlikely case of it ever becoming vacant and of someone (other than Max) volunteering for the post. Having just seen The Return of the King – I would think of The Steward of Gondor as another example of the role – as a 'holding' position (come back Max, all is forgiven and I have fixed the sword).

The (rather hopeful and dangerous) expectation of the role from some posters - is that the W.G (Witchfinder General) will always correctly burn others as witches but will never turn their inquisitorial gaze upon them…………

The term 'troublemaker' is never defined but I think it would be fair to say that in practice it covers anyone who posts to our forum - anything that The W.G personally considers not suitable to appear on our forum (except anything from YOU of course).

The term 'troublemakers' is one that is often used when justification for censorship action is taken to protect us from them. Even when the 'trouble' is simply one of understanding what the poster is trying to say - or indeed simply the number of their postings. As the W.G has also decided that there is an undefined but hard and fast limit to the number of postings that they will allow us to post on our forum, which the W.G will censor if exceeded (not a lot of people know that).

There probably is another analogy in the sport of football (or soccer). There are experienced players who become 'player-managers', often by default. They pick the team and also are also responsible for picking themselves and of dropping players from the team to enable this. They also buy and sell players, are responsible for their wages, for sorting out their player's personal problems and deciding on their squabbles. Many full-time managers and full-time players consider the 'player manager' role, to be the worst of both worlds and a very difficult – if not impossible trick to pull off. In fact there has been very few who have done this 'juggling-act' successfully for anything but a relatively short 'honeymoon' period and it is usually a temporary 'holding' position.

Perhaps the problem is really with the range of the W.G role and it can finally be accepted that it is an impossible task? We hardly expect someone appointed to be the school caretaker to be responsible for the delicate task of excluding errant pupils do we?

For there is no simple 'black and white' here - even in the case of a seemingly so-called racist attack. Is calling someone a 'Pommie Bastard' to be judged by our W.G – as a racist attack on our forum to be deleted from it by our W.G? It might well be but if we substitute the word 'Pommie' for any number of other words and it automatically would be.

Our forum can have GUIDELINES to encourage posters to post respectfully but where transgression will be tolerated. Or if it has hard and fast rules where transgression is never tolerated - shouldn't these hard and fast rules be spelt out - so that the first time we know of these hard and fast rules is not when the W.G considers them to have been transgressed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 21 Dec 03 - 02:18 PM

Aw, Sham, give it a rest, then, man. Really, truly. All this socialist mumbo jumbo doesn't really work, y'see...

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Raedwulf
Date: 21 Dec 03 - 03:13 PM

For crying out loud, Shambles! Shut up & give it a rest!! You are not a "vocal minority", you are eunuch, sorry, unique! ;)

You are the one sole & solitary voice in this thread bitching at Joe. Absolutely no-one is voicing any support for your p-o-v. There are plenty of us for whom some of the Guest postings remain a problem. There are a variety of possible remedies for this complaint. Neither Joe, nor Jeff, nor Max, seem inclined to adopt even the mildest of them. That's up to them, Mudcat is their (much appreciated) gift to us.

You, sadly, are a bore. 69 posts went by without your intervention. In the next 70 posts you've contributed no less than twelve bloody times, banging out the same tired message that no-one has even remotely agreed with.


Your opinion appears to be of interest only to yourself - ergo: PM the Government & kindly spare the rest of us!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 21 Dec 03 - 03:48 PM

Please Shambles give it a rest. I started the thread because I was pissed off and you have completely missed boat. The ORIGINAL issue...which was why the thread was started....has been delt with in a polite and adult manner, we are all friends so please get over it and contribute something of a) interest and b)use to the 'cat instead of going on a Joe slagging off session.

Khatt


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Dec 03 - 04:21 PM

catsPHiddle

You could always ask for this thread to be closed... :-)

Robin
(but that would be the W.G who would close it ...) !!!!!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Joe Offer
Date: 21 Dec 03 - 05:03 PM

Hey, I think "Witchfinder General" is a rather colorful title, don't you? Let it be known, though, that when Shambles wanted lyrics on the topic, it was Joe Offer who found them - (click). Let it also be known that I get no pleasure out of playing policeman around here, and I do it as little as I can. I'd rather be finding songs than witches.
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Peace
Date: 21 Dec 03 - 05:14 PM

Dear Shambles,

I am of a milder temperament than my buddy, Raedwulf. However, the sentiment inherent in his last post finds a gentle harbour in the interpretative part of my heart. Give it a rest, will ya? I've had a few guests tear a piece off me, and in the event the guest and I ever meet, we'll finish the converstaion. Life has aspects of that simplicity in it.

Joe, wanna find some songs about witches? (Just kidding.)

Joe has guided or directed or presented me with songs and threads on a gang of occasions. He is excellent at that, and the main purpose of the 'Cat is music. I think we'd be better expending our energies to thank the guy instead of criticize him.

Thank you, Joe.

Bruce Murdoch


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 03 - 05:36 AM

The first post asked for ideas.

References on the forum to 'the management' and to 'editorial policy' may be relevant to other aspect of The Mudcat Cafι but are not really apt when applied to a forum provided only for our contributions.

Is not the fear expressed by the Witchfinder General of our forum being 'taken over' or as a result of many postings from one troublemaker or from a combined and determined band of 'troublemakers' – a rather unlikely practical possibility?

But the argument could be made that our forum has already been 'taken over' by The W. G and that the whole issue, rather than one of protecting us, is now one of control and of the fear of ever losing that control to anyone else?

Many of us accept that controlling ourselves is hard enough and would not ever wish to exert control or judgement over others. But some of us always seem to need to be in a controlling role, even when making the attempt to control something like our contributions to our forum – is clearly unrealistic and more importantly counter-productive.

The heroic image rather like in a Hollywood western comes to mind. Where one person with an edit button is all that stands between us being murdered in our beds by all the hackers, spammers, trolls, flamers and general 'troublemakers' that we largely learn just to ignore elsewhere on the internet.

The Witchfinder General's so-called protective control is only to censor posts that are considered unsuitable. That is any post from a "known" 'troublemaker'. This action is reactive and relies on the W.G to see the offending post or for someone to bring it to his attention. As the 'trouble' has already been caused this control can only at best, be one of damage limitation.

The W.G may not have directly censored 'Birthday Threads' or others of a type that the current postholder expresses a personal dislike for - or a value judgement on. But the result is that posting to these threads are inhibited. Why should these thread subjects should be thought of as any worse than any of the other BS threads?

We appear to have moved from a position where the poster is respected and asked if their postings can be edited, moved or deleted to one where it is largely accepted that permission to post must be personally sought by our W.G on subjects personally approved by our W.G. Even when it is clearly prefixed with BS and will only appear in the section of our forum specially set aside for it!

If the the BS section is to act as a safety valve - it is either allowed to freely operate as such by the W.G or it serves no purpose at all and can be gotten rid of entirely.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 22 Dec 03 - 06:35 AM

catsPHiddle - You could always ask for this thread to be closed

She already has - and I have too !

Why not shut down this thread, then if Shambles and any others wish a JO/JC knocking thread they can start one of their own - after all Khatt started the thread about an issue which has now been concluded to her satisfaction.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 03 - 06:40 AM

The following thread - from the help forum - is an example of value judgements being taken that resulted in editing action - even when the W.G (subsequently but too late) disagreed with the action taken. Questions resulting from this remain to be answered.

How can a similar situation be avoided and exactly where the supposed controls over the controllers - went wrong and exactly what idividuals can censor what, and when?

The Memorial Thread


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 22 Dec 03 - 06:42 AM

"some of us always seem to need to be in a controlling role,"

Like always telling everybody ELSE that THEY want to be....

"serves no purpose at all and can be gotten rid of entirely"

:-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 01:34 AM

Shambles-You are mad!
I once shared a cell with a bloke called Terry, he was convinced there was a big conspiracy, and the russians were putting rays into his head, your posts on this thread remind me of him!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 02:38 AM

Shambles, I thought you were done with this place? If I dig, wouldn't I find that you resigned and started your own site, and a pretty good site it was/is. And it was just as you wanted it. Do me a favor? After all these years, and you bitchin' about the same aul load of shite, why don't you just take it to your site and control it? It isn't changing here.........period. You just look like an idiot with nothing better to do, buddy. C'mon, lay off.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 02:54 AM

heloo Large Mick, i like your'e CD, its really nice, i still play it all the time,
i waent going to buy it, but bill sabels told me to, he said it was good, so i did, and its reallt nice.john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 03:02 AM

yes, if you dont like it here, make you own website, and stop making trubble.john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 10:34 AM

Thank you, John. That is very nice of you to say.

All the best,

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 10:48 AM

A Merry Christmas to all our readers, especially Shambles. {BTW the original shambles was an abattoir [sp]in York}
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Bogeyman
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 11:26 AM

And heeeeerrreeee's Joey's Sycophants and the Mudcat Royals, bitching about Their Common Enemy--the truth!

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame79.html

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame38.html

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame20.html

The majority Mudcat opinion is WRONG! Shambles has nailed this place, and the power hierarchy. Hence everyone screaming SHUT DOWN THIS THREAD! SILENCE SHAMBLES!

No wonder Shrubya & Co. gets away with their abuses. This place is a micro of the greater macro--let the anon guest and the expression of a dissenting political view be FOREVER THE ENEMY OF THE GREAT MUDCAT!

Joe Offer actually sucks as an internet forum moderator (see the part about absolute power corrupting). His nasty comments about forum participants would never be allowed on a legitimate internet forum with high standards for it's community. Why? Because it is the first sign of a petty tyrant exercising petty tyranny.

Those who support Joe Offer are those who JUST LIKE HIM! Those who agree with his personal vendetta list--and it is a politically motivated, vendetta oriented list, to be sure. You don't agree with Joe's politics, or you like/defend the posters Joe hates, and you are on the list too!

All bow to Joe!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 12:13 PM

I agree with Guest Bogeyman that calls for the thread to be closed are wrong, it is useless closing the stable door etc. However the rest of his post is the usual screwball anonymous guest stuff. Still it gives us something to laugh at for Christmas.
Happy Holidays.....John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 01:33 PM

Thanks, Giok -- I was about to get pissed off again.

I dunno about anyone else but as far as I am concerned it is not about the majority.

It is about governing agreements.

The whining is about wanting to govern by disagreements.

It doesn't work that way, because of how a site is set up.

You could go throw bombs at government cars, I suppose.   That might make you happy.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 01:41 PM

"The majority Mudcat opinion is WRONG!"

....fascinating.
Funny how having fun and trusting your friends leads to mass brainwashing and corrupted values. Ah, well...guess we'll just have to suffer in our misguided confusion.

