BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Ellenpoly
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 04:08 AM

So





Cookies all around?





;-D




..xx..e

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Peace
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 02:04 AM

Besides, I started by asking LH if I could borrow the goat because life was lonely in Alberta. In the only real lie LH has ever told on the Mudcat, he said he sent her--and I know he didn't. He barbequed the poor little thing and here I sit, waiting for Esmerelda who will never find true love. Death, where is thy STING!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Peace
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 01:49 AM

It would seriously hurt to get your stocks clapped. That happened to me once in a sparring match. Spaw, don't let him clap your stocks.

Someone on another thread made a very good observation: We never saw Ringo Starr and Arafat together in the same room. So, could they be the same person? That got me to wondering about Little Hawk and William Shatner. Naw, couldn't be, right?

When I castigate (I hope that means what I think it does) Little Hawk about the goat or the dolls, it is with the intent of having some fun. People--even all growed up people--occasionally get the giggles and absolutely EVERYthing seems funny. The whole world won't like it. Hey, that's life. If I though for a moment that LH took any of it seriously, I would apologize first in public and then in private. He is a 'catter, thinker and person for whom I have the utmost respect. (I don't trust him worth shit on the goat, but he understands that.)

Some fights do break out on the Mudcat. But fights don't break out over Willard Fillmore or beer (except amongst those who drink Guinness and those who don't). Fights break out over topics about which people feel very deeply, rightly or wrongly. That too is life.

After my brother's deat a while back, I got to thinking that with his body being sent to Montreal for autopsy, then being sent elsewhere for further testing (toxicology) and finally the trip to the crematorium and then the trip to the burial sit--he travelled more the first month after his death than he's travelled in the past twenty years. That appealed to my sense of humour and I ended up laughing for about ten minutes. It struck me as being extremely funny. I wouldn't expect many people to see the humour in it, but I know some from the 'cat who would. And I wouldn't be the least offended if they too laughed out loud about it. Hell, funny is funny, even if everyone doesn't 'see' it.

An understanding of context helps, but that isn't the only barometer for humour. Months ago I seriously offended someone who likes rugby. I implied that it wasn't a real game like North American football. (I know rugby is a tough game.) You'd a though I shit in the cornflakes. I tried to make amends--they weren't accepted. So, what's a guy to do? Everything can't be serious all the time, any more than everything can be a joke all the time. Is everyone's understanding of context always right on? Naw. Is everyone's humour or timing always right on? Naw. Will it matter in five years? Naw.

It's life, and life only.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: DougR
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 01:15 AM

Aw shucks, LH, I'm blushing! :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 11:44 PM

Actually, Doug, all it usually takes is just not to react immediately, but to read between the lines a bit. When people are writing stuff tongue in cheek it usually becomes evident what they are up to fairly quickly, I think.

And we don't do it to mystify outsiders, we do it because it's funny for those directly involved. The same thing happens in ordinary conversations in real life. Have you not ever kidded around with a buddy about something? And did the people at the next table always know exactly what was going on? Does it really matter? Any club or meeting place forms groups of people who know each other well enough that they have something going that someone else may not fully comprehend. It's not just Mudcat where that happens.

Brucie's constant references to my supposed penchant for goats and blow-up dolls, for instance...how could a newcomer possibly know where that's coming from? Well, it's a joke. I am not going to give up making jokes because there may be someone in the room who doesn't get it.

In the immortal words of Mick Jagger, "F*ck 'em if they can't take a joke."

And I learned it all from Spaw, the beloved elder statesman of this forum, so if you're gonna get upset with someone, get upset with him.

Yes, he is a horrible example. Just horrible. He should probably be clapped in the stocks or keelhauled or something. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 11:10 PM

Well, they did stop (Troll and Skeptic). They even apologized for it in a thread started just for that reason. Feel any better?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 10:40 PM

............This happens when people aren't in on the joke, I guess, or they don't know the combatants well enough to catch on..........

..................But when well-intentioned peacemaker is trying to calm down a battle-royal which is in fact a friendly match - that can be quite entertaining to observe..........

