 sj |
||
|
||
In the UK......? (thread title change complaint)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 19 Aug 05 - 02:58 PM And to further clarify your muddy waters - as you have qouted above - not that removal of the song challenge would relagate your thread to BS - but if you insisted on making the thread a diatrabe against editing and or the volunteers. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 19 Aug 05 - 02:55 PM nit picking shambles - the thread was clearly what most people would consider a "song challenge". BTW - what was added was a title clarification - not a pre-fix. The forum doesn't have a "song challenge" prefix. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 19 Aug 05 - 02:54 PM Subject: RE: Song Challenge: Camilla and Charlie were lovers From: The Shambles - PM Date: 23 Feb 05 - 02:51 AM Can whoever placed the prefix 'Song Challenge' before the title that I chose for this thread please remove this prefix? This thread is not a 'Song Challenge' and as far as I am aware the choice of using a prefix (or not) still remains an option for the poster. If anyone else wishes to change this - perhaps rather than simply impose this change - the origination could be asked for their opinion first? Thank you. Well, hello, Shambles- I added the explanatory tag to the thread title. If I had my druthers, all the song challenge threads would be on the bottom half of the Forum Menu - but they haven't been, so they'll stay up top. If I remove the "Song Challenge" tag, the thread will go to the bottom half of the Forum because the title makes it look like it's a BS thread. That's your choice - keep the tag, or have it removed and have the thread on the bottom half of the Forum Menu. The Forum Menu is an index of the threads, and should give an idea of the contents of the threads. If you want to turn this thread into yet another complaint about the way the Mudcat volunteers do their work, then it will end up in the "BS" section. You can let me know your choice by personal message. I don't see that adding a thread title tag is anything to get upset about. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 19 Aug 05 - 02:49 PM Song Challenge Camilla and Charlie were lovers |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 19 Aug 05 - 02:46 PM Again - ALWAYS? the prefixes are an aid to searching and to distinguishing threads so the users of the site (the READERS) can find what they are looking for. If a song challenge is NOT labeled - doesn't it make sense to label it? Isn't this the sensible thing to do? If it is not so labelled - it could possibly be that the originator - seeing in the thread creation screen that the use of a prefix was an optional choice for them and considering that their thread was not a Song Challenge or any other of the optional prefixes available - intentially chose NOT to use one. These prefixes are either optional for the originator or they are not. Would it really be the sensible thing for a anonymous volunteer fellow poster to assume and judge that the thread's originator was an idiot (to use Joe Offer's description of me) and impose the (so-called) optional prefix without the originator's knowledge or permission? Or would it be sensible to take a little time and make little effort to ask them first? In my case the Song Challenge was imposed without my knowledge or permission and when I pointed out that it was not a song challenge but a thread song and requested that the imposed prefixed was removed as the thread creation screen stated it was optional - this request was refused. This request was not only refused but I was told (in an editing comment) that if the prefix was removed this - (a pefectly obvious music related thread) - would be relegated to the non-music section. The personal opinion was also expressed in this editing comment that all such threads should be relegated (for some unexplained reason) to the non-music section. It is the shapeing now of our forum by this form of imposition and the determined (if vain) attempt to control the posting of others - all based upon the assumption and personal prefences of a few posters - rather than being shaped by all our forum's contributors - that badly needs addressing. Any help to ensure that it finally is addressed - will be much appreciated. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 19 Aug 05 - 01:59 PM Once again nothing but smoke...... Until Max publicly states otherwise on our forum – where I am sure that Max is quite capable of reading this thread as well as every other poster - that is good enough for me. But I have yet to read any public statement from our forum's owner saying that he specifically considers the need for any volunteer fellow poster to 'index' or 'consolidate' is more important than the original poster's right to have their words appear as posted. And you haven't read that he is dissatisfied either have you? Your statement is completely meaningless. Since you are with us, you get to help us make the rules. Of late it seems that it is used for non-music related questions, comments, thoughts and stories. It may be like just a light conversation piece, or just killing time, or getting through a bad day, or anything non-academic (if you will). Or, just don't use it. It is what you make it. Don't sweat the rules, cause there aint none. A statement by Max made 6 years ago and which you have taken out of the contsxt of the thread. Mudcat was MUCH smaller and quieter back then as you well know. Since then Max has instituted rules and other things to keep theplace more functional and has allowed and endorsed a group of members to help out. As you cannot site any example of him firing any of them or being dissatisfied with the job, this is another meaningless argument on your part. In summary, there is nothing new in your post and all of it has been posted by you at least a half dozen or more times so the whole thing is less than nothing. Roger if you had any real desire to fix this thing that you see is so terrible, you'd take it to Max,,,,,but you are a gutless little Dude so you don't. And as I have said before you have NO experience on any other net forums so your lofty ideas are completely laughable. C'mon little Dude, prove me wrong. