BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 09:16 PM

"I won't contribute a thing to this place."

If only...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: katlaughing
Date: 19 Jun 02 - 08:33 PM

John from Hull, the Healing Threads War was a LOT longer ago than a year, though Jon did start the Annexe partly to help with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 08:43 PM

Useful contributions! well I am sure you knew what I meant , it's late here!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 18 Jun 02 - 08:36 PM

Max-I am sure Jon does not hate you! He was just trying to help this website develop and continue.
I met Jon freeman a couple of weeks ago, we did not speak for long, but I know for a fact that he is a good bloke and he was trying and has tried to help Mudcat any way he can, about a year ago some people were complaining about the prayer chain and healing threads on Mudcat, Joe Offer called them assorted bullshit, so Jon provided an an extra space for such threads at his own expense on his own website (the Annexe). He has made a few suggestions here, eg he has offered to host new permathreads and give their originators editing facilities at his website, he has been met with hostility and derision, "If you don't like it here fuck off and start your own site", is there any surprise that he did just that?I often hear talk of the Mudcat community, well I don't see much evidence of it at the moment, instead of arguing and bickering why don't we all (hopefully Jon Freeman included) all pull together and make this the best folk music site on the net, a site we can all be proud of, where all contributions are usefull welcomed?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Celtic Soul
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 08:42 PM

That's as may be, mate, but where do you get melons THIS time of night????

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: artbrooks
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 08:36 PM

Max seems to have said all that is necessary to say. We, as a group, appear to have gotten involved in another troll thread. As has been said many times before: "don't feed the bugger and he'll eventually go away".

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: SINSULL
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 08:10 PM

But, Max?...but...but...what about my suggestion? And I promise I will never ask for a "Thank you".

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: RichM
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 01:48 PM

and now we should all go away and be good little girls and boys (--or both, if your surgeon consents), and stop worrying about the smoke and mirrors...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: aussiebloke
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 02:39 AM

Nuff said then...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Max
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 02:05 AM

Please don't bother defending me. I build and upgrade this site for your (my) enjoyment. Defending me when upgrades are late, and defending me when upgrades happen and some things don't work quite right because we rushed it, and defending me when some folks just don't like the changes, is just taking away from your enjoyment.

Just enjoy it, let me take the heat. That is why I'm here, I actually enjoy the responsibility. They want to hate me. They are going to hate me, that's a given (I say hate instead of criticize because there is nothing constructive here). No need for you to get involved and be a target too. Threads and comments like these never bother me. I read them, and I absorb them, and I learn from them, but I never take them personal. No need to worry about me. If it took away from my life rather than benefiting it, I would just shut it down.

The critics just don't understand it, even after explaining it, because, as you can see by this thread, they only talk, never listen. I get more out of a 300Mhz machine than probably anyone ever has. Not only is Mudcat a technological marvel, but also social marvel. From so many countries and so many states, so many religions and so many beliefs… and what we argue about most is the Web site that brought and keeps us all together? I'd call that victory. I DO call that victory.

Let me worry about this stuff. Let me design and host the site to the best of my ability and to the best that it serves my self-interest. I am very comfortable with what is and what will be. It is a Web site, it is MY Web site. It is one of many collection and delivery mechanisms of the DigiTrad (of which I have neither control nor input). The Mudcat is what it is, and it is what I want it to be.

So you see that it serves the community, that the focus is on me. The defenders merely enlarge the target with their diversity.

The arguments here are absurd. Dogma. I am surprised that anyone is taking them seriously.

And some of you are right, I can do better… and I'll try to do so. I'm sorry Jack, and Thank You.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Deckman
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 01:36 AM

Don, thanks for the address. I'm going to send cash ... I don't need no stinking receipt! CHEERS, Bob(deckman)Nelson. GO MAX GO MAX GO MAX GO MAX GO MAX GO MAX GO MAX!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 01:25 AM

Greetings, Bob! What are you doing up this late?

The address is:--

The Mudcat Café
PO Box 3006
West Chester, PA 19381

Don (goin' to bed now) Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Deckman
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 01:13 AM

Thanks for the reminder Don! What was that address again please. CHEERS, Bob(deckman)Nelson

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 12:46 AM

. . . bitch bitch bitch. . . .

