The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #93659   Message #1864043
Posted By: The Shambles
20-Oct-06 - 07:24 AM
Thread Name: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
However, assuming that you meant it when you say you post to have a discussion, our frustration comes when it appears that you ignore or never seem to acknowledge that our points could have some validity.   Your steadfast insistence on re-posting and continually arguing your case should probably be admired, but instead in results in frustration because there does not seem to be a discussion.

There is just about discussion here, despite the recipes, jokes etc and the attempts to make the whole discussion cetre around the worth of one individual poster. However, there may not be total agreement. But should there be?

I am not sure that I try to carry on posting my views to be admired - do you?

However, in reply to your point, it is necessary to repeat arguments from time to time - both in reply to posts and for the benefit of those posters who may not be as obsessed as others and to which these points will be new. And there are lots of aspect to this discussion, probably too many for one thread.

But if we find that threads and posts that others may admire - bore or frustrate us - should we then blame the other posters for our boredom and frustration ? Or should we just accept that there are all tastes and move on to another thread? Or should we been seen to try to shout-down and remove those posters who may bore and frustrate us?

Ron - are 'you' not equally frustrated by those posters and 'moderators' who are seen to encourge the idea they have some right to be seen to publicy judge another named poster? And to to be seen to do this on regular basis with a view to preventing discussion and with the aim of bullying them into agreement, into silence or off of our forum completely?

I know that I am. But I accept that I have no control over the posting of others. And no matter how frustrating I may get - perhaps you will accept that I do not respond in kind to these. I have found your views and actions to be frustrating but have I questioned your mental health or made any personal judgements of your worth?

Many posters here appear to pay only lip-service to the idea that posters are free to express their view. Perhaps you would agree that this remains the whole point - no matter how frustrating you may find it in practice?

In the course of this discussion I have accepted many points and agreed with many other posters - I have found that the level of my regular detractors frustration does not appear to relax any as a result of any agreement shown on my part. You may be different.

On the contrary, I have found that this frustration actually looks to increase - in the unlikely event that some other poster does make a contribution to the discussion - one that is not limited only to a post making some personal judgement of me. Or heaven forbid - a post that could be viewed as providing any sort of support to any of my views........That really raises the frustration level - if the resulting increase of posted one-line judgements and recipes are any guide.

I try to carry on posting - in the face of this (largely engineered) frustrated reaction against it, partly to show that the problems raised and the many suggestions made to solve them will not be examined - if a certain few of our fellow posters are not in favour of them. The same few who now appear to be set on engineering a change to members only posting.

Hopefully this will show that as long as a poster does not provide any grounds for Max to ban them - EVERY POSTER MUST ACCEPT THAT THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO PUBLICLY CALL FOR ANY FORM OF CENSORSHIP ACTION TO BE IMPOSED ON THE POSTING OF ANOTHER NAMED POSTER.

If (as Max informs us) this site is about happiness - the encouragment of posts only containing judgements of the worth of other named posters - by the example currently being set on our forum - can only result in the very opposite of this happiness.

I have found that there is little need for for me to respond to Mick's posts (in kind or at all). These posts demonstrate the basis for MY argument - far more eloquently than I can ever manage.