..................They had to stop because people who weren't in on it were getting upset..........

..................However, you are correct that petty criticism and personal abuse is the heart and soul of a really good fake feud,...........

I find the idea of people continuing in-jokes on a public forum, at best, rude. When the insiders start to find amusement in the actions of the "well-intentioned peacemaker" then it is akin to children whispering and giggling with the intention of upsetting others.

As members often use Mudcat handles rather than family names, how could I be expected to know that Troll and Skeptic were, in fact, brothers and their "feud" was only good old family joshing. One of the complaints against Mudcat is that it is run by an inner clique. I don't believe that to be true but leaving a large percentage of the contributors out of the loop in this way only re-enforces that feeling.

We have enough real feuds (or, at least, I think we do) to make Mudcat seem a very unpleasant place at times. Fake feuds, while being fun for the few, encourage the climate where intolerance seems the norm and is likely to drive sensible people to look elsewhere.


Doug C

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Once Famous
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 09:22 PM

"My only real quarrel is with the kind of person who (to change the analogy from fencing) comes into a conference where dignified people are discussing serious issues, and whose only contribution to the discussion is to drop his pants and take a dump in the middle of the conference table"

But that's the deal for me. The more dignified, the bigger the dump is going to be. Can't do it at the meeting room at work, but sure can here. I'm always watching for the good opportunities, Don.

And fencing is really a stupid sport! Why don't you play with your friends for real? Do you guys wear the same masks as bee keepers?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 07:04 PM

Don, the Presbyterian church here sponsors fencing. I'd like to get back to it -- foil, I think, since I gave away my epees and my saber is, well, a saber and sharp edges and blood give a whole new dimension to the sport.

It's excellent physical and mental exercise.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 06:55 PM

Idle curiosity drift - is "blessed" there intended as an adjective, with two syllables ("I can't find my blessed socks") or a verb with one syllable ("he blessed the bride")?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 06:44 PM

Hi again Don. I fear your last "Lunge" may be "Parried" by you know who but aint it all sort of fun anyway??. I suppose if we all took everything everyone said to us on a real personal level on here, we would become paranoid(paranoid schitzophrenics..those who are pretending not to be their real selves eh?)
Be Blessed.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 06:38 PM

Darn right. :-) I remember one time when Spaw was engaged in some ridiculous thread that supposedly involved people maltreating parrots while playing music or something like that. It was started by some band looking for information, and Spaw siezed upon something in their band name and started raising hell about them encouraging cruelty to animals. He was doing it just for laughs, but they took him seriously. It got crazier and crazier. I think they finally realized he was joking, but he had to say some totally off-the-wall stuff before they finally caught on.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 06:31 PM

What can be annoying, in the Internet as in real life, is when someone starts blustering and bullying in dead earnest - and then backs off under pressure and moves into the mode "I was only joking, some people haven't got any no sense of humour".

But when well-intentioned peacemaker is trying to calm down a battle-royal which is in fact a friendly match - that can be quite entertaining to observe.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 04:55 PM

I mentioned on another thread that I used to be an avid fencer. The sport, of course, was derived from serious matters centuries ago, when sometimes one's life could depend upon one's skill in handling a rapier (16th and 17th centuries) or an elegant but deadly small-sword (18th century). Gentlemen would often spent half a day at the salle d'armes, taking a lesson from the maitre d'armes in offense and defence with the sword, then spending a couple of hours bouting with other gentlemen, partly in an effort to perfect their technique, but often just for the sport of it. It was this sort of thing from which modern art and sport of fencing was derived.

Although the term was never used in relation to fencing until a few decades ago, it is a martial art, and it demands the same sort of discipline, mental focus, and self control as the Asian martial arts.

Many hours I used to spend dressed in my fencing whites, peering intently through the wire mesh of a fencing mask, foil, épée, or saber in my gloved hand, going at it hammer and tongs with other fencers, invariably good friends because we shared the same passion for the sport. The click and slither of slender blades against each other, the stamping of feet, and the shouts of "Et la!" and "Touché!" are sheer music!