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 19 Aug 05 - 09:49 AM So, Shambles, not to distract you from your distractions and disparagements, but what did Max say about changing thread titles and about us volunteers encouraging use of the Forum Menu as a mere index instead of as a free speech platform? There is a big difference between the words – 'changing and 'imposing' and also between 'encouraging' and 'imposing'. That crucial difference is what this thread is all about. Joe I am merely replying to your personal views - expressed on our forum as a fellow poster – which I do not agree with. But in my response - I am leaving out the personal abuse and name-calling. You seem to think this acceptable – when this used by you and your supporters. When asked to explain the BS rules – Max publicly stated on our forum - Since you are with us, you get to help us make the rules. Of late it seems that it is used for non-music related questions, comments, thoughts and stories. It may be like just a light conversation piece, or just killing time, or getting through a bad day, or anything non-academic (if you will). Or, just don't use it. It is what you make it. Don't sweat the rules, cause there aint none. Until Max publicly states otherwise on our forum – where I am sure that Max is quite capable of reading this thread as well as every other poster - that is good enough for me. But I have yet to read any public statement from our forum's owner saying that he specifically considers the need for any volunteer fellow poster to 'index' or 'consolidate' is more important than the original poster's right to have their words appear as posted. Nor has he publicly stated that he considers any possible inconvenience caused to volunteer posters by first asking permission before any changes are imposed by them – are too 'cumbersome'. Nor that this consideration is more important than ensuring that all posters are treated equally and their words appear as posted. Until Max does publicly state this on our forum – I shall assume that he expects all volunteers to follow his lead and facilitate. To use their commons sense in this and NOT to go too far and make any attempt to control and shape our forum by the heavy imposition of their personal judgement – when there are more friendly and welcoming alternatives. The 'index' – is merely a list of thread titles. These titles are the ones that each thread originator has chosen from the optional choices available to them. They may not be Joe Offer's choice (or mine) and they could possible be clarified. However, I strongly maintain that on an issue of clarity only - there is no need and that there are no grounds for any 'clarification' or 'consolidation' to ever be automatically and selectively imposed without the originator's knowledge or permission. Joe - this idea that the thread titles should not now be part of the poster's free speech - which you do rather grudgingly seem accept is the case for the words of the post. Is based only on your assumption that it is up to you to impose what title appears in the 'index' and your personal judgement that posters are now considered wrong if they wish to see the words of their own choosing. Is Max in agreement with this particular point? Have you asked him? Perhaps Max will publicly inform us on the detail? A librarian may not think the list of their book titles look pretty or not informative enough – does that entitle the librarian to impose their own words to these book titles? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Aug 05 - 09:39 PM At the very least, they should be provided with little life preservers so...... Oh. Sorry. Did it again. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 18 Aug 05 - 09:24 PM 489 |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:26 PM So, Shambles, not to distract you from your distractions and disparagements, but what did Max say about changing thread titles and about us volunteers encouraging use of the Forum Menu as a mere index instead of as a free speech platform? I'm still waiting for a change in instructions from Max. Otherwise, I'll stick to my rejection of your proposed rules, and we volunteers will stick to changing thread titles (sparingly) when it makes sense and when we think it will be helpful. We were talking about thread titles in this thread - right? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:23 PM Who the hell is Dido? So he thinks he knows me, huh? Dido's first post.... *shy quiet little voice* Hello sorcha and Rob-o. I'm Didelphyia O'Carina, but you can call me Dido. I'm a clay 'possum shaped ocarina, and I don't post much. My brother Cleigh O'Possum is a MudCat Icon and has his very own page at the MudCat resource pages. Welcome to the Mudcat and please don't step on any possums when you visit the Tavern. Dido Now I can guess,LOL |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Amos Date: 18 Aug 05 - 03:21 PM Just a darn minute, Dido....that's MY disorder. I don't recall signing off on any request to assign it to Harpie!! A |