(what, ME? Cynical?....naawwwwww.....)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Bogeyman
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 01:55 PM

BillD, you might want to educate yourself about the phenomenon I described above:

Echo Chamber Effect

(Hint: I refer to the metaphoric definition).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 02:33 PM

"...you might want to educate yourself about the phenomenon I described above:"

nope, I think not. I've been here 7+ years. Met people, talked to people, traded songs and stories, broken bread and shared a beer or two. And I'm old enough and smart enough and cynical enough that I can decide what's good for me without trolls whispering (or shouting) in my ear, thankyewverymuch. Go eat a Billy Goat Gruff.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Bogeyman
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 02:49 PM

LOL! Ah Bill D, a better, more shining example of Echo Chamber Effect one couldn't have asked for!

And a happy, healthy new year to you!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Cluin
Date: 26 Dec 03 - 06:49 PM

Holy piss! What a waste of electrons this thread is.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Dec 03 - 04:20 PM

Metaphorically, an echo chamber can refer to any situation in which some force or idea is amplified by transmission inside an enclosed space. For example, observers of journalism in the mass media have described the echo chamber effect: one purveyor of information will make a claim, which many like-minded people then repeat, overhear, and repeat again (often in an exaggerated or otherwise distorted form) until most people assume that some extreme variation of the story is true.

Postings by Guest, bogeyman: 3 (At least) By Guests in general (who could be bogeyman): ???

Postings by BillD: 2

I don't know either. Just wondering who is doing the whispering...?

Cheers

DtG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 03 - 10:44 PM

I'M LADYJEAN, AND I KEEP GETTING LISTED AS GUEST. I'M A FLAMING EGOTIST. THIS IS VERY ANNOYING. AS I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS INTERNET THING, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY. BUT I'M NOT A GUEST.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 27 Dec 03 - 11:36 PM

LadyJean, go to the drop-down menu in the upper right hand corner, where it says "Quick Links", click on the down arrow and then on "Login." Then enter your Mudcat name, hit "submit" then enter your name again and your password. That should get you recognized as yourself again.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 06:50 AM

One wonders if there would be all this discussion if Shambles had been the direct target of a Guest insult..... Been there, done that, got the printout. One also wonders how amicably it would have been sorted had Shambles been the one accused of anonymous and inflamatory guest postings. Again, been there, done that, found the piggybacker.

As mentioned above, it is the very nature of anonymous postings that hurt the most, not always the content of the post. My arse is fat, it was a lot fatter, but it wasn't Guests' public declaration of such that made me do something about it.

Sometimes people feel so strongly about a subject that they need to ask a question with a different or no name attached. There are many such threads archived here and almost all of them deal with very personal issues. Anonymity is chosen because this is a public forum and as also noted above, many people here, not just in the UK, know each other intimately, biblically and for considerable numbers of years. Those that are genuinely asking for help and advice, whether taken or not, usually have a psuedonym. Those that are making deliberate and personal attacks tend not to.

There are some very valid comments on this thread, from all sides, but the matter is old news and the issue is closed. Ranting here will not change the policing of this forum, a policing which it will always need, regardless of Guest or other status.


LTS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dead Horse
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 08:38 AM

Okay! So how do I deliberately delete my cookie so's I can post anonymous appreciations of LTS's bum?
Answers on a postcard will be ignored.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 09:19 AM

I'll tell you how if I can make similarly appreciative comments about Kay's bum, [and I don't mean you!]
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: catspaw49
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 11:09 AM

Y'all need to send me pictures of each and I'll be the judge. At least 3 angles must be shown for a fair and impartial assessment: 1) The classic Full Moon 2) The bent over Harvest Moon 3) Either pose with "pressed ham"

Any other photos would of course be helpful in making my selection..

Spaw


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 01:39 PM

Personally I'd trust Joe Offer to carry out this kind of role more than I'd trust just about anyone else. I wouldn't do it if you paid me, and I wouldn't do it anywhere near as well either.

The Shambles has written some pretty good songs. And I think that might perhaps be a better medium for protesting about things.
..........

I suppose there's no point in saying it yet again, but the stuff about nameless GUEST postings isn't about anonymity at all. A GUEST with a handle is just as anonynmous, and so for that matter is a member with a pseudonym. But a GUEST who posts without any name is in effect using the same name as umpteen other GUESTs who do the same thing, sometimes several in the same thread, and that just gets confusing and interferes with thebfree flow of communication. (And it makes it pretty well impossible to tell whether a particular remark is meant ironically or not.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 02:32 PM

Gentlemen (using the term loosely) - private viewings only I'm afraid.

LTS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 06:18 PM

Pan-o-rama??
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 06:24 PM

Loaf pan?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 06:28 PM

3-D large screen format.

LTS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 07:47 PM

It is worth noting that the 'Help' thread referred to by Shambles in his posting 20 Dec 03 : 03.24AM refers to the 'help' thread Why Are My Threads Being Deleted which contains two messages by Shambles, and numerous unsigned messages by a 'Shambles Clone' who appears to have the Shambles 'rant style' off to a 'T'
I am not trying to suggest that the other messages are from Roger (The Shambles) but the style is remarkably consistent, and it either points out the fact that an anonymous poster can appear to be other than himself, or that 'The Shambles' sometimes hides behind anonymity.
I make no claims over which is the case, but either case shows the disadvantage of allowing incognito posting

I happily append my name to this message (despite earlier criticism from Roger)

Nigel Parsons


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 08:31 PM

Guest bogeyman.... Thanks for Flame Warrior links ,I really pissed myself laughing..."All of Mudcat is there" my self included.I had great fun puting names to the faces .
I think we all take ourselves too seriously, and as somebody else said were all anonymous anyway whether we sign or not.
Its nice to be able to get things "off our chests " but we shouldn't kid ourselves that we can change anything.
As for "nasty" guests, you can have abit of fun arguing with them or just ignore them..Who cares???   We can all be nasty occasionally.
   Ake


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 09:40 PM

Nigel-As i posted in the thread, i pposted 1 message to that thread, and 1 mesage only,
the whole thing got totally out of hand.
threre were about 45 mesages in that thread, i wish i had never started it!
{i was very drunjk one day [ i have a drink problenm, i''m alcoholic], i started a thrad, but it was a mixed up drunjken jumble, didnt make sense], it was NOT deleted by joe, , anyway the message i got was sonmeyttjing like= hi john, your message looks a bit messed up, we cant really tell waht your on about!, any cjhance of you posting it again wehn you sober up?. cheers .whover sent message.

My reply was along the lines of " dear max, or whoever delted my message, screw you!, i'll post wqht i like, how dare you say it was messed up, and invite me to resubmit it at will !

but, having sobered up, i realised, it was a drunken thread, most people would not understand it, so ahts the point in sending it then!

The thing we all need to realise here, is that this is MAX website, he can run it exactly, how he wants, [guest, no guest, wahtever]
no idea weaht it costs, but must be a lot, eg, most of the folk music lovers in hull are here]

I say for definet, if this was my site, and folk satarted moaning, [to much censoring etc etc etc], i would just switch it off!
fuck em, cant be bothred,
i run my own little site, for local folk sessions, there was 1 bloke trying to plug his astroolgy business there.
i banned him, "astrology my arse, piss off"

is astology anything to do with my site?
no
welll then, fuck off.johh
anf stop moaning asav well


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 28 Dec 03 - 09:44 PM

astology id not flokm muscic, = if you want to taslk abouy astrology, make an astrogly site and fuck off.john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 12:42 AM

Joe - the Mudcat capitulated its role as a DT winnower anda folk music forumseveral years ago.

It is a little late to draw the stampeding boars back into the barn.

Let the Brits play and have their fun....just because it isn't yourse or mines humor....who are we to criticize our kindred cousins?

Sincerely,
Gargoyle


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 12:50 AM

mr gargoyle-your spelling and grammar use leaves a lot to be desired
yours [sic], stampeding [sic], humur [sic], sincerley [sic]
learn to spell, or bugger off.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 29 Dec 03 - 06:04 PM

John from Hull

Do you spell the way you do to try to be clever (not!) or are you just poorly educated?

why close a perfectly interesting thread?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bassic
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 08:54 AM

Mudcat is not a democracy, it is at best a benevolent dictatorship. I dont have a problem with that, after all, I do have a choice as to wether I "live" here or not.
For the most part, the benevolant dictatorship creates a good place to be, one with considerable freedom and creativety. But as with all dictatorships, there is the potential for power to corupt. I presume that this is the "fear" that Shambles is trying to highlight. It is something that we should all be aware of and guard against.
Is it a problem at the moment? Personally, I dont think so but that is only my opinion. Are Joe and the other clones imposing their own view on the cat by how they do their work? Of course they are, that is why they were chosen, for their tollerence, good sence and thoughtfullness.
Do they get it wrong sometimes? Yes, inevetably and it should be pointed out when they do and they should admit their errors. (Which it seems they usually do).
Would it be better without them? I believe not, at least for the time being. The special nature of the Mudcat and its unique family/comunity feel depend on the "Royalty" to maintain the environment which has alowed that comunity to flurish.
Will it last forever? No, something will change in that unique combination of circumstances that will ultimatly lead to the demise of the cat, but the point is that this is just a tool of communication, its not the REASON we exist as people and friends and we can all move on and find other comunities or start them ourselfs. We have a choice.
This is not life or death so there is no need to argue with life or death passion about who said what or did what. Debate the issues, use examples, give illustrations, that is healthy. But dont attack well meaning people personally, that is cheap argument and ultimatly shows a lack of thought and intelectual rigour and is just annother form of bullying in my view. Change my view with the strenght of your reasoning not the size of your verbal fist or the volume of your rhetoric!
If the occasion comes where I want to challenge the Mudcat organisers about how they run this site then I dont want to have to scatle the battlements and cross the moat that they have had to build around themselfs because of the attacks that they are coming under. I want to be able to walk in the front door, as a respected member, tell them to their face, and change their ways.
We still remember 1066 in this part of the world! :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Big Mick
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 09:46 AM

Well said, Bassic. I want you to know that the clones are very judicious in their use of the edit. And each time the edit or delete is used it is run by Joe or Jeff. Also, there is communication between the clones to be sure that they are not being overly protective. And you hit it on the head when you indicated that when they perceive a mistake is made they will take the blame and correct it. They are not a lot of clones, and they are a very fair lot. Max has defined what the 'Cat is going to be, and whether clones agree or not, they attempt to always maintain Max's vision of the place. I know that many times I would have blocked folks, but that is not how we do it here. My view is that one should be registered to start any thread, but we don't do it here. Unlike Shambles, I accept that these are the rules and get on with it. My love for the site and its citizens exceeds my desire to change certain things. Isn't that the same as in any other unit of society? There is no perfect place, but this is our place.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Nemesis
Date: 30 Dec 03 - 07:16 PM

Bass .. "we still remember 1066 in this part of the World .."
Where's that then, mate? Hastings-upon-Hull? :)

Nem
(Sussex girl)
x


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 02:11 AM

I am a little confused now - as this thread was indeed CLOSED the last time I looked.