"The only thing of true, lasting value here to the folk and blues music world is the Digital Tradition."

It would seem that you have missed quite a number of really good and informative threads. There are at least a couple good threads going at any given time, and sometimes there are a whole batch of them. A lot of knowledgeable people populate the Cat and contribute to these threads. A great deal of the information found in them, I find, is of "true, lasting value." I have quite collection of threads stashed away on disk, and I use many of them for reference.

And as for the Digital Tradition belonging to everyone, let's put it this way: I have a whole bookcase full of books about folk music, including dozens of song books. The songs in those books belong to everyone. But the books belong to me.

This thread reminds me—it's time I send Max another check. It's true that the only acknowledgment I get for the contribution is the canceled check—and the fact that Mudcat still exists. I get what I want in return for my meager contributions. I figure Max has better thinks to do than to spend his time writing "thank you" letters.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Amos
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 12:39 AM

It isn't a matter of lunch, snide one. It is a matter of honor and respecting gifts given freely and those who put sweat into making such things happen. It is a matter of preferring those who communicate plainly and openly on the strength of their own names than those who insist on underhanded, covert methods. Craven and snide carping is the stuff of small beasts. Suggest you stand up and put your name behind your opinions. They would be much better received -- is that not obviosu by this time? It looks to me like the only one who is trying for a free lunch is you and your alternate identities, voices, or whatever you call them -- maybe Larry, Moe and Curly?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Jun 02 - 12:13 AM

There is no such thing as a free lunch. So what price are some of you paying to defend this place and the man who runs it, hmmm?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Devilmaster
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 11:56 PM


'Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenandoah
Date: 16-Jun-02 - 09:09 PM

I won't contribute a thing to this place--'

But you have shenandoah....you have contributed a laughable bit of BS, which is of course the downfall of the Cat, according to you.

So we the guard dogs thank you for contributing to the continuation of the riches of the folk and blues community known as the mudcat....once again... according to you.

:)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 11:09 PM

Goodnight, Gracie. Go on back to the other forums you cruise and troll in. We are done with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenadoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 11:06 PM

Rather attack me than Jack the Sailor, wouldn't you all?

You know, this level of animosity wouldn't exist if Max would merely say "thank you" to those who have sent financial donations (there IS no excuse for not doing so, no matter what his personal circumstances are), or emails or PMs with offers to volunteer to help.

When volunteers and individual contributors are treated with such contempt, and the database is in such a sorry state, just what do people expect?

Sure, the guard dogs are always going to be foaming at the mouth, just like you are now, whenever these criticisms are brought up in the forum. But guess what? These complaints and criticisms aren't going to go away, because Max IS accountable to the community that has supported him financially and with their volunteer efforts.

To suggest that Max doesn't owe anyone any explanations is bullshit. Max owes a LOT of people explanations about how he has squandered this community resource they have done so much to keep in existence. Any person with a shred of decency and integrity knows that, but integrity and decency is something you guard dogs around here don't know much about.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 11:00 PM

Jack, I am sorry for not responding to your comments. They are well taken and I want to offer my thanks to you for putting your money where your mouth is. I know Max appreciates it, too. And Jeff, and Joe, and all of us who support the place.

I look forward to your posts.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 10:40 PM

Shenandoah, You said: "I consider his mistreatment of OUR resource to be an act of cultural theft, pure and simple."

Since the DT is freely available, there is no cultural theft. Yeah you have the right to speak but why make a fool of your self?

Katlaughing has your solution Shenandoah, get yourself a copy of the DT and start your own site. Best of luck to you in singlehandedly protecting the integrity of folk music.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 10:27 PM

What is funny, Shenandoah, is that everyone here knows who you are, as well as your level of honor. You accuse us of sheltering, when what we are really saying is, if you don't like it, don't come. Your track record is laughable and your arguments circular. The fact is, the DT is available to anyone in any number of formats. Dick and Susan have their own reasons for maintaining it the way they do, and Max provides it a home. Don't like it? Create your own.

As far as Max responding to donations, sure he should. But we aren't walking in his brogans just now. If folks would really think about it, they would realize that just keeping the thing going (in his apartment no less) is all that we require and should be greatful for.

