Although I may just be free to post and disagree with everything Joe Offer says states and also the way he jumps from a personal judgement to claims to be something else – Joe at least (along with his own abusive personal attacks on a fellow poster) does address the issues raised in this thread. Joe Offer – in a conventional posting (although again speaking in this post - for 'us volunteers') states the following.

You see, Roger, most of us are here to have a good time among friends. All of your adversarial crap is just that - adversarial crap.

First I would suggest that our anonymous voluteer fellow posters should be looking after the interests of all of us - rather than just 'most of us. I will leave the readers of this thread to decide just where the posting of any 'adversarial crap' is originating and why the posting of this - is being encouraged? The thread started with a simple request for a return to a less divisive and a more friendly approach – a request that some others posted were in favour of. However, can you think of anything much more adversarial on our forum than selectively and anonymously imposing judgement as a matter of routine - upon the words of fellow posters – without their knowledge or permission? Posters who may also just wish to have a good time among friends..........

We volunteers do what we need to do to keep the peace and tidy things up.

If this is so – perhaps our volunteers should be more careful not to fire the first shots? The biggest contribution toward peace – would be to inform our forum how many of these peacekeepers there are and what are the names of these peacekeepers? I think the Colt 45 used to be called the peacemaker? But why would there be any need on our friendly forum - to 'tidy things up' in secrecy? Are these measures really likely to ensure that peace breaks out?

Nobody's out to offend your right to free speech - but if you insist on making an asshole of yourself, you're likely to be treated like an asshole.

Are there not many examples of posters – in this thread who could be judged to be posting and also making an asshole of themselves? Why are those that post here only to express a judgement of any negative aspect of a fellow poster (who they may never have met) – also not judged (by you) to be 'assholes'? And why are those who are encouraged to feel they can post just to be personally abusive – use offensive language and call their fellow posters names – not judged by you to be 'assholes' or a 'pain in the ass'? Sadly the answer is only too clear.....

Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted.
Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass.
-Joe Offer-

The question that need to be answered is - who is that feels themselves qualified to impose their public judgement about who they consider to an 'asshole'? And as a result which poster is not thought entitled to express themselves in the words of their choosing on the part of Max's website that he has set aside for public discussion?

Basically, Mudcat is here for enjoyment - not for all this heavy stuff you try to lay on us. You want to play war games, and that's not what we're here for.

Whoever does feel qualified to impose such heavy judgement as this - upon their fellow posters – does tend to encourage similar judgement to be expressed from those who may feel themselves to be equally qualified but who do not (yet) have the power to impose their judgement. As a result of this encouragement – our forum now regularly has posts asking for one poster's judgement to be imposed upon their fellow posters……Our forum appears now to be in a permanent state of division and indulging in 'war games' (against selected easy targets) would appear now to be officially encouraged. We (meaning all of us) post for many different reasons – all of them equally valid - the role of our volunteers (if we need any) is to follow Max's lead and facilitate. It is not to judge fellow posters and to shape all aspect of our forum by their imposed judgement.

No, I really can't defend our editorial actions, and I have no reason to defend anything to an idiot who can make such a big deal about the addition of three little words, "in the UK," to a thread title. We just try to do what we think is right, to make things run a little more smoothly around here. That's basically what Max asked us to do when he gave us editing buttons. And we volunteers don't pretend to sit in judgment over anybody here, as you so often contend. We're just here to deal with the problems.

Please face the fact that feeling qualified to sit in judgement (and imposing it) upon your fellow posters is exactly what you are doing and it is indeed 'heavy stuff'. Is it now the official Mudcat view that anyone who may not agree with the imposition of an anonymous volunteer fellow poster's judgement (for the very good reasons already stated here) is an 'idiot' (as well as an 'asshole)?

If that's not satisfactory to you, so be it. Tough shit, in other words. Nobody named you judge and jury. And despite your four-year campaign, you haven't been able to convince Max to crack down on us volunteers, have you? Doesn't that tell you something?

-Joe Offer-

Yes. I think the assumptions and sentiments in the words of your last paragraph does sum-up our forum's main problem very well. It sadly brings us no nearer to any solution........