Liz I am not saying that being verbally attacked is pleasant - just that there is a trade-off. As for me personally being subject to guest (or member) attacks over the years I have lost count of the number of times this has happened - you just resist the temptation to respond or expect there to be any other solution than to ignore it. Especially in the BS second division - what else would you expect to find if you open such a thread?

I worry about Big Mick's memory. Mick you are thinking of Jon Freeman. Who you slagged off when he first posted - then became good buddies with and now he would appear to be off of your Christmas card list again - unlike our guest who I see you continue to insist on jousting with.

Nigel I have never posted as a guest. The reasons for the posts on the Help forum were explained there on the Help forum. Please not let us encourage or be encouraged to join in any more witch-hunts.....Can we just be encouraged to mind our own business and to concentrate on our own contributions?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 08:28 AM

Shambles: "Can we just be encouraged to mind our own business and to concentrate on our own contributions?" Yes, I'm all in favour, if you would only follow your own guidelines. I'm sure both Kat & jOhn are capable of fighting their own corner if need be, but if there is any sign of censorship then we can expect to see you leap into the fray. "Can we just be encouraged to mind our own business and to concentrate on our own contributions?"

Of course, it was you who first pointed the way to the thread in question as being of relevence here. I merely pointed out that it does further the discussion here, as either you were posting there incognito, or there was someone posting there with a sufficiently similar style to cause confusion. Either of those possibilities is reasonable cause for asking Guest posters to take on a consistent handle.

Nigel


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Big Mick
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 09:51 AM

Yes, Roger, I stand corrected. I did get confused. Happens at my advanced age. But the main point still stands. You have been complaining the same complaint for years. It isn't going to change, and that is that. You only appear unable to quit floggin' that old, dead horse.

And yes, I do enjoy the occasional round with the GUESTS. I love turning the tables on bullies and manipulators. Rightly put, Rog.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 09:59 AM

Personally I'd trust Joe Offer to carry out this kind of role more than I'd trust just about anyone else. I wouldn't do it if you paid me, and I wouldn't do it anywhere near as well either.

We will never know if anybody could do the W.G role any better than Joe, (or even if the role is even necessary) because it would appear that no one is ever going to get the opportunity. For there is not a role, vacant or otherwise nor a job description or rules– there is just Joe. This makes it almost impossible to express any suggestion or fault with the role. Without this being seen as a personal attack on Joe's integrity and undoubted good intentions as to how he would like to shape our forum, by making his value judgements upon our contributions to our forum.

As you say it is unpaid and it is not a function I would care to undertake even if it were paid. However it must have its advantages and attractions – as the present W.G shows no sign of handing over and there appears to be no shortage of willing disciples, eager to pass final judgement on the suitability of other people's postings on a forum set aside for their contributions.

As for trust Kevin – I fear that there is no one who should ever willingly be entrusted with such God-like powers over their fellow man (except our creator Max). We can perhaps understand why Gods may wish to delegate these troublesome powers (to their son for example) – but the last experiment did not end too well – did it?

Perhaps in the unlikely event of you or I being given these current arbitrary powers over Joe and all the other posters on our forum – it may then be possible to get a job description, rules and a clear idea who has the power to do what and when. I certainly suspect that if I were appointed to decide over the suitability of Joe's postings and started censoring those that did not conform to my personal concept of order – that he would be among the first people asking to see some rules………………

Mudcat is not a democracy, it is at best a benevolent dictatorship. I dont have a problem with that, after all, I do have a choice as to wether I "live" here or not.

Bassic you make some good points. However I fail to see how any dictatorship can ever be considered as benevolent. It rather depends on the forum (or Royalty) that you find when first entering and whether there is any real justification for any insidious changes. The flooded canyons that now form Lake Powell and Lake Mead in the US West, are attractive to those who sail and rent houseboats. If you had entered them earlier there would have been different and more varied attractions.

Unlike Shambles, I accept that these are the rules and get on with it.

Mick all I am asking for is to see what these censorship rules are (especially for the BS section) so that we can have the choice. For the answers we are given are dishonest. They are that there are no hard and fast rules – when there are obviously many and that posts are only censored rarely and for certain reasons – when it is clear that this is simply not true as the examples given in this thread demonstrate.

When asked – Joe says that he does not see a need for these hard and fast rules to be spelt out. To protect us – I suggest that we do need these rules to be spelt out– so that that the first time we find out that such a rules exists – is NOT when we transgress it. In any other sphere, this would be seen as a modest and reasonable request – why does it generate such hostility when expressed on our forum? I can't delete your threads and posts, as and when I feel like it – but the Witchfinder General can (and frequently does). ……What are the rules, who can censor what and when?

I want you to know that the clones are very judicious in their use of the edit. And each time the edit or delete is used it is run by Joe or Jeff.

Mick you may well believe this to be true but why should anyone take your word for it, when the evidence provided here demonstrates that the opposite is true? I gave the example of the Memorial Thread and linked to it. If you read it, you will see that the editorial action was already taken before anyone else was aware of it. Such action is not reversable and although Joe said that he did not agree with the action taken - it was too late.

This is not an attack by me on individuals but a request for clarity that will not only inform us but will also protect these individuals from criticism. Every business has a list of who is authorised to do what and when - it should not be too difficult to have such a list, and for people to follow it, should it? If the forum must be run like a Government Department and it would appear that it must - we may as well do it properly.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:09 AM

Why trust anyone,

especially Max,

now that he is taking up the Piano Accordion?

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jeri
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:12 AM

After discussing Mick's memory and earlier using JOhn from Hull's removed-and-replaced post (despite the fact JOhn had no problem with it) as evidence that Evil is being done, AND dreaming up negative personality traits for Joe - at length, you now think we should
"Please not let us encourage or be encouraged to join in any more witch-hunts.....Can we just be encouraged to mind our own business and to concentrate on our own contributions?
Feel free to set the example.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Big Mick
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:20 AM

I will try this one more time, but I know that you are incapable or unwilling to accept it.

Roger, it doesn't matter what you want. You are not entitled to what you are asking for. This is not a democracy. It is a website on the friggin' Internet. You have free choice to come here or not. The rules do not have to be published, or even explained. You simply can come here, or choose not to. Joe explains more than he needs to. You are lucky that he is such a decent guy. If I were what he is, I would just be done with you. He has tried a number of times, and with great patience, to get you off this. Max was very wise in making him the Chief Clone.

I believe that the genesis of all this is that decision. I think that you wanted to be what Joe is. Ever since the days that you were a clone, and then not, you have been on this. I believe envy and anger drive this whole waste of bandwidth.

Roger.... accept how it is or leave. That is my opinion. You are not forced to be here, and there are alternatives. I have seen the good work you can do, but it is in danger of being eclipsed by your just being a pain in the ass.

Sorry to be so blunt, but those are my feelings.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:20 AM

Said the Queen of the Witch Hunt.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:23 AM

I think that I will go along with the originator of this discussion, and say it is time to close this soapbox thread.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jeri
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:35 AM

I don't know about closing it, but the Shambles' crusade has been going on (in this thread) for over two weeks without anything new being said and nothing accomplished except people tiring of it. I strongly doubt that HE is going to be the one to stop beating what's left of that horse.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:36 AM

I believe that the genesis of all this is that decision. I think that you wanted to be what Joe is. Ever since the days that you were a clone, and then not, you have been on this.

Mick it would appear that facts are not important to you but there is a danger that others may consider that what you have to say is factual. For the record - I have never been a clone or would have ever wished to be one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jeri
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:40 AM

He's still got you confused with Jon Freeman.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:40 AM

And then the Dark Prince of the Witch hunt weighs in too.

Proving certain power mongers have plenty to keep secret and feel ashamed of--anytime the conversations reverts to "this isn't a democracy" you know the power mongering authoritarians are flexing their muscles to show us WHO IS BOSS AROUND HERE, BUSTER.

Shambles isn't coming off the least bit like a disgruntled former employee. Shambles is coming off quite admirably, as a knowledgeable former insider, turned whistleblower on management. Which is why the current crop of bureauclones are so defensive about Shambles.

The forum bureaucratic hierarchy has been set up to keep the peasants away from King Max, pure and simple. Power was handed to people who think and behave like Max does. Secretively, manipulatively, and dishonestly. There is no transparency or accountability here, either for the money sent in as donations, or on the rules of engagement for forum users. The clones, just like Max, rule by fear and intimidation.

They keep telling us they are nice, decent people who wouldn't hurt a fly. The record shows the exact opposite. When this amount of secrecy is combined with the lack of transparency and accountability to users, you have the perfect storm scenario for abuse of power and corruption.

And that is what you get when you sign on as a member in this place. Secret rules that only the priesthood of clones know and are allowed to enforce. Such rules are obviously arbitrary and often malicious, and reflect Max's contempt for the users of the forum. Because this IS what it all boils down to--Max and his Royal's contempt for many of the people who contribute here.

No legitimate web forums operate like this. By originally claiming he was going to keep the forum unmoderated, Max has created a paradise for his "forum security" clones with egomaniacal power complexes.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Big Mick
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:41 AM

Boy, Shamb, you are right again. You were never a clone. I seem to be confusing you and Jon a great deal. I must apologize again.

But the rest of the post stands. In the words of the Beatles: Let it be.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 10:49 AM

Yeah, except the issue isn't disgruntled former clones, it is disgusted forum users, fed up with the witch hunts, the jackboot clones, and the horrifically bad maintenance of the system, which goes up and down like a crackwhore on Sunset Blvd.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Big Mick
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 11:32 AM

Which completely explains why folks are leaving in droves, and never starting threads every time the 'Cat goes down saying how happy they are its back, eh? sez Mick, tongue planted firmly in cheek

I sure am glad you folks are here to help us muddle through.

Mick, who is quite sure that you guys will still be here flogging this in a year or two.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 11:39 AM

I am beginning to understand how Republicans feel!! Sheeshe!!

If you Invisible Forces for the World Resurrection of Generalized Namelessness and Socialistic Dissipation of Everything will just stick to specifics we'll be fine. Your armwaving is beginning to make you look like delusory herons or something.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 11:50 AM

Actually, those folks are the ones with Mudcat addictions. It has nothing to do with this forum being a great place, it has to do with them needing their fix. It is the same small group of people over and over again who contribute to those types of threads.

Just like it is the same people who manipulate the guest/member thing over and over. Like you and Jeri, for instance.