And shenandoahchild, you might want to adopt an identity that isn't so easy to see through.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenandoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 09:54 PM

You just forgot to mention Amos, I am entitled to my opinion, as well as speak it here. Unless the Mudcat faeries decide to zap my posts, that is. Wouldn't be the first time the Mudcat censors stepped in when criticism of Mudcat Max was openly posted here.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Amos
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 09:43 PM

Well, you are a piece o' work; I take back everything I said about your appearing to be a flaming circle of swamp-gas. It wasn't an apparency, but the actual substance of the thing.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenandoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 09:09 PM

I won't contribute a thing to this place--see Jack the Sailor's above post re: financial contribution, and Jack Campin's posts to the rec.music.folk thread on Mudcat Duffers if you want to know why.

There is a time when the best way to solve the problem at hand is to lend one, and not level criticism. There are other times when seeing the sincere and genuine efforts blown off by the person being helped suggests that any further help to the person just prolongs the bad situation.

I'll not do anything to prolong what I see here as a very bad situation regarding the Digital Tradition. The sooner Max goes under, the better for the online folk and blues music community and the collection.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 08:50 PM

ROTFLMAO............Anybody else have this mental image of Max with a crazed expression on his face and shooting a flamethrower at a computer? I tell ya'....Shennie is the funniest thing we've had here!!! LMAO....this is really rich...............I don't think "disingenuous" even begins to express it, but it damn well is funny reading!!!...............Let us fight to the end and the music will survive......geeziz.............that's a riot!

Got any more sad tales? Maybe you fear and loathe the idea of parting with an old friend you'd like to repeat here?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Amos
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 08:48 PM

Jeeze, more mudslinging thinly disguised as meaningful dialogue; I gotta tell ya, man, if you will not abandon your stoopid pedastal and get to work yourself, not by criticizing vaguely and condemning loudly but offering instead some sweat and some honest hours where they will do some good, I suggest you have earned no right to criticize those who are actually taking the job in hand and doing what they can do to move things forward.

This sort of hollow condescending know-best criticality is not only unproductive, it is apparently intentionally so. Which, if I may use the expression, gives the lie to your high-falutin claims to integrity (since you won't walk the walk) and makes you appear like a sort of shallow circle of gaseous flame in the backwaters. So to speak. A flaming a-hole, in other words.

I am off this thread, as it is clear my request for specifics, responsible behaviour and putting your money where your mouth is are falling on very large deaf ears.

A

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenandoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 08:36 PM

I disagree that things can't be changed--that is never true. We all have a duty to ourselves and to one another to speak our own truth with integrity and conviction--and in most instances, without compromise. This is one of those instances for me. The Digital Tradition is a collection of songs that belong to all of us, not Max. I consider his mistreatment of OUR resource to be an act of cultural theft, pure and simple. I know that ruffles feathers, but that doesn't trouble me a bit.

If enough of the folk and blues music community brings pressure to bear on the site owner, change will come. Why will it come? Because the collection of songs in the Digital Tradition is much more important than the one man hell bent on controlling that collection. I'm confident time will prove me right, not Max. The songs will live long and far beyond him, or any of us. The only thing that matters is the care we take of them while it is our watch.

Like I said,

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 07:58 PM

Well, the Digital Tradition belongs to Dick Greenhaus. It's his baby. Max and the Mudcat Cafe only serve as host to the Digital Tradition. Susan of DT has shared editing responsibilities since the very beginning - 1988, I think.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: katlaughing
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 07:55 PM

For crysakes, the DT is available on mirror sites, or by download or, Dick will rip a CD for you, even. If anyone has a right to concerns about the DT it would be Dick and Susan to whom one should express their concerns.

Just six months ago, Max posted a Heartfelt Thanks to any and all who have contributed. That ought to hold us for awhile, exp. considering he is off the charts for MAJOR stress producing occurences in one's life, this past year, alone.

Shenny, your posts are transparent and disingenuous and don't fool any of us who know you. How's the guitar coming along?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 06:12 PM

Shenandoah: Sorry to say this but you are mistaken. Except for the legitimate claims of various copyright holders the DT is Max's entirely.

It is the same as if we went on his land and built a stage to play on. In the end the stage would be his. Except for our copyrights. We in actuality give up our claims to the material when we post it here.

If you do not like this arrangement, then you really should go elsewhere rather than rail against something you cannot change.