|
Subject: complaining about the complainers From: Dido Date: 18 Aug 05 - 03:11 PM Both 'The Shambles' and Harpgirl seem to live in little fantasy worlds of their own. Both also seem to exhibit traces of megalomania. megalomania \meg-uh-lo-MAY-nee-ah; -nyuh\, noun: 1. A mania for grandiose or extravagant things or actions. 2. A mental disorder characterized by delusions of grandeur. also: megalomania n. form of insanity in which patient believes him- or herself to be person of great importance; mania for doing grand actions. megalomaniac, n. megalomaniacal a. and I would like to express my personal view here. For two people who bitch and moan and whinge about Joe Offer and others claiming to impose thier views on others and consider themselves judges - seems to be doing exactly what they are complaining about. Who gave either of you the right to sit in judgement of the people Max has asked to monitor and administer this site? and Harpgirl - If you consider wikipedia as a source with any amount of veracity you really need to have a reality check. There is more erroneous information on that site then there is in this forum - except they claim to be authoratative experts on EVERY subject. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 18 Aug 05 - 03:02 PM Here's a description that you might be able to understand, Leo:S&M go hand in hand and are interchangeable traits |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 18 Aug 05 - 02:50 PM perhaps it would be better for you Joe to finally accept that you have no control over the postings of others and give-up the attempt? But Max has given him control and REQUESTED he make the attempt. Why do you feel that you alone are qualified to judge the choices of others and feel you have the right to do this? I don't recall Joe ever making any statement of the sort. could you point out where he has claimed he alone is qualified to judge the choices of others? Or where he has claimed he has the right to do so? *You* of course have claimed that right for him repeatedly - that doesn't make it a valid viewpoint for Joe. Why can't you just leave them alone - would this not always be the MOST sensible thing to do? Always? EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE? There is NEVER a reason? What qualifications do you have to decide what to impose upon the contributions of your fellow posters who Max has invited to the part of his site - Max asked him to. When creating a thread - the choice of using a prefix is optional. This should ALWAYS be honoured. Again - ALWAYS? the prefixes are an aid to searching and to distinguishing threads so the users of the site (the READERS) can find what they are looking for. If a song challenge is NOT labeled - doesn't it make sense to label it? Isn't this the sensible thing to do? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Aug 05 - 02:39 PM Oh...sorry! I thought this was the thread about waterskiing hamsters. Excuse me. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 18 Aug 05 - 02:33 PM Joe Offer say- I suppose if the Forum Menu is to be an effective index, it has to have some sort of balance. Despite any imposition upon thread titles - it will remain an index and have a natural balance. Whether this balance agrees with your idea of what it should be - is debatable but perhaps it would be better for you Joe to finally accept that you have no control over the postings of others and give-up the attempt? I rarely start threads myself - I'd be surprised if I start two a month. Usually, I try to add what I have to say to existing threads, to participate in ongoing discussions. That is your choice - no one is judging your choice. Perhaps if you spent less time judging the choices of others - you may have more time to start more threads? Other people start one or more threads per day, every day - whether they have something new to talk about, or not. A very few people consistently start threads on topics that are already currently on the Forum Menu. I don't know why, but they seem to have a compulsion to start threads. Why do you feel that you alone are qualified to judge the choices of others and feel you have the right to do this? Sometimes, we humor those compulsions and let those threads continue, and sometimes we combine them with existing discussions - it all depends on what seems to be the sensible thing to do at the time. Why can't you just leave them alone - would this not always be the MOST sensible thing to do? The other day, it seemed sensible to me to consolidate the dozen Shatner threads that were to be seen on the Forum Menu. See, that's the problem - if we allow Shambles to use the Forum Menu as a platform, we have to give the same privilege to Shatner. So, no, I think we'd better let the Forum Menu be an index, and let Shambles and Shatner say more-or-less whatever they want to say within their own messages (in case some of you didn't know, William Shatner has been an Honorary Mudcatter for quite some time. It happened shortly after Little Hawk joined us - about the time Cletus left us...). I have a problem with what 'WE' will now allow and all the personal judgement involved in this. What others choose to post is their business and it is none of yours. What qualifications do you have to decide what to impose upon the contributions of your fellow posters who Max has invited to the part of his site - set aside for public discussion. If you wish to change something like a thread title - why not simply ask first? When creating a thread - the choice of using a prefix is optional. This should ALWAYS be honoured. If I choose not to use the optional Song Challenge prefix (as the thread is NOT this) I strongly feel that it is quite dishonest for anonymous volunteer posters to later impose this incorrect prefix upon this thread. The use of these prefixes is either optional for the originator - or it is not. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 18 Aug 05 - 01:58 PM Well shit Jeri......If I can't call him an asshole, can I call him a tool? How about Smokey? Roger....Once again a smokescreen and you avoid the issues. Show us some internet experience so we can see your ideas have substance. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 18 Aug 05 - 01:44 PM If all you sadists didn't like to let loose on people, you'd stay out of this thread! Then there's us underdog supporters!....Not clueless as Jeri likes to say about people who don't agree with her, but disgusted at those of you who keep trying to stifle the ones who have complaints! Where would the world be without dissenters? Answer this question, you people. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 18 Aug 05 - 12:59 PM "Good thing I didn't say anything about the dirty knife! Unlike some others - Joe Offer does at least mention the issue along with his abusive name-calling of me. My posting to reasonably disagree with his views (in the face of this) cannot be considered by any sensible poster to be in any way a personal attack by me upon him...For it must be pretty clear and self evident - that any abusive personal attack upon him by me - would have been subject to imposed deletion. Even if other posters are permitted and encouraged simply to post abusive personal attacks, offensive language and name-calling. Joe Offer - says- I think that Shambles makes too much of this editing stuff. He sees it as some sort of Armageddon of the Internet, a cyberpower struggle between the forces of good (Shambles) and evil (those who have edit buttons). Joe's assumption here is also wrong. I think that the freedom of all posters to our forum to always say what they wish in their words - is more important that the wish of some volunteers to impose their judgement upon their fellow posters and certainly more important than any inconvienience caused to these volunteers by obtaining the originator's permission before imposing any changes to these words. I don't see it as quite so dramatic. We volunteers rename threads to make the titles more consistent, informative, and useful. This is fine (if it were always strictly true) but I am sure that if first asked - the originator would readily agree. The is issue is NOT the change but its automatic and unfriendly imposition. I suppose I could write seventeen pages in the FAQ about thread naming conventions, but nobody would read or understand them. So, we add or change tags when they're missing, and add explanatory information when needed. We figure that as time goes on, most people will catch on to our naming conventions - or not. It doesn't really matter, because the Forum Menu is just an index, and we can fix it if it's broke. I suppose we devote our time to teaching, and send Mudcatters preachy little messages about how they should do this or that in thread title naming. We had a lot of that preaching before we had the ability to change thread titles, and it got really old. Now we just make changes when they're needed, and don't make a big deal of it. Most people accept our thread renaming practices very well - most of our complaints come from just one person. If these conventions and changes to conform with them 'don't really matter' are not considered a 'big deal' - why risk upsetting anyone (even me) by imposing them without the originator's knowledge or permission? For is expecting all the contributors to our forum to conform to YOUR re-naming practices rather the 'tail wagging the dog'? Should YOU not be just accepting the naming practices of all the contributors. This surely is the difference between facilitating and the earnest but vain attempt to control the contributions of others? Remember that it was the posters who originally made these conventions and shaped our forum by them. Perhaps they can be permitted to continue to make them? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 18 Aug 05 - 11:55 AM Typical Shambles.......No guts at all, just smoke. I suppose that you are now claiming victory somehow is good. At least it might shut your trap!!! But once again it simply a way to avoid answering even the kindest of posters. You have no moral fortitude whatsoever and it becomes more and more obvious with each new post. You will not engage the issues before you while saying others do not. ALL of your issues have been answered but you refuse to verify that by contacting Max. Show someballs and do it. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Jeri Date: 18 Aug 05 - 11:53 AM Shambles, get off the high horse. You accuse people of personal attacks, when this whole crusade of yours is just one huge personal attack on Joe and the admin weenies you know about. If you knew about others, their postings as members wouldn't be safe. You accuse others of name calling, but wasn't you who started with the 'witchfinder general' bullshit? Or, the short version: Stalking someone is much more of a personal attack that calling somebody 'asshole' and walking away. Mick, I know you get involved because you think people might not see through the tactics and the crap. While there are a very few who won't clue into what's really going on, for the most part, people are NOT that stupid. Many of the smarter folks aren't reading this thread, or at least not commenting. Others