In case you hadn't noticed Big Mick, in the other threads where the Queen and her Dark Prince of Witchhunts have vented their aggressions on anonymous posting, not too many people are jumping on your vendetta bandwagon. Just the usual handful of Mudcat regular suspects.

You clearly have blinders on when it comes to who is flogging the dead horses--because it isn't something done exclusively by the forum users you and Jeri personally detest. Jeri and Big Mick are the jackboot clones most obviously obsessed with this creepy stalking thing, of "exposing" (as Jeri put it in another thread yesterday) people's "true" identities. catspaw and katlaughing less so, but you have the two of them hoodwinked because of the "stolen identity" fear mongering gene katlaughing was apparently born into her perpetual victimhood with. And there isn't a bigger bully on this forum than catspaw.

When pointing your fingers at other people while calling them bullies, etc. it would be judicious of you to remember the majority of fingers are pointing back at yourselves.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 11:54 AM

It sounds like you are being equally accusatory, and the rule of fingers has just as much bearing on both sides of this haunted mirror, Guest! Why is one set of arm-waving accusations more compelling than another?

You erode your own arguments by being Nameless -- don't you know that?


A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 11:58 AM

Hell, Guest it's a website not a place where you have to live! All this talk about peasants amd conspiracy is nonsense. It's a toy, someone else's toy, and if they don't want to play the way you do you'll have to get your mummy and daddy to buy you one of your own.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 12:08 PM

"Why is one set of arm-waving accusations more compelling than another?"

Because the worst abuses are being committed by those who hold power, against those who don't. The playing field is tilted heavily to the side of those who can cut off anyone's arms on a whim, and do so regularly.

I don't live here manitas. I just roost here now and then, like the crow on the cradle. Nor do I care one iota if the place were to be permanently unplugged at 12:01 a.m. 2004. Mudcat is one of several folk music forums on the internet. Pointing out the nasties in this one is one of my internet hobbies. It takes little thought, because the power abuses here are so blatantly obvious, except to those who are most addicted/invested in this place as their personal clubhouse. Anyone with any emotional distance here just doesn't engage in this petty bullshit, because they know there is real life out there, passing by those who spend all their time and energy in this web backwater.

I figure anyone dumb enough to sign up for cookies and milk here, much less stupid enough to blindly and unquestioningly send their money into Max's black hole bank accounts, gets what they bloody well deserve from the place, frankly.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 12:26 PM

Does the ability to post under the Guest disguise encourage, and/or breed schizophrenia??
Discuss.
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Folkie the Guest
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 12:55 PM

If you think this is bad, you should see the Kingston Trio forum. It's completely censored from any critical thought. People keep analyzing Tom Dooley and asking for the chords for "Scotch & Soda."

It is a complete joke.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 01:02 PM

Good point, Folkie.

As for crows and cradles, I agree with the carrion aspect. Incapable of creative action, the bitter soul hides in a cloud of anti-creative ones. Whatever camaraderie exists among regulars here has been built, message by message and day by day, by them and their creative actions. You will find that for the most part the only time they offer anything less than that is whent hey are addressing someone else's oppressing carping nattering whinging secretive nabobberies.



A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 01:22 PM

Amos my old mate, did you get a dictionary for Christmas? (¦¬{]>
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 01:24 PM

LOL, Giok!! Nar, just a head of steam!! It starts my thesaurus rising up, y'know!

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 01:32 PM

Amos, not only are you king of the sycophant boot lickers, but you surely must be one of the most consistent defenders of the Mudcat status quo. You even have McGrath beat on that count.

You have both my begrudging admiration for your consistency, and my sincere pity for your inability to cope with the cognitive dissonance emanating from this forum in any meaningful, healthy, functional way.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 02:34 PM

aww, Guest...we LIKE our little MudWallow just as it is...cognitive dissonance and all! What a strange hobby, going about setting yourself up as a "higher moral authority" to critique what you perceive as OTHER'S foibles!

(and didn't you read Shambles' note that *I* rank right up there with the best of the bootlickers?)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 02:46 PM

What can I say BillD, except that some of us take great joy and glee in exposing hypocrisy, hyperbole, and two faced duplicity. There are actually people much better at than I am in this world--as I said, for me it is just a hobby.

In the grand scheme of things, taking joy in exposing hypocrisy is no stranger than say, playing at war by particpating in "historic re-enactments". Talk about strange, deeply disturbing hobbies...

BTW, I do agree you are one of the best boot lickers. But no one holds a candle to Amos in that department.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: artbrooks
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 02:51 PM

"Yawn" Like I said, close it down.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 04:56 PM

Could someone pleas epost teh words top "Crow on the Cradle" in this thread - it IS a music Forum, ya know -- and can we please have the verse about the carrot too?

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 05:35 PM

For what it's worth Jeri - not all nameless GUESTs agree with the GUEST(s) who decry your alleged shortcomings. For the time I have been following your posts (a few years now), I have consistently found your perspective to be among the most rational, thoughtful, considerate, levelheaded and logical ones on this forum. And I think I've said so on more than one occasion, anonymously - so you know that I'm not just blowing sunshine. Again, FWIW, IMHO, YMMV and all those other cryptic acronyms.... Best wishes to you for a happy New Year.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 05:49 PM

I am Spatacus...

(Well, it's just as daft as the rest of this stuff...)

HNY to one and all

DtG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 05:51 PM

Guest:

You are of the Unbeing, as of now, as far as I am concerned. We're done.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 06:22 PM

A happy new year to all our readers.
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jeri
Date: 31 Dec 03 - 06:53 PM

Guest-who's-not-blowing-sunshine, thanks! I try. I believe few nameless regular GUESTs are troublemakers. The few just try very hard. I HAVE noticed nice ones!

I tend to think that an individual who excuses their bullying by saying their hobby is "exposing hypocricy" probably really is exposing something. Having a nice argument with someone can be fun, but provoking someone whose life is such that they go out of their way to hurt people just feels mean.

Anyway, I'm off to a party. A happy New Year to you us all!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 12:25 AM

I ghot the solution to those nosty GUEST postings.

Posters posting as "GUEST" can only post to a thread named "BS: GUEST Postings - "Month/year"....   :-)

Robin
Happy New Year here already in Oz...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 12:47 AM

Gesut is bad-get lots gutes.john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 03:40 AM

The answer to nasty guest postings was and is very simple. There is no need to ask a higher power to remove offending BS comments from a section of our forum set aside for BS.

You use the edit button that we are all blessed with and simply not open the thread or post or indeed anything in the BS section. If you do see offending comments anywhere on our forum. you can just ingore them and not open the thread again. Too simple?

The answer is simply that as comments that may offend you may not offend others and asking for threads to be closed - edited or moved only deprives others with different tastes - of the opportunity to respond.

There has always been plenty of room for all our tastes on our forum. Our inability to tolerate our different tastes and fed by the current mania with asking for other's postings to be judged or deleted - is resulting in a situation where there will be only one taste to comform to.

Our forum is and in my opinion should be just a mirror reflecting back what we all contribute. I suggest that it would be better if we all contributed on equal terms.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 10:35 AM

The thread "Joe Pas is the greatest guitar virtuoso" is a fine reminder that not all guests get their kicks out of insulting and hurting other people. I've thoroughly enjoyed the thread and other than predictably smarmy Martin Gibson, all the postings have been positive and enjoyable. My hat off to Guest:Navigator, who is a youthful 80 and started the thread.

The ultimate stupidity of many of the Guest postings is that they criticize Mudcat for being insular and self-satisfied in the most egotistical, smug, self-congratulatory, condesceding way. Maybe they should start their own website and call it holierthanthou.com.

Jerry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Micca
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 10:59 AM

Do you mean this Jerry :o) holierthanthou?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 11:06 AM

I suggest that it would be better if we all contributed on equal terms.

   


A sane, thoughtful and fine suggestion. I submit for reflection that all those who post here DO start out on equal terms.   

All posts are not the same though, and if the extremists want to argue that vilification is equal to edification, they are just being obtuse.

Reputations are not all the same either. They are built slowly with care (or not) for truth, humor, a decent respect for the affinities of the community, accuracy, value, and so on.

But the posters ARE all eual and can change their posts and their reputations at will with a little effort.

This is very much like "real" life in tthat respect.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 11:36 AM

LOL, micca:

I think I'll change my e-mail to muddlingthrough.com

Hope you're feeling better..

Jerry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 11:52 AM

The Crow on the Cradle

The sheep's in the meadow
The cow's in the corn
Now is the time for a child to be born
He'll laugh at the moon
And cry for the sun
And if it's a boy he'll carry a gun
Sang the crow on the cradle

And if it should be that this baby's a girl
Never you mind if her hair doesn't curl
With rings on her fingers
And bells on her toes
And a bomber above her wherever she goes
Sang the crow on the cradle

The crow on the cradle
The black and the white
Somebody's baby is born for a fight
The crow on the cradle
The white and the black
Somebody's baby is not coming back
Sang the crow on the cradle

Your mother and father will sweat and they'll slave
To build you a coffin and dig you a grave
Hush-a-bye little one, never you weep
For we've got a toy that can put you to sleep
Sang the crow on the cradle

Bring me my gun, and I'll shoot that bird dead
That's what your mother and father once said
The crow on the cradle, what can we do
Ah, this is a thing that I'll leave up to you
Sang the crow on the cradle
Sang the crow on the cradle


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 11:54 AM

By Sydney Carter, of course.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 12:05 PM

First two lines borrowed from "Little Boy Blue"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jeri
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 12:52 PM

I don't believe it would be good to punish all of them because of a very small number of obnoxious posters. We have GUESTS who're civil, even kind, we have people who don't want to be the subject of rumor, or who they are to be more important than what they say, those who feel they're being stalked, as well as folks just dropping in to ask or answer a question.

Jerry, that's the impression I get regarding accusatory posts, GUEST or otherwise. They point fingers at others because it's less frightening than looking in a mirror. The self-righteous attitude assures people focus, not on what they say but how they say it. The stated subject is simply an excuse, never intended to be taken seriously.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 01:08 PM

Jerry, OK, if your definition of smarmy is that I think jazz sucks I guess you will just have to deal with it. Actually, I like most swing, but find jazz guitar players like Joe Pass boring. Want to start a thread now about Wes Montgomery?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,guessed.
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 01:12 PM

It is life.
Some anonymous guests are nasty.
Some named regulars are nasty.
If you don't like something why not just push it to one side of your plate and get on with the rest.

I was a named guest, until I saw all the back biting that goes on amongst the regulars...it is probably still going on.