That is my humble opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 06:03 PM

Spaw, I appreciate your timely and considered response. As to the donation, I'm saying I'm gonna do what I'm gonna do but If you are looking for ways to increase funding, here's an easy one. And your point is well taken that it is Max's business. Usually if a business treats me poorly, I make a point NOT to tell them. They've pissed me off, Why should I try to help them make more money?

In Max's case it is different. Those I know who have met him and know him tell me it IS a labour of love. I want to see him do better. Normally I DO NOT announce my donations. But it is obvious that present practices are costing money.

I am not condemming you or any of the other "watch dogs" (an entirely fitting name I think ;) ) for your actions, I am merely suggesting that the Cat MAY be better served if you all were to back off a little and let others make the points. Which are after all well known.

Decide whether the warm fuzzies you all get by defending Max is worth the alienation of potential supporters you create by appearing to form a clique. Also your points would have more weight if they came from more people. Once you all have spoken, what else is there for the rest of us to say?

Again I am suggesting that you all back off just a little and have trust in the rest of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:39 PM

Jack, I missed your post somehow so I'll say you have some points...you said: "I sent a $100 check with a personal note, because I thought this was a community and Max and I were both members Max being the much more senior one. The only response I got back was a cancelled check. Was Max within his rights as laid out by the "guard dogs" on this thread? Yes! Will the lack of response affect any future donations? What do you think? Could Max have done better?"

That's true and it's something that a number of people have mentioned to Max but it's not been something he's ever been especially good at and it seems to be the way of things......so if it does bother you (and I can understand how and why it would)...Don't send him any more money. When I said that same thing above I was completely serious......If anyone donates anything to anybody and expects more than a warm fuzzy feeling, they're likely to be disappointed. Anything I ever get back from anyone who I have donated to I view as a nicety....no more, no less.

I'm not trying to stifle discussion, but how many times have we gone through this before? Shennandoah's comments are complete crap and a troll....period.   In my first post I was simply stating what IS. This is the way it IS. We can talkforever, but this is the way it IS. The site belongs to Max. What he does and when he does it and how he does it is his call. If it goes commercial (very, very, doubtful), then that is his call too. As far as serving the needs??? That's nuts......The "need" to be served is whatever Max feels his need to be.

Let's just do the things we can as Joe has suggested and let the rest of it alone. If and when things are done and updates are made....good. No one is forcing anyone to use the site. Jack, I know you are sincere and I value your posts but there isn't much we can do about what happens here. I like it the way it is, the way it was, and hopefully, the way it will be.....and if I don't, I assure you I'll simply leave.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Amos
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:39 PM

Actually, you widdle tweefwogs, the Digital Tradition is maintained by voluntary spare-time work by Dick, Susan and a few honest, unafraid people who are always interested in suggestions for improvements.

I think uniformly the spirit of the responses you are getting, Shenny-me-lad, is "if you want ti done better, see what you can do to help and communicate about it". But I must say your condescending pseudoi-patronizing tone is likely to result in a communication barrier similar to the one you seem to be experiencing here.

I would like to see less critical unsubstantiated generalities, and more specific, concrete suggestions for improvements and offers of volunteer hours to spend making it happen. You don't need to be a data base expert to tabulate improved information on the songs in the DT, and a simple tab-delimited text file or Excel spreadsheet of your updates or improvements would be relatively easy to import into the database.

If I were as anxious as you pretend to be to see these enhancements, I'd get in touch with Dick Greenhouse about volunteering, insteading of carping all the diem long like some wet-eared whippersnapper with a debilitating lack of cojones and heart.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenandoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:26 PM

The Digital Tradition IS NOT Max's, Guest. What part of that don't YOU understand?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenadoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:24 PM

I don't give a rip about Max, you or this forum, spaw. But I do care, as many do, about the Digital Tradition as a resource for music lovers.

But go ahead and insult me if it makes you feel better. It won't change the reality of the situation with the Digital Tradition one iota.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:21 PM

Shenandoah,
I said I wanted it maintained to a much higher standard.

It has NOTHING whatsoever to do with what YOU, Jon Freeman or anyone else other than Max, want. (What part of the preceding sentence don't you comprehend?)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenandoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:14 PM

Jack, I never said I wanted the DT to be more academic. I said I wanted it maintained to a much higher standard. I refuse to accept that because something is a collaborative effort, it must be done to a lower standard.