just have a twisted sense of humor and this is entertaining. If you think you're pointing out the idiocy of all this to innocents, any newby probably tried to figure out Shambles' unsuccessful attempt at selling new 'buzz-words' and phrases was for and wandered off, probably trying to figure out if he was aware how he was coming accross (or not) to others and whether he did it on purpose or accidentally. Or, the short version: People aren't that stupid. I have a problem with calling Shambles an 'asshole'. It's not specific enough. I also don't know him personally. He may be an asshole, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility that he may also love and be loved, enjoy music as much as the rest of us, and feed the birds in the winter. He just acts like an asshole sometimes. We all do, although most of us aren't quite so consistent or globally public about demonstrating this quality. Long version: I don't think I'd ever call Roger an asshole. I think I'd say he behaved like a control freak who had no control, and in his impotence was spiteful to those who he believed did. I'd say he's taken on a few qualities of a stalker. I'd say he's betrayed people who once respected him and thought of him as a friend. I'd say his constant pointless battles and chronic failures here have almost nothing to do with change and everything to do with his ego. I wouldn't all him an asshole, though. It's personal abuse and name calling. And should anyone seriously wonder: my personal opinions about people have nothing to do with my administrative job here. That's one of the reasons why I'm doing it. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 18 Aug 05 - 10:16 AM Talking of pain - (self-inflicted or otherwise) and its location. On a more practical level - being considered by some to be a 'pain in the ass' - on our friendly forum (for being anonymous) - will result in your freedom of speech being curtailed. 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- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 18 Aug 05 - 10:08 AM Masochism is a paraphila normally expressed primarily through fantasy; normally not being physically expressed - therefore not involving a secondary person other then as on object/subject of the fantasy |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 18 Aug 05 - 10:00 AM Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat censorship - a proposal From: Big Mick - PM Date: 02 Apr 05 - 08:31 PM The alteration it needs must occur in the minds of the folks that respond to this stuff. Roger is entitled to his opinion, and in virtually every posters response they have indicated they are tired of his restating the same thing over and over; they are tired of him twisting quotes to serve himself; they go on and on about how he goes on and on. Do you folks learn anything? Who is worse, Roger or you? The question to Roger about who is "we" has been asked over and over. Roger isn't the problem anymore. Those that feed him are. Mick If you call a fellow poster a manipulative schmoe a troll or worse - it remains name-calling and remains unhelpful and counter-productive. And when this name-calling is attempted to be excused and justified by you – when you would be the very first to condemn others for doing the same thing – this hypocrisy does highlight our forum's main problem very well. It sadly brings us no nearer to any solution. Blowzabella said - You must know the way things work. Yes and how do you know that they are not working? Not I hope simply because you think that those few posters making all the noise and personal attacks – really know what they are talking about? Do you really think that I would expect these few posters (after all these years) to post any differently or ever resist for very long - the tempation to posting at all? And would you really expect turkeys to vote for Christmas? However unpopular I may appear to have made myself with some posters on our forum - by sticking to my principles – it does appear that as result of all this - things are slightly better. For example – We do now have situation where claims for the 100th post are not now described by Joe Offer as fair game for the Clones to delete as they please. I see that even he now joins in with this fun and the practice is not judged to be 'obnoxious' any more. And we do now seem to have seen the last of entire threads being deleted because our volunteer fellow posters could not be bothered to deal with just the offending post And even the imposed closures of entire threads does now seem to be used a little more sparingly. So it is a fact that effecting change (for the better) by instigating an open and reasoned debate on our forum - is not actually as impossible as some posters would like to have us think.....However, there are still many things that need to be addressed. Any help you can provide - to ensure a return to a more friendly and welcoming situation where the words of thread titles on our forum remain as posted - unless any change is first agreed by the originator - would be much appreciated. This simple request is thought to place a too 'cumbersome' burden upon our volunteer fellow posters - who now insist on the right to impose these changes upon their fellow posters - as they decide. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 18 Aug 05 - 09:48 AM no, you're wrong. Masochism is a concept which requires interaction with another. Self-inflicted pain is not masochism |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 18 Aug 05 - 09:34 AM Not true. In the abscence of sadism a masochist will self-inflict pain. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 18 Aug 05 - 09:23 AM Let me remind all you people that masochism doesn't exist without sadism.... |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:56 AM I'll admit to having my own issues as well; prime among them the unwillingness to have posted here or elsewhere information that is blatently false, twisted, slanted and biased without it being contridicted. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 18 Aug 05 - 08:52 AM Yes Mick, you are absolutely right about some of us having issues in this case and I'll be damned if I know why!!! LOL....I'ts strange. Over the years I have learned pretty well and during the last siege on Mudcat by the Martin Gibson persona, I found it easy to ignore as I had on several previous trolls. And just when I thought I was immune to the temptation, Roger takes off again and I cannot seem to help myself. It's just too fascinating to keep playing! I don't know why. I think it's because although I believe him to be a troll, it's as if he himself does not. I really can't determine whether he's a troll or just simple minded and really does want a discourse. This is like wondering if he is an asshole or a dipshit....neither is pleasant but one means no harm. In any case, the questions still are on the table and I'm waiting for the next smokescreen. Let's see if Roger can summon up any balls and answer them! I assume he must have balls although one could be the size of a pea while the other is real tiny. Jon has summed it up veery well in words that need restating: Shambles, |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Big Mick Date: 18 Aug 05 - 06:55 AM My case is proven. I asked this sad person to do two things. I was sure he would ignore them and he did. It is not namecalling to speak the truth, as one sees it. I see Roger as a sad person in need of help. His pathetic refusal to resolve the problem when the solution is obvious indicates a need, IMO, for professional help. Their is a masochistic streak at work here. As an aside, I think that those that continue to respond to him with logic and solutions, when it is clear he will not respond, probably have issues of their own. Mick,ambling off to deal with issues of his own. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: John MacKenzie Date: 18 Aug 05 - 06:30 AM Just one question Roger [Which I know you won't answer!] Just what is so sacrosanct about your deathless prose that it should be immune from editing or adding to, in order to clarify it? Did you complain in school when a teacher marked your homework on the basis that you didn't appoint him to his position? In the immortal words of whoever, 'Get a life!' Giok |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Blowzabella Date: 18 Aug 05 - 06:22 AM Dear All, I am going on my holidays tomorrow and won't be able to visit this thread for nearly two weeks. I am sure that it will look after itself while I am away - I am torn between amazement at seeing how stoic the originator is at continuing to repeat his 'civil request' ad nauseum and begging everyone else to stop posting, just to see how long he will continue talking to himself...! PLEASE Shambles - clearly, this method of attempting change is not working for you and so, all reasoning would suggest that you try a different method, to see if that works - e.g. ASK MAX! Otherwise, you show all the symptoms of someone who does not learn from experience and just keeps doing the same thing over and over again - there is, of course, no guarantee that the new method will work either. This is not a democracy - you can make suggestions - even try to persuade someone that you have a valid point of view, but saying the same thing over and over is clearly not working - it is presently wasting your own time and, honestly, making you look a bit, well, foolish. It is another step to instigate change though - lots of people have valid points of view, on all sorts of topics, but fail to get things changed to their way of thinking - because of all sorts of reasons - economical, present way suits most people, person in charge likes things the way they are - haven't you ever been a member of a club? You must know the way things work. As I say, I'm off on my hols....I wonder how many posts this will be up to by the time I get back? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: GUEST,Jon Date: 18 Aug 05 - 06:13 AM Jon - does seeing this treatment on our forum not annoy you also? Or do you also seem to think that I deserve this special treatment. Or are you saying that by imposing this special treatment upon selected easy targets - that our volunteers are just following Max's rules? Shambes, You refuse to see the blindingly obvious. The situation you argue is close to impossible. It is possible that if you were a site owner, a mod might act against your own desires on occasion. It is possible you might end up having a PM exchange for example asking them to "mend thier ways". Where it becomes ridiculous is to believe a site owner would not simply remove the authority if matters persisted. One grants such authority on the understanding they are woking for you not against you. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 18 Aug 05 - 04:13 AM Issues buried? LMAO.......Roger, you have posted the "issues" so many times that they could not possibly be buried. You have also patently refused to contact Max even at the request of "fellow posters" who have never in any way, shape, or form, been the least bit abusive to you. No, what this all gets down to is that YOU wish to impose YOUR rules and judgements on Mudcat but have no real courage to confront the situation as you should.....by contacting Max. You also have no real back-up for your ideas as they are simply ideas without any substance and no back-up in real world experience. Your last post is simply another in the line of smokescreens you have thrown up when you are backed into a corner. It's obvious to anyone reading this stupid thread that all you are really doing is stirring the pot and when called out, you show your true self by turning tail and running behind your verbal smokescreen like the poltroon you are. Stand up to a challenge for a change and see how good it feels to have even a soupcon of backbone and integrity, win-lose-or draw. Contact Max. Show us your vast internet experience. My bet is you will once again run away. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 18 Aug 05 - 03:47 AM SO, was my calling you a hypocritical sod simply "name-calling"? I don't think so; I was basing it on your own writings and public behaviour. Three times I repeated it and by now it is obvious that you cannot refute it. You are indeed a hypocritical sod. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 18 Aug 05 - 02:05 AM Mick Those who post (even volunteer fellow posters who should know better - like you) simply to call other posters abusive names and use foul and offensive language may receive a response (from me) if they cease this practice themselves and stop encouraging other posters to do this and publicly apolgise to our forum for their past conduct. If they are not prepared to do this - my posting policy is not to respond in kind but to give the response these posters deserve. Which is not to respond at all. This also prevents the issues from being buried beneath posts containing mounds of name-calling and personal abuse. According to Joe's 'rules' - all abusive personal attacks are supposed to be deleted - but these 'rules' also now say that some animals are more equal than others. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Big Mick Date: 17 Aug 05 - 10:59 PM Notice how this manipulative schmoe ignores challenges with substance? Roger, you are driving me close to calling you as I see you. I would like you to respond to 'Spaw on his last post, as well as his challenge (as well as a number of other posters) to contact Max. If you respond to this by ignoring those challenges, then you are what you are. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 05 - 07:13 PM Are the requests still considered civil if they've been asked and answered 437 times ? 438 ? 439 ? 440 ? 441 ? 442 ? 443 ? 444 ? 445 ? I would suggest that as long as it remains civil (in the face of much provocation) - no matter how many times a civil request is made - it remains civil. If a civil request is to be answered - it probably always deserves to be answered civilly. If a civil request is not treated civilly and the problem not addressed and an agreed solution found - you could perhaps expect the request to be made again. There is always the option for those who may find it irritating to ignore the thread it is contained in - rather than keep refreshing the thread. It would perhaps always be best for our volunteer fellow posters to treat all posters civilly (perhaps even those who may not be civil)? For if our volunteer fellow posters ever resort to incivility - they lose the moral high ground and more importantly - a poor example is set for others to follow. Now who was it that came up with the following common sense? Grant our members and guests the serenity to accept the things they cannot change - the courage to change the things they can - and the wisdom to realise that this is a forum open to the public and that they have no control over the posts and ideas of others |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: artbrooks Date: 17 Aug 05 - 06:32 PM Anyone else notice how often the first post each day on this very repetitive thread is....The Shambles? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 17 Aug 05 - 05:42 PM Shambles.....You are so naive when it comes to the function of forums on the internet that anything you suggest should be regarded with LESS than a grain of salt. Your ideas and requests are not based on any reality and are ridiculous at face value. Go ahead......Tell us of your experience and since you love to document things, tell us where those experiences have been or are currently taking place. I'd love to visit them to see just what does go on there. I'll do the same in return for you. I know you either lack the guts to admit you have no experience or will come up with some bullshit that relates not at all to my request. Let's see the places where things work your way. No guts---No glory.......Let's see 'em Dude! And Grannie's button sewing site with it's 4 members and 11 hits a month doesn't count.......At least let's keep them in the same size range as Mudcat....larger if you like. Go for it Big Man..... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Wesley S Date: 17 Aug 05 - 02:52 PM Are the requests still considered civil if they've been asked and answered 437 times ? 438 ? 439 ? 440 ? 441 ? 442 ? 443 ? 444 ? 445 ? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Big Mick Date: 17 Aug 05 - 02:45 PM If the shoe fits .............. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 05 - 01:49 PM Do you really think that any organisation that allowed any of its representitives to personally abuse and call their customers names - like 'asshole' and 'idiot' in response to civil requests - be following organisational principles likely to enable any organisation to flourish and prosper?
