I like the idea of us as a school of fish. I don't know if real Mudcats go in for that, but that's irrelevant.("No it's not an elephant, it's a fish.")

It's never worth worrying whether things and people here are what they seem, and the best thing to do is to avoid getting suspicious and acting paranoid; even when the suspicions are justified, what's the profit? - and if they aren't, there is always the danger of driving away someone who might be a friend, or a valued antagonist maybe. (I remember the way some smart-arses pounced on the newcomer karolina, apparently on the weird, and plain ignorant, ground that there was something improbable about a Pole being interested in Sea-shanties in Engish.)

If a stranger sits down and joins in a session, you don't waste time worrying and speculating about their motives, you just go by what contribution they make to the evening. If they keep playing bum notes or whatever, or make remarks that break up the evening, that's when the welcome might start to wear off.

As for the thesis Samantha proposed, I don't think war and terror and all that have really made that much difference, not here anyway. Maybe the arguments tend to be about different things, but there's always been a fairly strong current of dissension, which when it goes right, is enjoyable and stimulating, and when it doesn't, it can get boring and bad mannered.

I think the paranoia is much more to do with issues of power. It arises from people resenting sustained efforts by individuals muscling in and attempting to impose their own pattern on the Mudcat regardless of the customs that have developed. And that can lead into an over-acute suspicion that someone might be seeking to rattle our cages.