There are many examples of truly exquisite folk and blues music websites done to a very high standard online by amateurs. Imagine how wonderful this place could be if even a handful of those gifted and talented folks were given a chance at salvaging the Digital Tradition, and transforming it from it's current sad state.

Because something is grassroots and collaborative doesn't mean it should be substandard.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:07 PM

LMAO......You're a real riot Shenny!!! Your concern is just soooo touching........Yes, it's truly wonderful to see the complete and total dedication you have to improving this site............Somebody get me a hankie, I'm completely broke up here..........and help me up off the floor too.........Shenny if you are concerned about the BS here than you need to stop posting such complete bullshit!!!

Yeah.....you care, I can tell..........LMAO...........You may be more completely full of shit that anyone who's posted here in....like......ever!!!! Thanks for the laughs!!!!!!!! Feel free to post some more crap.......Great stuff!!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenandoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:06 PM

Big Mick, Max, Jeff, and Joe did not give us the gift of the Digital Tradition, they've just managed to screw it up, possibly beyond redemption.

I am not here complaining because this website isn't giving me what I want. I'm here complaining because this website owner has squandered the opportunity to do something of real value for the online folk and blues community, which could serve the folk and blues music community for years to come. But rather, he chose to selfishly take control of the painstaking work done by many, many others who have both collected for and contributed to the Digital Tradition, and keep it as his own. That is cultural theft of the worst kind, IMO.

Given us a gift? Fat chance. He stole what was never his, and refuses to open it up to those who are truly willing to make the DT something really special for the good of ALL folk and blues music lovers, not just the handful who inhabit this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 05:00 PM

Guest:Shenandoah, and Jon do raise some interesting issues. I've been avoiding this sort of discussion for six months because it never seems to change and because It aways seems to lead to name calling of one sort or another. I hope this criticism is constructive. I am going to be very honest and blunt.

Let us take a step back and examine what is best for the site.

Is the site owner interested in serving the needs of the community?

I sent a $100 check with a personal note, because I thought this was a community and Max and I were both members Max being the much more senior one. The only response I got back was a cancelled check.

Was Max within his rights as laid out by the "guard dogs" on this thread? Yes! Will the lack of response affect any future donations? What do you think? Could Max have done better?

I'm saying this not to ask for credit, One hundred dollars is not a big deal. But I get thanks if I hold a door for someone. I know I have the choice to go elsewhere. It is not good P.R. and not good business on Max's part not to say you thank for $100.00. I know that Max is busy, but he probably can use some help in relating with his subscribers.

If Max is going to get grants or Tax-free status then accounting is necessary. Also , opening the books to donors, if the books are as we all expect, will tend to increase the size and regularity of donations. It would be good for Max to have accounts. But as you say, it is his choice.

It is an excellent point that Max owns this. What is to prevent him at any time from going commercial and charging a fee or subscription for DT? If he does he will be within his legal rights to charge money for your work. That is the way it is things are set up. Take it or leave it. Who knows if the site would grow if DT was made public property?

Shenandoah: I am against making DT more academic. Unless it is the only way Max can get a grant to support the rest of the functions. Right now it is the result of a community effort, shared experience, opinions and knowledge. I do not see how it could be otherwise without professional editing. And I doubt that many of us have the time or the means to do research to come out with the "right" answers.

Mick, Spaw, Susan et. al

Maybe you should rethink your reactions to criticisms of Max and Mudcat. You all seem to jump in so quicky and so hard that it is difficult to have a free discussion. I am confident that the points you all make will be made by others and a feeling of community will be fostered. Why don't we try to eliminate the appearance of cliques. I don't see how perceived "insiders" such as yourselves, telling us what you are sick of, appointing your selves guardians and telling people to "f" off, is helping Max. Often times less is more.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST,Shenandoah
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 04:54 PM

I find it quite interesting that those who are so quick to come to the defense of this website are talking about the forum, which I know is of value to them as their online "community". I don't doubt for a second that is the case for the majority of people regularly posting to the forum.