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 05 - 11:29 AM Or at worst, and at the time last night I blew it with you, seeing. Jon - I may have posted it - but they were not my words - were they? It matters less how anyone became a volunteer fellow poster than what they do when they become one of this anonymous, select band of unknown number - who are able to impose their judgement upon the rest of us. Can I suggest that you rather missed the point? It may have been a small victory for a return to a friendly and welcoming forum where these posts are not now subject to automatically imposed deletion by our anonymous fellow posters – but it was a welcome move from the unfriendly position it was before – as stated in the following. Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,Joe Offer - PM Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:28 AM Well, I can't log in, either, so I don't have access to proof one way or another. Generally, the 100th/200th claims are a no-no in music threads and in many serious discussions. People have come to think of them as obnoxious. I don't know why, but that's what they think. I don't bother with them, but they're fair game for the Clones. -Joe Offer- ----------------------------------------------------------- Jon - does seeing this treatment on our forum not annoy you also? Or do you also seem to think that I deserve this special treatment. Or are you saying that by imposing this special treatment upon selected easy targets - that our volunteers are just following Max's rules? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Jeri Date: 17 Aug 05 - 10:50 AM The problem, Amos, is that he doesn't espouse any organizational principles. He simply attacks others' and reacts to actions he notices. That said, I'd LOVE to read part of a memo! |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Amos Date: 17 Aug 05 - 10:46 AM Sham, I suggest you start a small company with about twenty employees based on the organizational principles you espouse. Flourish and prosper if you can. A |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: katlaughing Date: 17 Aug 05 - 10:27 AM Jon, it doesn't bother me for you to say that. I do clone work because I care about the Mudcat, just as you said. I don't always enjoy it, but it's just second nature, after all of these years, to try to *tidy* up a bit when I see typos, etc. For the record...I do NOT have the time or energy to check out every single thread title for clarification. None of us do. When I see one in which I think I can help to make it more clear, I will do so. That does NOT mean there are no others that may benefit from such additions, nor does it mean the one which I add to is being singled out. kat |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: GUEST,Jon Date: 17 Aug 05 - 10:11 AM Accuesed of being the self imposed they get called, shambles, rather than truthfully being called people asked by Max to carry out tasks Max asks them to do. Or at worst, and at the time last night I blew it with you, seeing. Folk music, Mudcat and the Internet has been saved from the scourge of the "100thpost-ist" anonymous self-appointed clones. All together now : Let's hear it for our eponymous self-appointed drones! The air is somehow fresher this morning... We can take it the other way if you like and I will as I've nothing here to loose. If you want the other way and ask "What the hell is Max doing allowing self-appointed drones to over-run his forum?" |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 05 - 09:52 AM It's just seeimg people accused for obeying Max's rules that is annoying me. Accused of what exactly? Perhaps anonymous folk may expect to be accused of something - even if it is only wishing to remain anonymous? The facts are here. Some anonymous volunteer decided to impose their personal judgement upon my thread title in isolation - when there were many titles that could also have been subject to imposition. This was imposed without my knowledge or permission. Despite the fact the addition of 'UK' made the thread misleading (as the legisltion it concerned was not applicable to the UK) and as the changed title was still credited to me as originator - it opened me up to charges of not knowing my subject. I requested in this thread that originators are always contacted before any imposed changes are made on thread titles. For this - I am subjected to abusive name-calling and offensive language and the imposed editing action is not only defended - the title of this thread is subject to imposition........ Jon - This treatment does tend to annoy me but I do not resort to the abusive name-calling and offensive language that is encouraged in this thread. And if I did - I could be pretty sure that any such contributions of mine - would be subject to imposition and deleted. I just try to ensure that the facts are known so that posters can make up their own minds - from these facts. Jon - does seeing this treatment on our forum not annoy you also? Or do you also seem to think that I deserve this special treatment. Or are you saying that by imposing this special treatment upon selected easy targets - that our volunteers are just following Max's rules? |
| Share Thread: |