Some of you seem to have TOO much of a history, and it keeps overspilling into the threads at every opportunity. Nothing wrong with that, but then do not wonder why some of us do not wish to be part of it.Named regs bitching about something that occured between yourselves a couple of years ago, is not of general interest to many people visiting this site.It is confusing and ruins the run of a conversation, which was a criticism used against people choosing to be ANON.

What I tend to do now, is run through the list of names associated with a thread, it is easy to avoid the obviously ranty ones, who dislike EVERYTHING that wasn't as it was at the start. And if someone doesn't want to respond to me because I AM a guest, that is fine with me, no complaints there,there are plenty of nice ones amongst you who do.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Micca
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 01:14 PM

Jeri, my compliments, your second para is almost the perfect definition of a Troll!! A bit like the diffference between a Doughnut and an a**hole, both are round ,brown and perforated, both have their uses but one is pleasing to be around and the other not. nuff said.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 01:39 PM

My apology, Martin Gibson. It just seems like I rarely see you post a message that isn't contrary. How about YOU starting a thread about something you feel positive about?

Jerry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 02:22 PM

Jeri -

A fine way to start off the first day of the New Year, by hitting the proverbial nail squarely on the proverbial head (re your 01 JAN 04 - 12:52PM).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 02:59 PM

I'm a nice guest.

Happy new year to EVERYONE and may all your dreams come true.

From a nameless folkie.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 03:38 PM

Nothing whatsoever anyone could object to in a handle like GUEST,guessed. It makes it possible to reply to a post without going through the rigmarole of copying the date and time and that; ut alkso measn that if anyone else wants to identify which post the reply is referring to, they do not have to go through an equally cumbersome ritual.

Nobody objects to anonymity as such in the slightest, that I've ever seen. Most people here have always been anonymous, and everyone is as anonymnous as they choose to be.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Jan 04 - 05:40 PM

I don't have any real problem with "GUEST, something" - teh only problem is that you can't be sure who you are talking to - I had a Schizophrenic manager at work for 10 years - life was not pleasant, apart from my career being destroyed...

Thanks McGrath for the song!

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 09:45 AM

A sane, thoughtful and fine suggestion. I submit for reflection that all those who post here DO start out on equal terms.

Amos I can only beleive that you are being deliberately obtuse and simply ignoring the evidence being provided here. Perhaps you could reflect on this evidence?

There are now a numberless amount of unknown posters (i.e. the 'clones')who are not posting on equal terms. I cannot censor their contributions even if they publicly call me names like "idiot" (like in this thread) but they can censor mine - as if I used such language - this could be construed as an abusive personal attack. Or requests to close the thread would be made because others thought the contents to be unsuitable - and the thread will be closed - as this one was. The reasons for this or who was responsible and why it was susequently re-opened have yet to be made public.

These few have the power in unknown varying degrees - to censor the postings of everyone else. Despite the often quoted and well-believed concept that these powers are rarely exercised and only used for abusive posts - the evidence provided here - which is in no way the whole story and is only that that I have stumbled over recently - demonstrates a different story.

There are many occasions where threads and post (even BS threads and including this one) are closed, deleted, moved, edited or otherwise censored on grounds such as the contribution not conforming to the individual 'clone's' concept of:

1 What can be understood.

2 Is political (i.e The Menorial Thread).

3 Exceeding some unspecified quota of postings.

And just about any other reason.

posts are not the same though, and if the extremists want to argue that vilification is equal to edification, they are just being obtuse.

Those that may argue this may well be obtuse but anyone who argues that abitary and unaccountable censorship of our postings on our forum
is equal to any degree of freedom of expression - is being equally obtuse and ignoring all the painful lessons of our history.

If you contend that some form of censorship of our forum is necessary - would it be unreasonable to ask and to expect to be told what the rules were, when they can be exercised and by whom?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 10:50 AM

the RULES?...you KNOW the basic rules, Shambles...but you would never in a million years accept that part of the rules that requires 'some' arbitrary decisions that you might quibble with.

In any case where editing/moderating/censorship is employed in any degree, there will be someone who disagrees with it, in part or in whole.

Therefore, I would describe the basic rules once more:(MY description only)

Max is in charge...he has decided that some things would be better edited. He has designated 2 people to be in charge of this. They have several helpers.

This system is designed to 'reduce' duplications, mistakes, incoherence, personal attacks, SPAM, and blatent, abusive trolling. MOST of these efforts go to simple 'housekeeping' chores, NOT to censorship.

Your objections, after all the rhetoric, boil down to simply that YOU DON'T LIKE IT! There is no doubt....everyone understands that you don't like it, and mostly, your objections are left un-edited and on the record, as is much of the blather and trolling that goes on. Joe has repeatedly noted that he censors as little as possible...it's just that YOU want a different set of guidelines.

I don't see why you persist...perhaps all the efforts to overturn PELS (a just cause) have made "righteous indignation" a major hobby, but in this case you are in the minority. You have added invective like "witchfinder" and "bootlicker" to the discussion, as if THAT will make your point better....did you never hear that "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar"?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 10:56 AM

You know, the Mudcat status quo looks very much like a right wing, neo-con presidential administration I've heard about...

Amos labels anyone who disagrees with or crticize the status quo as "extremists"...

Big Mick acts like Max's Karl Rove advisor.

And I'm sorry but, although Jeri is usually very level headed and reasonable, she also has this McCarthyite streak that is about a mile wide.

The desire on the part of the defenders of the Mudcat status quo to arbitrarily sanitize this web site of so-called personal attacks (while personally attacking anyone who disagrees with them in a very nasty manner, as Shambles has pointed out) and "out" anonymous posters, doesn't do much for the ambiance around here. As another guest pointed out, all this petty personal squabbling truly does get in the way of decent conversations.

And again, I'm sorry, but I have a real problem with the hypocrisy of making nasty, personal attacks on people whom are deemed "not nice" to the friends of the Mudcat elite. That is REALLY what this all boils down to. Petty tyranny over personal loyalties.

I mean, Big Mick can't even distinguish between the criticisms of Jon Freeman and Shambles. Those perfectly legitimate criticisms, made in genuine attempts to make Mudcat a better place, not a worse one, are not indistinguishable. The concerns each of them expressed were quite different. Yet they have both been painted with the same broad, black brush. And in Jon Freeman's case, tarred and feathered to boot.

At the root of much of the forum angst is the demonization of those who choose to use the guest log-in without filling in the from blank. As many have noted in the past, this is a very easy thing to either 1) change and require something be typed into the 'from' line before posting is allowed, or; 2) police and filter out truly offensive material.

But the offensive posting and personal attacks posted engaged in by so many members makes #2 a moot point here. It works really well in most moderated forums, but not here.

So we are left with this bad taste in our mouths, guests and members alike, about the way the arbitrary, unbalanced, unfair, and bigoted way this forum is run. Now, a few posters choose to go the bootlicker route, and will do anything to stay on the good side of the clones. The majority of posters here just shut up and take it. And a few of us choose neither of the above options, and pick and choose the battles we fight here, as we would do anywhere we encounter this level of dysfunctionalism in our communities, online or off.

One thing I do agree with. It isn't going to change, as long as Max owns the server, and the current crop of clones remain in charge. To be sure, there is no other online folk music forum I have encountered that has this level of ill will towards the people who use the forum, either occassionally or regularly.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,guest
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 10:59 AM

Will you named regulars please STOP fighting.................it is boring/hysterical, and gives us guests a bad name.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 11:20 AM

Shambles, you're twisting my point. Any of those who serve as clones are posting on the same footing as anyone else. If they started posting personal assaults their stuff would be messed weith jsut as surely as yours or anyone else's who did the same. That they are also clones (meaning they can fix posts) and you are not is because for whatever reason they are trusted to exercise mature judgement. And when they do so it is primarily to masintain an atmosphere where people won't get hurt, balanced against letting this flow as much as possible without interference. Sure it is a judgement call.

But you may have forgotten that we have seen many instances of what happens when there is NO editing at all. It gets wild, the invective gets corrosive as hell, people come in and tromp on personalities of others for no reason except bile, and a lot of pain and bull gets generated which serves no good and no purpose.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 12:59 PM

...these complaints are getting to sound more & more like "have you stopped beating your wife yet?"

The complaintant simply states that management is being unfair and biased, and that by definition, anyone who agrees with management are bootlicking toadys. The argument is circular...and difficult to counter without resorting to the same techniques.

Did you ever read the notice that appears on the doors to shopping malls (USA, anyway) that says, in rough translation, "yes, this is an open, public place, but that doesn't mean that you necessarily can do as you please here. The management IS in charge and reserves the right to oversee what goes on here."?

think about it...

If you choose to take my defense of this policy as indicating that I am either 'one of the "elite"' or a bootlicker to the elite..*grin*, be my guest ..umm, go ahead...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 01:21 PM

Well I've had a couple of doubts about Mudcat, and I've mentioned them at the time, but I'm not going to keep repeating them as if that made them more valid.
It's a bit like democracy, not a perfect system, but the best we've tried so far.
To those who don't think it's being done properly, please would you suggest the remedy to your complaint, and make your criticism constructive rather than destructive.
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 01:22 PM

"Any of those who serve as clones are posting on the same footing as anyone else. If they started posting personal assaults their stuff would be messed weith jsut as surely as yours or anyone else's who did the same."

This is just plain wrong. Joe Offer, for one, is constantly posting personal attacks in his little colored letter inserts, against posters he personally dislikes. Because he hasn't done it to you Amos, doesn't mean he isn't doing it.

The same is also true of certain clones (catspaw and Big Mick particularly, though katlaughing and Jeri occassionally jump on the posters too), who personally attack/engage in name calling of the poster they feel they must "deal" with--they rarely keep their personal animosity towards that poster to themselves, which is what good forum moderators always do.

Their behavior only aggravates and escalates situations that could easily be controlled without creating a negative atmosphere, if anyone here just understood how to moderate a discussion forum.

As to the public space thing, the only notices I've seen posted at shopping malls/public spaces that are privately owned, are on solicitation, leafletting, and banning guns. It doesn't say anything about management harrassing and haranguing patrons they decide "are a pain in the ass".

But so many of the regular members and clones here don't ever participate in any other online communities, they have no standards to use to compare this place with, which is also part of the problem.

For instance, I can't imagine the regulars at rec.music.folk or uk.music.folk, putting up with the likes of catspaw, much less giving him the keys to the house.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 01:27 PM

GUEST 02 JAN 04 - 10:56AM

"And I'm sorry but, although Jeri is usually very level headed and reasonable, she also has this McCarthyite streak that is about a mile wide."

Can't say as I've ever seen it; that's not to say I've seen every post she's ever submitted, but...perhaps you could provide examples on which you stake your claim.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 01:43 PM

GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 01:27 PM

I could, and I suppose it would be the decent thing to do for the benefit of those who haven't seen it with their own eyes. Jeri's McCarthyite tendencies aren't that difficult to avoid if you don't get involved in the "personal attack" drama in the forum, and stick to the music stuff up top.