Where I disagree with you is on what I value here, which is the Digital Tradition, NOT THE FORUM. The reason I don't value the forum is because a decision was made (apparently quite some time ago) to allow the forum to address any topic under the sun, rather than just folk and blues music. I can go to a million chat sites on line, but there is only one Digital Tradition--the resource which initially draws everyone to this site. I also know that the Digital Tradition is work that was done by Dick and Susan, not Max.

I would have much preferred that when the Digital Tradition came to be housed at this website, that an agreement had been made to reserve the main discussion forum for on-topic discussions of the music. Those of us who come here looking ONLY for information in the DT and the discussion forum about music have had Max and the "Mudcat regulars" thumb their noses at us and tell us, essentially (or literally in some members' cases) to FUCK OFF.

Now, those attitudes do not contribute a thing to the online folk and blues music community. Maybe that is because people here wish to preserve their own insular community, rather than serve the needs of the greater online community, and the music itself.

The only thing of true, lasting value here to the folk and blues music world is the Digital Tradition. The standard of maintenance of the Digital Tradition has been appallingly low, and people here seem to be JUST FINE with those low standards, because the forum feeds their online addiction needs.

That there has been this embarrassment of folk and blues music riches squandered doesn't seem to be a matter of concern to the regulars here. But then, most the regulars don't seem to care near as much about the music as they care about maintaining the ability to exploit the Digital Tradition to keep their own little chat forum for internet junkies going strong.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 04:18 PM

It's so feckin' simple yet for some so hard to grasp.

It is Max's site.
He provides it FREE.

To chastise it and its owner because you have problems with it is the epithome of gall and arrogance.

It's like being offered unlimited free meals and full run of the house and complaining that you don't like the food or the accommodations.

Get real or get stuffed.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 03:52 PM

Guest:Shenandoah: I think your earlier post puts things clearly in perspective, and should be carefully read by all those providing Max with 'guard dogs'.

"To suggest something like Jon is suggesting isn't casting aspersions on the site owner, IMO. I don't know who the personalities are being discussed. But it is quite clear from this thread that there is a loyal faction of regulars here who act as guard dogs for the site owner.....

the site owner isn't all that interested in serving the needs of the community this website is here to serve."
Who, but the 'site owner' decides what community the site is to serve? !!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 03:24 PM

Several years ago I started a newsletter for family and friends, with a mailing list of almost 65 people. At the moment it is far overdue, due to some changes I am planning. If anyone of those 65 people started harassing me (which they NEVER have)as to when it should come out or what should be or not be in it, I would tell them: Start your own.

Ownership has autonomy.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Big Mick
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 02:45 PM

Well, Shenandoah, I will disagree with you and tell you why. The whole tone of your post is that you just think it should be what you want it to be. You are unaccepting of it as it is. No one asked you to come here (that is merely a statement of fact, not a perjorative), rather you chose to come. I note that the substance of Susan's post was that your main contention of having to come here because of the DT was not true. You chose to ignore that. It is a fact. You have no need to come to The shoddy Mudcat to get the DT. This thread has given you several alternatives. Instead you choose to complain. Fair enough. But remember this. The thing that brought some of the most illustrious voices among us to this place was the sense of community, and the dialogue. That is what you call BS. There are plenty of sites where one can get lyrics and pure background. Please, if you don't like this version, just go there. Mudcat has, is, and always will be about the music, the issues that will spawn the folk music of the future, the characters that inhabit our various genres, and just about everything else in sight. Folks will come and folks will go, but the Mudcat will be here.

Insulating Max? Protecting him? Yep, and happy to do so. He has given us a gift, ably assisted by the likes of Jeff and Joe.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: katlaughing
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 02:36 PM

Have some patience, the upgrade Spaw mentions will be worth it; contribute by way of Joe's suggestions; and, quit bitching about what is offered free of charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 01:51 PM

Geez Gareth.....In that case it would be REAL big of me!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: Gareth
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 01:32 PM

Spaw - just remember what the penalty for bigamy is - Two mothers in Law !

Gareth **BG**

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat accounts and commitee?
From: catspaw49
Date: 16 Jun 02 - 01:30 PM

So Sins, how about you move in with me and I'll takeover Mudcat from Max. Wow...what a plan!!! Of course there is Karen to consider as well and having two women around here would be bigamy......and it would be big of me, I mean what with having to give up the extra bathroom time and all............

Spaw