To the onlooker unacquainted with the art, it undoubtedly looked as if we were trying to kill each other. In fact, friend of my youth Alan Randall and I were fencing one afternoon in a nearby park (in our imaginations, recreating the days when gentlemen might settle an "affair of honor" in the Bois de Boulogne just outside of Paris) when a police car cruising through screeched to a halt and two policemen leaped out and dashed over to us, convinced that we were bent on doing murder to each other—fight with swords, ye gods! We let them examine our weapons (slender, flexible steel blades with points like nail-heads which we padded with a bit of adhesive tape) and our wire mesh masks and padded jackets, and assured them that we were good friends engaging in a perfectly safe sport. They stayed for awhile and watched us, rather fascinated as we thrusted, parried, lunged, et al, then eventually left us to our recreation.

An evening of swordplay at the YMCA or the Washington Athletic Club in Seattle or Hans Halberstadt's salle d'armes in San Francisco was almost invariably followed by adjourning to the nearest alehouse to replace the moisture we had sweated out and share convivial good-fellowship with the guys and gals we had spent the past couple of hours trying (in our imaginations) to shish-kabob on modern (blunted) replicas of the elegant, deadly weapons that the aristocracy of two or three centuries ago wore as an essential part of their wardrobe. A spirited, healthy, and enjoyable way to experience a bit of history.

Quite a bit of verbal fencing goes on here on Mudcat, and sometimes it gets vigorous to the point where an onlooker might misunderstand what is really going on. As long as one does it in the spirit of sport—and in the spirit (even if, because of distances, it is not actually possible) of following the discourse by lifting a tall and foamy with one's former adversaries, then one gets one's exercise, hones one's skills, and all is well.

My only real quarrel is with the kind of person who (to change the analogy from fencing) comes into a conference where dignified people are discussing serious issues, and whose only contribution to the discussion is to drop his pants and take a dump in the middle of the conference table.

You know the type.

Don Firth

". . . and as I end the refrain, thrust home!"
                               —Cyrano de Bergerac

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 03:15 PM

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Har! Har! Gasp!@ Oh, my...

Carol, that stuff is absolutely as good as it gets in fake feuding. My hat is off to Troll and Skeptic.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 03:07 PM

well I think you're all talking tosh - you wouldnt get me wasting my breath - or typing on a pretend fued I reckon they are all real!!!!!

bring back birching, stocks, hanging for anyone who has an alternate point of view

the duelling threads last year and this were a bit like the ones you've talked about - check out the names there - we're all mates too

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 03:07 PM

Some gems from Troll and Skeptic:

Skeptic-

ps: troll: I agree and endorse the first paragraph in your latest post. But then, I know where you got it from. Lobachevsky would be so proud.

Troll-

I only steal from the best. I'm happy that you FINALLY recognized one of my many sources of information.
Of course, even a blind pig will find an acorn if he roots long enough.

Skeptic-

troll, The Times? In response to something in the Forth Worth Star Telegraph? You are being less than lucid. Glad you're getting back to normal.

Skeptic-

The "blind pig" reference was to me. Not one of his better efforts (using 'effort' very liberally). I think it some sort of sad compulsion to try to be witty. Much like his delusions of competency. (Note to troll - an opening for a comeback - don't miss it).

Troll-

I save them for those who can appreciate and -more importantly- understand them.

Far from being a "sad compulsion to try to be witty", I was merely trying to make YOU feel more a part of things. Sort of a "make jokes with him so he'll feel more like one of the guys". I realize that it was probably a wasted effort but I DID promise I'd try. I should have remembered," Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."

Oh. By the way. All things considered, you are the LAST person I would expect to hear talking about competency.

Skeptic-

Is there someone who appreciates your efforts? I mean aside from those abnormal psych grad students using you as a case study?

Troll-

Skeptic.
Ebbie likes my humor. She said so.
So THERE!