But I also know better. To do so is an exercise in futility. To understand just how futile, just have a look at the responses to Shambles in this thread.

I've given what I think ARE positive criticisms in this thread, in other threads, now and at other times in the past. It doesn't matter, because the issues here are, as I said, about personal loyalty to the Mudcat elite. Valid constructive criticism of the forum and it's moderators simply isn't tolerated here. And anyone who has attempted it is immediately attacked, demonized, and forever ostracized by the Mudcat regulars.

It happened to Bruce Olson. It happened to Jon Freeman. It happened to Shambles. And it has happened to countless guests and a good number of regulars who have left this place in disgust.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 03:47 PM

Valid constructive criticism of the forum and it's moderators simply isn't tolerated here.

This is the core of the matter and I feel it is a misstatement of fact. I have often suggested ways to improve things and been heard either in silence or with acknowledgment, but certainly with tolerance. I have seen intolerance toward snideness and carping and passive-aggressive backstabbing, but not of constructive criticism offered in a spirit of friendship, if you know what I mean.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 04:16 PM

Why dont you all shut the fuck up!
Dont you realise what sad OLD bastards we are .
Most of us just want a warm place to curl up and die.
Guests....Your self obsession is just "rage against the going of the light"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 04:20 PM

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/bomb.php


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 07:10 PM

It's a bit like democracy, not a perfect system, but the best we've tried so far.

With the greatest of respect it is nothing like democracy (not even its supporters make that claim for it) – it simply does not work and it is the only thing tried so far.

If we only had one person making value judgements and censoring what they considered as not suitable on our forum and responding to complaints about what other's post – it would be bad enough but there are a number of people doing this and not communicating. The Memorial Thread and this one are but two examples of the way the current system works – or rather does not work because the clones do not consult together, and act as we are told they are supposed to.

I can't see that anyone would like any form of censorship but it is not the fact that I do not like this form of arbitrary unaccountable censorship (especially of the BS section) – the blind acceptance of which I also consider to be dangerous. But I have not just objected or made general statements - I have produced the evidence in this thread that has clearly and finally demonstrated that the system does not work. And that the way many people honestly believe it is supposed to work – is not actually what is happening. I have also made many positive alternative suggestions.

You may have expected this to be the start of a sensible debate on how things could be improved - but amazingly we still have people blindly supporting the current system and ignoring the evidence of how poorly it is performing, how counter-productive these measures have been and completely ignoring the separate section set aside for BS or off-topic postings……..Perhaps we can start this sensible debate now?

From the earliest days of our forum there were two main problems – neither confined to this forum. These were quite different problems but the same blunt instrument was and is still being used to combat them – as if they were the same problem.

The first problem –- was abusive postings. After requests to Max to do something – the Guest idea was born – and that solved that problem didn't it? We now appear to be in agreement that the only answer to this problem is to ignore and to encourage others to ignore these abusive postings. After all of this time, this still appears to be too difficult for many of our regular posters to manage.

The second problem was off-topic threads.

We now have a separate BS section where off-topic subjects are confined. This measure alone you may think would finally put and end to this second problem and for control? But no – even though anyone opening a BS thread will not surprisingly find BS – the need to control our contributions to our forum to a shape that is acceptable to our Witchfinder General's personal concept of order and control - continues - even in the BS section!

Like many other posters, the BS section does not really attract me very much but I can see no need to use exactly the same controls in this section as are thought necessary on the main forum. It has a useful function as a safety net – but it has to be permitted to operate as such. Perhaps anyone complaining on the Help forum (or elsewhere) that they are offended by anything they open on the BS section can simply be told not to open these threads? Then our clones could confine their censoring actions to the main forum or better still hand back their edit buttons to Max?

When janitors start to see their job as deciding what pupils to exclude - instead of keeping the school tidy – perhaps it is time to thank them for their efforts and say goodbye?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 08:19 PM

GUEST 02 Jan 04 - 01:43 PM

"Jeri's McCarthyite tendencies aren't that difficult to avoid if you don't get involved in the "personal attack" drama in the forum, and stick to the music stuff up top."

-- I guess that's why I've missed her "McCarthyite tendencies" then, because, you're right, I don't get involved in the "personal attack" drama in the forum, although I probably spend the majority of my time in the "lower 40" area (the B.S. area).

I will bid you good day, then, and wish you well as we depart in different directions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 10:06 PM

"...amazingly we still have people blindly supporting the current system and ignoring the evidence of how poorly it is performing,"

--and I suppose that the only evidence otherwise will be when we all "see the light" and agree with YOU, Shambles?

Do you not even see the possibility that most of those "supporting the current system" are not doing it 'blindly'?



"In the devil's theology, the important thing is to be absolutely
right and prove everyone else is absolutely wrong."
- Thomas Merton


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 10:12 PM

These days, I am reminded of an endless rash of nasty Guest postings a year ago. It was so disgusting that it was almost enough to make me throw up my hands and give up on Mudcat. Finally, someone must have sung Send In The Clones, and Joe, Max and the others came riding to the rescue and got rid of all the garbage that was being posted. Life was very peaceful and enjoyable for almost a year. What does all this ugliness accomplish?

Some folks get their jollies in the sickest ways.

Jerry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Jan 04 - 11:26 PM

Was just watching Bill Moyers, and in a discussion about evil, he mentioned two quotes about people's fear of the truth. The first is a Turkish quote:

"The man who speaks the truth will be run out of nine villages."

The other attribution I can't recall. But the quote was:

"Tell the truth, then run."

People who speak the truth to fearful people (and Mudcat is a place where many, many people fear anonymous posters) pay a high price, always.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Amos
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 12:33 AM

There is no reason to fear anonymous posters. Why should anyone? The only thing that gets the dander up around here is not anonymity but anti-social posts which are couched in vague and negative generalizations, broad condemnations unsupported by specifics, and   other stock in trade of the pusillanimous.

Why not tell the truth over your own name, and stand for it? That's a kind of honesty that others can respect and understand.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 02:09 AM

"--and I suppose that the only evidence otherwise will be when we all "see the light" and agree with YOU, Shambles?

Do you not even see the possibility that most of those "supporting the current system" are not doing it 'blindly'?

This is not a matter of opinion it is a matter of fact. But if folk wish to believe what they do - despite the facts there is little I can do. But that does not mean that I have ignore the evidence and change my view because it may be a minority one - if indeed it is a minority one?

This is our forum for our views - if you don't like me expressing those views - don't open the thread. Bill if you can produce the evidence of the clones working as you wish me to accept that they do - then provide the evidence that will convince me.

Do I have to convince you that the world is indeed round and will you continue to slag me off personally - until despite the evidence I accept that it is flat? Ignoring the reality, just attacking me and accusing me of introducing words and concepts like 'bootlicker', when you were the one who first proudly claimed to licking boots is hardly going to convince me or anyone else that your view of what the clones are doing is a correct view and can be demonstrated.

For folks who may not have read this from the beginning it may be as well to remind them at this point that this thread was asking for ideas as the original poster had been written to and wrongly accused by one of our clones of writing abusive postings.

I am just suggesting that when the witch hunt is earnestly burning the wrong people - it may be time to review the situation to prevent others from suffering from the paranoid fever that drives it.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 05:44 AM

I reiterate, NO POSITIVE CRITICISM! Please state not only what you dislike about the status quo, but what you would like to see put in its place. Perhaps you would like to start a thread of suggestions for changes in the running of Mudcat, and throw the subject open to discussion. Or is your paranoia so deep that you immediately think everybody will disagree with you no matter what. There is no compulsion to partake in the activities of the Mudcat, and if any of the carpers think they can do better, then why don't they try starting their own website. It's not all beer and skittles!
I have now said all I am going to on this thread, and so I wish ALL of you a happy new year.
John


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 06:41 AM

Borrowing some words from Amos

I don't FEAR anonymous posters. The main thing that gets me going is not anonymity but anti-social posts which are couched in vague and negative generalizations, broad condemnations unsupported by specifics, and other stock in trade of the pusillanimous.

The other thing is that when someone says some interesting, there is no way to contact them to ask to follow up on it. Like when some anonymous GUEST said they know how to "bend notes on Piano Cccordions", I suspected that they were just spouting crap (which as it turns out they were!), but I always am prepared to to discover something that I don't know and learn some thing new.

I now totally distrust anything said by anonymous GUESTs in this place - but might be prepared to take some notice of those "named GUESTS" who always use the same moniker - but there is no guarantee against ANYONE using such a moniker.

I think this discussion has gone around in circles for long enough - it's covering no new ground.

If it is still grinding away in a few days time, I shall start posting songs in here... :-)

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Gene Burton
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 07:20 AM

I would just like to take this opportunity to state my complete and implacable opposition to absolutely everything.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 08:30 AM

"bend notes on Piano Cccordions",

Question! If it's possible to bend notes on a moothie, then why not on an accordian?

This is not a spurious posting.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Big Mick
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 09:00 AM

Once again you set yourself up as the martyr, Shambles. Hell, you've been doing it for all the years I have known you.

There are many anon posters here that are fine contributing folks. There are two or three specific GUESTS who like to create a problem and then say "see, there is a problem". They are classic trolls. When I see them using multiple identities to create a problem and then ambush decent folks who respond, I take 'em on. You trolls consistently try to imply that there are many of you out there, but the PM's I get run 10 to 1 in support of taking the piss out of you. You imply that folks are hugely dissatisfied, yet this site remains one of the most popular, and in the main it is populated with decent and noteworthy folks.

I won't even ask you to leave, because you revel in that. Rather I am just telling you that I will expose your stupid crap. Jerry Rassmussen said it best. He is an example of the best among us. He uses this place for interesting discussion, and to inspire goodness. He also uses it for research. And most importantly, he loves its sense of community.

Mick


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Tinker
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 10:20 AM

Community is an illusive idea especially to those who find themselves unable to join. Fortunately it is full of paradox… A sweet communion of individual differences. There are always those who feel the best way to enter is to send in the storm troopers and create a new order where they can be comfortable. But in a true community it only rallies those who have found shelter and the pleasure of living within relationships.   

Having met most of those Shambles rallies against, and knowing them to be oh so human, and, oh so diverse, this thread leaves me more wistful than angry.   They don't sing the same music or live comparable lives but they are all folks I am proud to be in community with in the real world and the virtual.

Yes, in the real world a non profit of the age and stage of Mudcat should be ripe for take over. But Mudcat is community not corporation. Those who rally loudest are those who have yet to figure out how to open their own doors and join the music. The door here is still open... the songs continue.


Kathy


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 11:27 AM

What a beautiful posting, Tinker!

