Added by request, so the Mods can delete the thinly veiled part 2Subject: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: technission
Date: 11-Feb-02 - 11:34 PM
Shop: O DayI wanted to post to the thread, "Open Letter from Max to GUESTS", but I can't get the whole thread loaded - maybe because bandwidth of my connection is measured in one dimension, or it's a Mac problem. (PC'rs commence gloating) Anyway, I've crashed my browser too many times to try further. If ANY Mudcatter wants to copy this post to the end of the open-letter thread, I grant my proxy to do so and show my handle on it.
I can't access much of the "Open Letter" thread, but I think the size it has amassed in less than two days time is a testament to support from serious and well-mannered Mudcat users and >supporters< Now, what the all-fired heck GOOD are guests anyway? I say if >>anything<< they do jeapoardizes Max's funding, build the fence, shut - nay SLAM the gate - and what on earth is lost? I only discovered the 'Cat a couple of months ago, and haven't seen much flaming, and I know I am naive about internet security, but WHY does anyone with a sincere musical interest or question even WANT to post without becoming a member, or with any more anonymity than a screen name provides? What is the paranoia fueled by?? Enlighten me, I beseech you all! I could only read the first 30 or so messages out of 218 posted at that time to the "Open Letter" thread, but some member who posted that early in the thread did express the opinion that something would be lost from discussions if anonymous guests could not post. I think I saw a "GUEST" imply that there would be fewer lyrics requests from his or her point of origin. OK, folks I'm serious - guests and members alike, *please* explain what the advantage is, to the entire Mudcat community and/or to the posting party, in allowing completely anonymous postings?? It takes minimal time to join. What HARM can Max or Mudcat or nameless big-brother security programs do, that causes such fear to parties who wish to post, that they will only post if they can keep their identities secret from Max and his volunteers??
And GUESTS, read on. When I joined, I elected to allow members access to my email address - yet that address is not shown anywhere on the site. After the prompt action I got from Jeff sending a calendar and posting my picture, I seriously doubt my email is missing by his oversight or backlog of work; it is not there because I have not specifically asked him to list it - so he didn't list it without my express request to do so. Now, I just resubmitted the membership form, requesting that my email NOT be available to members. >>> So GUESTS, or fellow members, can you please demonstrate my vulnerability by sending me a message to my email address, consisting of the word "gotcha" and stating the time and date shown as the posting time of this thread post? If you can prove to me that you can locate me, and you are not a Mudcat staff volunteer, I will concede that you might share similar vulnerability - but I still want to know what difference it would make to (the collective) you, and what you're so scared of. Are you in a witness protection program? Are you a tax protestor? Shock me! Tell me your horror stories, explain why you must remain anonymous if your only criticisms would be constructive ones. Justify yourselves, I double-dog dare you.
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 12:15 AM
I am not going to get into this discussion with you I just thought I would tell you I tryed to get into 'letter from Max' also and couldn't do it, but I went to the thread 'guest to Max' and there was a thread link on about fourth post and I got into the entire thread, Rustic
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: CarolC
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 12:28 AM
This is the only thing I am going to say on this subject, here or anywhere else. What I have to say is not directed at you, technission, or any person in particular. It's just my general contribution to the subject in question, and I have chosen to put it here.
This whole hullabaloo is not about GUESTS, or members. None of it is. It's entirely about people. All of it. Just people. That's all.
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: Sorcha
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 12:32 AM
Almost, Carol, almost. It is about people who choose to be assholes. It is about people who choose not ignore assholes. It is about people who think responding to assholes is fun.
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: CarolC
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 12:35 AM
I agree with you Sorcha. Now, if all of these different kinds of people could remember that we are all still people, maybe we could get someplace.
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: Sorcha
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 12:49 AM
Yup, and Mudcat would win. I guess I should suggest this elsewhere, but what about a required, valid e mail addy for any Guest? That way, we could send an answer for requests and Max and the Elves/Clones would know where the Flaming Troll lives.........
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: technission
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 02:18 AM
I believe the consensus here (and if it is I agree) is that a genuine troll is best ignored, not to give 'em the satisfaction of a debate etc.- they're not worth the keystrokes! My primary concern is that as a newbie I could be overlooking some legitimate value to a serious/polite but anonymous post, and if there is a good reason for nurturing those I'm seeking that explanation to fill in my missing clues....Also it seemed from Max's Open Letter that some potential site funding might be withdrawn because of frivolously vicious posting or something...? Rustic, thanks for the tip, maybe I can fill in some gaps to satisfy my curiosity. Hey CarolC, not trying to tease you into saying anything further, just want to say re: your 02/12/12:28, that wouldn't offend me even if it was directed at me, and re: your 02/12/12:35 I think you nailed the basic human stupidity there that keeps us from giving peace a chance! But since I'm a glass-half-full kinda person I keep thinking maybe each day a few more people will remember the golden rule...And Sorcha, I agree the jerks don't deserve a response - but isn't it useful to have an occasional one show up? That way even if I'm bitchy I still look good in comparison! <8)# Ann O'Nymous
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: The Shambles
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 02:58 AM
Jeri said: Of course, it would have been better if we'd all just learned to ignore the silly trolls instead of needing to be protected from them. Too much to ask for, though.
Is it really?.........
Max did not want a a part 2 to his thread and he also indicated there that a letter from Max to members was on the way.
Perhaps members should wait until that thread comes along and read what he as to say, we could possibly have as many parts to that one as we wished?
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: ClintonHammond
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 03:59 AM
1) this is really just a part 2 to the whole thread... So with that and what's coming after considered, I hope it gets deleted...
2) Only Max hurts Max's chances at financing... a few banner adds on a separate Mudcat page, with an open invite for people to click away would solve 98% of the $$ problems this place has... but Max doesn't want to do that, so... fair enough... this is where the fact that it's not a democracy cuts both ways... Max can run it how ever the hell he wants to.. but apparently that involves passing up readily available sources of income...
So it's HIS choice... There are PLENTY of funding options open to him, but Mudcat is HIS baby, so he can do with it what he decides to do...
Post - Top - Forum Home - Translate
Subject: RE: Why have 'guests' anyway ??
From: technission
Date: 12-Feb-02 - 04:13 AM
Big 10-4 on the waiting, I started this thread and hereby respectfully request it be stopped at this time. I would still rather it be attached to the 200+ post thread and be assimilated there without resistance. I just couldn't post there myself due to some failure (unprecedented!!) of my revered Mac to finish loading the whole thread. (kept getting error messages that a server somewhere had timed out after 120 secs.)
Can I hijack my own thread? >>> Does anybody know why I can't load the big thread? Mac is pre-G3 but not THAT primitive and I've never had this happen before, was it me or was the ether just too busy for my share to come through fast enough?
---------------------------------------------------------
:-)