Skeptic-

Ebbie, In his own mind, troll is almost always serious. Couple that curious delusion with his severely dysfunctional personality and a view of reality that can best be characterized as, literally, unique and you capture a hint of the difficult in deciphering his cryptic attempts at communication. Let along dealing with him face to face.
I've always found that: 1. Ignoring him does no good. He can't take the hint. 2. Some people crave abuse and rejection. He requires it. 3. Don't take him at all seriously. Although he takes himself that way, those who know him have adopted a kind of benign contempt.

I hope his comments weren't meant as a compliment. Talk about ruining your whole day.....!!!!


...And on another thread (I think this is one of my favorites)...

Troll-

Amos, if Skeptic (John) HAD taken it personally, you would have known it in no uncertain terms. So far he has been extremely kind in his postings

Actually, he is a vicious little rat with a tongue like a razor-blade dipped in sulphuric acid.

And those are his GOOD points.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 03:02 PM

Well, no, I think you can attack the ideas too, but it helps to attack them in a really intemperate, unreasonable fashion, using convoluted and pompous language or else resorting to obviously crude forms of bluster and obfuscation. (love those big words...)

However, you are correct that petty criticism and personal abuse is the heart and soul of a really good fake feud, saul. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: saulgoldie
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 02:11 PM

Is it only feuding if you attack the person and not the ideas? I have been sticking with attacking only the ideas. (Even if someone is a jackass, their ideas may still be pretty good, and even if they are the very model of a human being, if they spout crap, then that is all there is.) Perhaps I should branch out. Feuding, real or fake sounds like fun.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 01:55 PM

Little Hawk, Chongo the Chimp, Amos, DougR, Bobert and everyone else. Except the ubiquitous GUEST. Not all GUESTs, just the one. You know who I mean.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 01:42 PM

Yeah, I vaguely remember that, and it was truly hilarious all right.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 01:38 PM

Troll and his brother Skeptic had a hilarious "pretend" feud a few years ago. They had to stop because people who weren't in on it were getting upset. It's too bad, because they were very funny.

Subject: BS: Mudcat Feuds that aren't really feuds...
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jul 04 - 01:32 PM

Now and then one finds a Guest upset about an apparent feud on Mudcat between someone and someone else...but it isn't really a feud at all...it's a joke. Now and then longtime Mudcat members get upset about the same thing. This happens when people aren't in on the joke, I guess, or they don't know the combatants well enough to catch on.

The thing is, when you know people really well you sometimes pretend to fight with them about something (preferably something fairly ridiculous) just for fun. It's called "joshing".

The spectacle of other people getting bent out of shape by this because they take it all too seriously can sometimes come as a bit of a surprise.

Anyway, just to reassure those people, I have had big fake feuds in the past on Mudcat with:

flattop (a longtime good friend of mine in real life)

Raptor (another longtime friend whom I delight in sniping at on occasion...he's a real shit disturber sometimes, so why shouldn't I do the same to him now and then? For instance, he persecuted my stuffed frog, Kermit, so badly that I had to quit taking Kermit to my musical performances altogether. To put it simply, Raptor can be an A$$hole at times, and he enjoys it thoroughly! :-))

Clinton Hammond (a guy who disagrees with me about a lot of things, but sometimes surprises me by agreeing with me on something!)

Amos - A prince of a man. When I appear to insult Amos you should definitely KNOW it's a joke!

Spaw - I took up fake feuding with Spaw merely because he is a veritable icon on this forum (kind of like William Shatner), and it's far too tempting to snipe at an icon for me to be able to resist. It is all tongue in cheek. Spaw is a great guy.

Martin Gibson - Hell, everybody feuds with Martin! Still, I actually like him.

Doug R - Well, I don't really feud with Doug, we just disagree radically on politics. I like Doug R.

teribus & Wolfgang - Sort of similar to Doug R. I just naturally tend to disagree with them on a lot of subjects. This may appear like a feud, but it isn't, as far as I'm concerned.

So....the next time you see this sort of thing happening, consider that it may be just a joke...or the healthy give and take of alternate viewpoints.

Anyone else want to admit to their fake feuds on Mudcat so as to put people's worried minds to rest a bit?

Oh...and you real feuders can go and start your own flippin' thread!!!!