You know, we have no reason to be defensive. And you are right... we are a diverse coming together of people. A true community has unity, not uniformity.

As for being bearers of "The Truth," truth is measured by its fruits.
Look at the fruits of Mudcat! When someone like Walking Eagle is struggling with depression, we are all their in openness and honesty.
We trust each other enough to share all of our weaknesses... our bouts with alcoholism, mental illness, lack of faith, confusion and at times, even hopelessness. And, it's not just members. Read Guest's thread on Mental blocks. This is a Guest who has opened up their own desire to feel that wonderful creative flow when everything is working "right," when you're playing music. This is not someone who comes in claiming to know the secret to creativity. This is someone coming in in honesty, and humility. The responses to the thread have been a genuine attempt to better understand the whole process of creativity. And, read the thread on Joe Pas started by an 80 year old Guest, Navigator. It was a delightful thread.

The fruits of Mudcat are compassion, honesty, mutual dependence, encouragement, humor (not sarcasm) and sharing.

Look at the fruits of the self-proclaimed "Truth" bearing Guests: Judgment, cynicism, bitterness, antagonism, self-centeredness, and a lack of humility.

I am proud of Mudcat. I see the good in the people who come in here, including many Guests. I appreciate Joe and Max and the others who give so unselfishly of themselves so that we have this place to enjoy each other. I will not use the Guest term "clones." That is an insulting, judgmental word. There aren't any clones in Mudcat. We are all ourselves, whether we are Christians, Buddhists, Agnostics or Atheists. We enjoy each other, even if we don't all enjoy the same kind of music, and live in very different cultures. Our sharing enriches each other.

Years ago, I had a good friend who was a terrible cynic. She didn't believe you could trust anyone, that "need" was just another four letter word and that tomorrow was a threat, not a promise. And yet she was very drawn to the conversations and correspondence I chared with Art Thieme for so many years. I always pictured her as a wild animal, attraced to a glowing bonfire in the woods. There were people gathered around the fire, talking, singing and enjoying each other's company. She liked to come and lurk in the darkenss, just beyond the reach of the light, and there was am attraction that she couldn't resist. But, she never was able to overcome her cynicism, her lack of faith in the goodness of people or the depressed state she was in.

The truth will set you free. I see freedom as openness, humility, unselfishness, compassion, sharing and love. "Free" is not bitterness, cynicism and being judgmental. People who are bitter, cyncial and judgmental are in a prison of their own making. They are the key holders, and like you, Tinker, I feel a great sadness that people can't just come up and join us at the fire. It's warm up here. We don't claim to know the Truth. We are searchers, and in our incompleteness we come together to offer each other encouragement, and occasional wisdom that is not our own.

Hail Mudcat! For such imperfect creatures, we're doing pretty good..

And to our Guests... come and sit down by the fire. You are always welcome if you can find it in your heart to come in peace and humility.

Jerry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Tinker
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 12:06 PM

"peace and humility".... Jerry I'd have to expand the spectrum to include Rowdy Joviality... and the ability to harmonize on the chorus


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 12:32 PM

For even more seasoning, Tinker, add wackiness and silliness. Fun is one of the main ingredients in here..

Jerry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 02:34 PM

Having met most of those Shambles rallies against, and knowing them to be oh so human, and, oh so diverse, this thread leaves me more wistful than angry.

Kathy I have tried hard not to rally against any individual and I have tried very hard not to do this when replying to the many less than charitable posts directed at me. I will repeat that the issue is not one of personalities and I will continue to try and stick to the point that I am trying to make and to encourage a sensible debate. I am sorry if calling for a sensible debate makes you angy.

The humanity and diversity of our well-intentioned clones has never been in question. [Clone is a word used to describe those few entrusted with an edit button and as far as I am aware it not a derogatory word and it is their word not one of mine]

As far as I am concerned I have been a positive contributor to our forum for many years and remain very much a member of this community.
But surely the true test of any community is how accepting and inclusive it can demonstrate itself to be?

Sadly I see far too much exclusion being tolerated and encouraged and this inward-looking siege mentality is using censorship and deletions to shape this community when it should be being shaped by freedom of expression and all of our contributions.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 03:25 PM

"you were the one who first proudly claimed to licking boots " ...ummm, if tongue-in-cheek cynicism is lost on you, I give up.

"if you can produce the evidence of the clones working as you wish me to accept that they do - then provide the evidence that will convince me."    ...as I remember the order of things, YOU began the issue by claiming that Joe and/or the clones were abusing their power. There is a principle in debate that states that the burden of proof is on the assertor. I am not sure why I, or anyone else needs to 'prove' that they are not if we simply don't see your assertion to be true.
   Your statement "This is not a matter of opinion it is a matter of fact." kind of leaves me baffled. How can anyone debate or discuss if we can't agree on a basic issue of whether it IS or is NOT a fact?

You go on to say .." But that does not mean that I have ignore the evidence and change my view because it may be a minority one "

indeed...if you believe this, I guess you just believe it. As to majority/minority, I don't remember seeing many others (except for anonymous jabs) agreeing with you, while there are many long-time members who are sad and upset with your claims.

The question is, of course, what should we all do at this point if we can't convince each other? You say you intend to remain here, finding some virtues in Mudcat, I assume, that are NOT corrupted by some sort of 'underground elite'.

I would suggest then, that we ALL go back to posting about music, making jokes, trading information and debating the important (and trivial) issues of the world as best we can....and that IF you see specific, egregious evidence of editing and censorship that you deem unreasonable, then call attention to it. And...IF you are overruled, then shrug! This long, contentious claim & counter-claim.."yes you did", "no I didn't" accomplishes little.

I have tried to figure out how to say all this without it sounding like I am just telling you to "like it or lump it", but I suspect that's how you will read it. Perhaps that IS the only thing to say to someone with your views, as the fact remains that "Our Forum" is not a democracy. It is some sort of Oligarchy or Enlightened Despotism...but one that 'most' or its members feel ok with most of the time.

Shambles....you have much to say and contribute on matters OTHER THAN whether the forum management is biased & corrupt. I hope you will do that....

So...as of now, I will NOT debate this issue with you in public threads any more. I will try to answer PMs if you wish,(though I am not the decision maker) and if it seems there is any progress in understanding to be made that way.

I care about this place, I know others do and I assume YOU do....we just have different views. We CAN all co-exist here if we work at minimizing our differences......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Tinker
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 04:17 PM

One of the first ground rules of any " sensible debate" is to come to agree on the terms being used. My definition of community is far, far from the one Shambles brings to the table.

My working definition of community is based around the work of Ficino and the concept of convivium. It is not all "accepting and inclusive" which to me would best be included in a definition of anarchy. Anachry accepts barbarism. Jerry and I could probably play with these ideas for days, because our basic definitions are coming from similar places. .

"The convivium is rest from labours, release from cares and nourishment of genius; it is the demonstration of love and splendour, the food of good will, the seasoning of friendship, the leavening of grace and the solace of life… Everything should be seasoned with the salt of genius and illumined by the rays of mind and manners.""

Shambles ( or anyone else) if you want to PM me and play with the words and concepts I'd love to. But not as an attack on a fluid community that attempts to maintain humane dimensions and values. Mudcat (to me) is a "definition in process" of this model.
I will not post to this thread again, but I enjoyed the exercise.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 04:29 PM

The last post was to me,the biggest load of psycho-babble that iv ever heard. If were going to be an interesting and caring forum, weve got to say things that actually mean something. If I read another post like that I shall walk into the Atlantic Ocean till my bunnet floats ...Ake.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 Jan 04 - 09:38 PM

"One thing I do agree with. It isn't going to change, as long as Max owns the server, and the current crop of clones remain in charge. To be sure, there is no other online folk music forum I have encountered that has this level of ill will towards the people who use the forum, either occassionally or regularly."

It's not important who said that but its message seems elemental. From the very early years of school, and even before that, with one's own siblings, we all have to learn to live with obvious limits- so, if you know it's not going to change, you also know that your own attitude is the only thing you can change about it.

Secondly, the 'ill will' of the people on the Mudcat seems almost entirely a component of SOME Guests and some others who perceive a problem on the Mudcat that they can't live with - or without. Almost every Mudcatter I have 'met' much prefers things to be enlightening, funny, friendly, supportive, and even loving. Acrimony and Amity are not comfortable bedmates. As they say, a 'soft answer turneth away wrath'. Besides it bugs the bejeebers out of them.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 05:22 AM

Bill you do seem to have trouble with facts. It is a clear fact that in this thread you accused me of damaging my case by introducing terms like 'bootlicker'. It is also a fact that I pointed out the it was you that introduced this concept. The (humourous) manner in which you introduced it, I really have no trouble with but it remains a demonstrable fact that it was your introduction.

It is also a clear fact that the evidence presented in this thread (and which you still choose just to ignore) is that 'the clones' are NOT simply acting in the way you expect me to accept that they are.

You have also introduced into this thread and attributed to me the following-

YOU began the issue by claiming that Joe and/or the clones were abusing their power

Shambles....you have much to say and contribute on matters OTHER THAN whether the forum management is biased & corrupt.

The problem is that many later readers will assume that is what I have said and jump on the defensive bandwagon - when careful reading of my posts will show that it is not.

Asking for the censorship, moving, editing of other people's contributions and the irreversable nature of this action taken in response - without the poster's knowledge or consent - remains to me -a BIG DEAL. It does not show the level of respect toward our contributions that has been accepted as best practice on our forum over many years.

If it were done ONLY to abusive postings - as this action is defended on - this may be acceptable to many - but the evidence provided here proves that it is NOT only limited to abusive postings.

I am just concerned that recent evidence (provided in this thread) suggests that far from being seen as a BIG DEAL - censorhip action based only on the value judgements of a number of 'clones' is now being taken as routine and without the consultation that we are informed is necessary, even of BS in The BS Section!

We all make mistakes but the hope is always that will learn from these mistakes and not repeat them. I would just like to see what measures will be taken to ensure that these mistakes will not be repeated.

As for the majority view? I suspect the the majority of posters are happily posting music posts - unaware of the so-called 'debate' taking place here, in the second division. The majority view is probably split between those who consider this to be an unmoderated forum and those who think that the site is owned by Joe Offer and he can do as he wishes. Neither of which are in fact true....but neither are much corrected..................


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Termagant
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 12:12 PM

"...so, if you know it's not going to change, you also know that your own attitude is the only thing you can change about it."

That is correct. So why do so many of you continue whining/whinging about people who don't share your views about how you think people "should" post in this forum? Hmmmm...what's good for the goose, m'dear.

BTW, I would like to send an enthusiastic "hear, hear" to akenaton!

"Acrimony and Amity are not comfortable bedmates."

But they usually find ways to live together in all human relationships, don't they?

Pardon me while I gag on the saccharine, cheap sentiments being expressed by the Warriors for the Mudcat Status Quo (tm) about this wonderful, quaint little internet backwater...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 12:45 PM

yes, I see I actually did say "bootlicker" first... so stipulated. Perhaps it is advancing age. Mea culpa

Shambles only introduced "Witchfinder General","inquisitorial gaze", "willing disciples", "paranoid fever","heavy handed", "Petty tyranny" "snitchers corner" "clumsy and ill-directed censorship" and "authoritarian posturing".

Some of the terms just noted led me to the conclusion that Joe and some clones were being accused of abusing their power


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Termagant
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 01:28 PM

Bill D appears to be catching on. Yes Bill, we really are saying that Joe and the clones are abusing their power.

Some of us predicted this sort of petty tyranny and arbitrary censorship would be the outcome of Joe Offer and the clones being given authority to moderate the forum, when the Mudcat makeover was announced back in the day.

Max is a paranoid authoritarian type, and the acorn never falls far from the tree. Hence the Mudcat guard dogs being who and what they are.

The terms 'witch hunt' and 'McCarthyism' are certainly applicable here, both in the context Shambles has used it, and in the context that anon guest has used it. The obsession of the clones wanting to 'expose' anonymous/pseudonymous posters in this forum is reminiscent of the 'outing' of communists, gays, etc. The stalking of certain posters here, and the censorship of their posts/threads, is just plain creepy. Not because moderation of chat forums is creepy, but because of the obsessive/complusive way the process is shrouded in secrecy and surrounded by forum intrigues. Considering how little is truly at stake here, one can only put such behavior down to petty tyranny and arbitrary censorship.

And then there is the handful of members (just have a look at any Mudcat threads with the word "GUEST" in the title to see who the usual suspects are) who use this place as their retirement/shut-in clubhouse, and who foster a hysterical, xenophobic environment that keeps this dysfunctional game between the Mudcat ruling elite, the Mudcat royals, and "guests" going.

So yes, Bill D. It is fabulous to see you understanding that some of us are criticizing what we see as an abuse of power and authority here, which is far beyond the pale of reasonable forum moderation. It is just such petty and arbitrary action which fosters the paranoid, hysterical, xenophobic environment so many people perpetually complain about.

Please explain it to all your Mudcat friends now, won't you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 03:02 PM

Bill - Not guilty to "petty tyranny"......

Whatever term you may choose it is now a fact that our 'clones' are not operating as you wish me and everyone else to accept that they are operating and that the witch hunt has resulted in them falsely accusing a member of sending abusive postings.

Perhaps Bill you could address how these mistakes can be prevented and how communication between our 'clones'/ volunteers can take place as you wish me to accept that it currently does?

The following refers to this thread and was publicly posted on another one.....

You're right, Shambles, it WAS closed - from 22 December to 23 December. It was closed due to a miscommunication between volunteers, for which I apologize. I reopened the thread on 23 December, as soon as I found that it had been closed. Sorry for the inconvenience
-Joe Offer-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 03:19 PM

Man! Ize getting obssessively paranoid, and hysterically xenophobic.

Ooooowwwweeeoooooo!

The truth is out there!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Totally spooked,

Jerry


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 04:11 PM

Termagent..it is hard to raise one's eyebrows in surprise using only ASCII characters...but really.."Max is a paranoid authoritarian type"????....have you ever met Max? I have - and I don't know whether to laugh out loud or just sit and stare at that ludicrous assertion! It's just plain silly...

well, I said I was gonna stop, except for PMs(yeah, that DOES exclude anonymous posters)...so I am.

I simply disagree that power, such as it is, is being abused. I have read many of the examples of claimed abuse, and I see simple differences of opinion. The few times real mistakes have been made, they have been corrected as soon as possible. (and usually, apologies issued)

I believe that in a public forum, some control needs to be exercised, and that Max has designated 2 good people to oversee that process (Joe and Pene Azul). I realize that a few will see ANY activity by the volunteers (clones) as suspicious---I can't help that, and I see I can't convince them otherwise. There is really little else to say.

further, deponent sayeth not


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 04:20 PM

Term-agent also known as "Loopie Rocks" or "Sian" in one of his more sneaky personas has always been our biggest crackpot and the most blatantly abusive of our memebers towards others. I for one am tired of it. He uses GUEST as a coverup for his need to discharge rage.

MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (ring a bell, Loopie Rocks?)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Sian........a real Sian.
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 04:37 PM

Hitherto I shall be known as anon guest then.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 07:07 PM

shammblels-you are a mad person, why dont you just shut up?
anyway, = you keep saying " this is our forum",
it isnt, it is max's forum!
max owns the computer that its on, he pays for the internet service it uses, he pays for the phone line, he pays for the software used, and he pays for every other thing involeved in keeping this place going.
he started this place as a hobby, about 8 years ago, he does not charge any of us to use it, [if you want to send a few pounds, you can., but you dont have to]

anyway=my main point is=this is max site, he can run it exactly how he wants, he asked Joe, to help him run it, [joe is retired, and max has got job, wife kids etc to look after],
max is happy with the way joe helps, so why dont you just shut up?

you moan to much " joe is no good, he deltes too much, etc, blar , blar, blar", you moan too much=
if you got a problem with this site, why dont you talk straight to max?
i suggested this before, but you dident listen.
anyway=max might tell you 2get lost and mind your business.

another anyway=, you moan about here, but did you see the BBC folk music message boards?
[its only open a few hours a day, and heavily moderated, loadss of cencorship ie [for example], if you put " kate rusby is crap", it would be deltedeted in seconds, so just shut up.john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 08:34 PM

Shambles is, of course correct in his above post (04 Jan 04: 03.02PM) where he quotes:
"You're right, Shambles, it WAS closed - from 22 December to 23 December. It was closed due to a miscommunication between volunteers, for which I apologize. I reopened the thread on 23 December, as soon as I found that it had been closed. Sorry for the inconvenience"
However, what he fails (somehow) to mention is that this was in response to his post on 30 December (when the thread had already been re-opened for 7 days)

Clearly in his search for the truth, and an 'accountable' Mudcat, he took a week to prepare this single message, and did not take the step of checking whether his information was still accurate by the time he posted the message.

Shambles will still, of course, insist that everyone else check "The Facts" (according to Shambles) before commenting on the issue.
I, for one, am tiring of his anarchistic attitude, and will try to avoid further continuation of this thread.

Shambles post & the reply


Nigel


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Jan 04 - 01:47 AM

I simply disagree that power, such as it is, is being abused. I have read many of the examples of claimed abuse, and I see simple differences of opinion. The few times real mistakes have been made, they have been corrected as soon as possible. (and usually, apologies issued)

The point is that when these mistakes are made - a simple apology is not enough if lessons are not going to be learnt and the same mistakes are just going to be repeated again and again - as happens currently.

Changes that to be need to be made - like ensuring that communication between volunteers takes place before editing action is made, are simply not taking place. The differences of opinion that matter most are the personal value judgements of and between our volunteers - because they will result in the opinions of other posters being judged and censored from our forum.

Nigel - I apolgise for not being perfect and for not noticing that this thread had been re-opened. Perhaps you (or someone) could have informed me that it had - via PM?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST,Jon Freeman
Date: 05 Jan 04 - 04:18 AM

Hello Mick, I try to avoid reading the bottom but have just learned my name has been brought into this stupid thread.

Just for the record, every gripe I had about the operation of this place was resolved . It is a shame I made an enemy of myself in doing so and perhaps issuses would have been addressed anyway. For the record, the issuses were mostly poor (IMO) security, failure to deal with constant bitching over BS (some form of split or filtering was clearly the only way the matter could be resolved and I like the solution), and what I considered to be general neglect. I for sure wish I didn't go as far as I did in my attempts but that is life...

I've no regrets over starting folkinfo which is slowly but surely building up a collection of songs in abc format and while I do choose not to post as a member here, there is no animosity between the sites that I'm aware of. T'was only the other day we had someone asking about chords to some Andean tune and I pointed them here to get a wider audience...

Joe and his censorship policy has rarely been an issue to me. I don't think any 2 people are ever going to agree on every deletion action but overall, Joe very much has my respect in this department and always has had.

Jon


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 05 Jan 04 - 04:32 AM

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzz......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Jan 04 - 02:00 AM

BTW Nigel - I did get a PM (from Joe) - on the 30th December. Perhaps you could find out and explain to us why this thread was closed and by whom? And why it was re-opened?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 09:47 PM

mr shambles-you never answered my last post.john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 19 Jan 04 - 06:16 AM

john please let this thread die...that matter has been delt with.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Jan 04 - 09:33 PM

John is that the post you started by saying?

shammblels-you are a mad person, why dont you just shut up?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 19 Jan 04 - 09:45 PM

yes, that one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Jan 04 - 09:59 PM

*smiles*

And LOL from a mad person. We must both be mad to be awake at this hour. Goodnight.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Micca
Date: 20 Jan 04 - 11:59 AM

Rather tan dual post I would refer you to the last Post here


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 23 Jan 04 - 06:15 AM

Strange, according to Shambles in This thread this thread has been closed, and he is asking Joe Why?
Could it be that he has read the post above this with its "Last Post Here" blicky, and he thinks it ia a closing message?

Nigel


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Catherine Jayne
Date: 23 Jan 04 - 06:22 AM

Oh for pity's sake let the matter drop


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jan 04 - 09:05 AM

How will it drop while you keep posting? Follow your own advice.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Splott Man
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 07:31 AM

I've got nothing to say on this issue.

I just wanted to be posting No 300

regards

Splott Man


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 04:39 AM

Nigel why on earth do you now post this - implying that this thread had not been closed and suggesting that I was mistaken in thinking that it had?

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Nigel Parsons - PM
Date: 23 Jan 04 - 06:15 AM

Strange, according to Shambles in This thread this thread has been closed, and he is asking Joe Why?
Could it be that he has read the post above this with its "Last Post Here" blicky, and he thinks it ia a closing message?

When you had earlier posted this, with quotes from Joe clearly explaining that it had in fact been closed and later re-opened - if not the reasons why?

Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings
From: Nigel Parsons - PM
Date: 04 Jan 04 - 08:34 PM

Shambles is, of course correct in his above post (04 Jan 04: 03.02PM) where he quotes:
"You're right, Shambles, it WAS closed - from 22 December to 23 December. It was closed due to a miscommunication between volunteers, for which I apologize. I reopened the thread on 23 December, as soon as I found that it had been closed. Sorry for the inconvenience">Snip<


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
 


This Thread Is Closed.


Mudcat time: 26 October 6:43 AM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Cafι Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.