 sj |
||
|
||
In the UK......? (thread title change complaint)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:18 PM Oh please Mario, where is "the editing policy" manual. There isn't one. Pointing out a wrong is okay. These problems wouldn't exist if they're were clear rules, policies, or structure that helped people get along. Max doesn't want to make changes that will solve many of these problems. That is his right, but don't pretend that being mean to roger is right. It isn't. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:22 AM I also think bullying is "picking on" someone over and over about something. That person may set themselves up as a victim but to blame him for your response to him is blaming the victim. Solve the problem children. Don't keep saying mean things about Roger. Rogoer repeatedly makes inaccurate and misleading stements regarding joe, the clones, and editing policy. this is suppossed to be ignored because pointing out that he is wrong is "bullying"? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: wysiwyg Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:21 AM harp, I stand by my statement that I think the clones keep their feelings separate from their editing actions. They do have feelings about being repeatedly attacked, and I can't blame them for venting them. I gave up bushel baskets a long time ago, thank you very much. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 27 Jul 05 - 11:16 AM Susan, you've got to be living under a bushelbasket to believe this when it comes to Shambles repetitive complaints: "they are very good at keeping their personal thoughts about stuff separate from their loyalty to the job they have been given to do." I don't think the clones should change anything unless the poster requests it, in the BS section. Stay out of it. Editing buttons were meant for music. Or if the offended person requests it, first he or she must ask the poster. Half the time, people take offense over stuff other people don't mean to give offense about. If they sign their name they should be able to communicate with the one they are pissed about. If they don't sign their name too bad. If Max wanted to eliminate the ability to speak up anonymously, he would eliminate it. Cloneheads were instituted because Max doesn't have to time to edit. Not because they were meant to be moral arbiters, or inherently more capable of being moral arbiters, including Father Joebro. He's just an ordinary man with as much pettiness in him as the rest of us. Or should I say as much "devil." Bert is the only one of the signers on this thread to show Shambles any reasonable support or look for a solution. They rest of you are part of the problem since you aren't part of the solution. My opinion, which I am entitled to. I also think bullying is "picking on" someone over and over about something. That person may set themselves up as a victim but to blame him for your response to him is blaming the victim. Solve the problem children. Don't keep saying mean things about Roger. And if anyone accuses me of bullying Lepus, I will agree. And if Lepus wants a personal or public apology for anything I said that was UNTRUE, he will get it. But he hasn't ever asked me. so there l,h |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 27 Jul 05 - 07:49 AM Hey Mickster, I liked the "bite me". That I can relate to! |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 27 Jul 05 - 03:19 AM It seems to be generally recognised that this is a public dicussion form - set up on Max's website - so perhaps we can have an open public discussion...and not a battle. No answers have been given - just the views of individual posters. This is just a thread - like any other on our forum with no reason for it to be closed. Especially after all the volunteer's time and effort required to impose a change or if your prefer - to clarify this thread's title. Some poster have stated that perhaps thread titles should be left as posted and that any proposed change be notified first as a matter of common decency. I suggest that this remains their view - it remains mine. Are these the views from these posters on our forum not to be considered and to be thought as valid and to be as everyone elses's? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Bert Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:47 AM YAAAAH! I said "I have found a real need to add location information to ANY thread title" what I meant was "I have NEVER found a real need to add location information to ANY thread title" Ah well these things happen. Susan, I think you're talking about me, If so that's fine, you are such a good friend that you can mention my name without me getting offended. And you're right, I am not here all the time, and I certainly have not read all of Shambles postings, or anyone else's for that matter. It is highly likely that I have missed those things that seem to have got ereryone up in arms about this. But that is not the issue. The issue is that Shambles has had threads and postings edited and deleted. It appears to me that there is a personal vendetta going on between Roger and Joe. And so I will ask Joe, and Joe only 'cos he's a good friend too. Please leave Shambles alone. Just let things rest and as Susan says "take a breath". Thedn I'm sure things will quieten down because Roger will not escalate the issue if he is left alone. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Jul 05 - 11:00 PM Why not just close this thread now Joe? Any reason for it's existence is over. Shambles had some questions that have been answered and although he doesn't care for the answers, they have been given. Anything further has to come from Max and it has been suggested repeatedly to Roger that he take it to Max. He refuses to do so I guess and states that Max can read it here just like the rest of us and since he's had plenty of time to do so and can access any thread anytime, Max seems to have nothing to say on the matter and as kat noted, she has not been called down on anything she's done. And of course Shamble's constant harping on about anonymity is classic and shows how little experience he has. Moderators are almost always unknown on larger boards. Nothing new or sinister in that. Looks to me like it's a wrap. Other forums would have closed this thing ages ago. Luckily for all of us Mudcat isn't other forums but is a bit unique in what is allowed and the freedom it gives it's members. However, letting this go on does nothing to enhance anything about the 'Cat or profit members in any way. We can of course wait in anticipation of Shamble's copy and paste posts. THey've all been explained and discussed before ad infinitums. Just close it Joe. Anyplace else would have done it long before now. Spaw
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 26 Jul 05 - 12:33 PM Of course, if anyone dares to disagree with Shambles, it's labeled "abuse." Heck, if I say anything in disagreement with anybody, no matter how politely and logically, I get accused of all sorts of horrible things. I guess some people think I'm not allowed to express my opinion here. Such is life. Some following examples of the double standard that is making this forum look foolish and oppressive. You judge........... Subject: RE: Personal attack thread - please delete From: Joe Offer Date: 11-Jun-04 - 12:01 AM Max, Jeff, and Joe were off doing other things today, and missed this one. It's a personal attack, and it isn't allowed. Since so many have posted to it, I guess I won't delete it - but I will close it. This is one of the "no-brainers" that the Clones should have deleted early on, no matter what Shambles thinks. Clones, don't let Shambles care you off - you're doing a good job, but you should have deleted this and told us about it. Bob, I'm sorry this happened. Shambles, go whine somewhere else, or maybe we should start threads about you and the sheep or something. -Joe Offer- Subject: RE: Personal attack thread - please delete From: Joe Offer Date: 11-Jun-04 - 12:29 AM I could delete Bob's name, but I doubt that would do any good. the damage has been done. The thread should have been deleted as soon as it appeared, and I'm sorry that didn't happen. But Shambles believes in this sort of thing, so I think that maybe this would be a good opportunity to smear his reputation. Shambles, I'm sick of you and your shit. -Joe Offer- Subject: RE: Personal attack thread - please delete From: Joe Offer Date: 12-Jun-04 - 03:23 AM Ah, Shambles - we make an exception for you, since you seem to think it's a good thing to have personal attacks. We want to keep you happy, after all. Your whining is so annoying. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: (thread title change complaint) From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Jul 05 - 11:50 AM Of course, if anyone dares to disagree with Shambles, it's labeled "abuse." Heck, if I say anything in disagreement with anybody, no matter how politely and logically, I get accused of all sorts of horrible things. I guess some people think I'm not allowed to express my opinion here. Such is life. I was certainly aware that adding the tag (thread title change complaint) to the title of this thread, would be viewed by some as an act of defiance against the rules Shambles seeks to impose upon us. Still, the title In the UK... had no meaning at all, and our general principle is to ensure threads have titles that indicate the contents of the thread. So, I changed the thread title. I can't say I felt really horribly guilty about defying Shambles in that way, but the fact of the matter is that the thread title change follows our general principles. Before we had the ability to change thread titles, we had scads of messages in every misleadingly-titled thread, preaching to the originator on how a thread should be titled, and urging him to start another thread with a proper title. Now, if a thread title doesn't adequately describe the contents, we just simply change it. No big deal. We've always operated under the principle that threads are a product of the community, not of the thread originator. We have allowed thread originators to control the content of threads only in certain designated PermaThreads. Otherwise, thread originators generally have no control over what people may or may not say in subsequent messages. Each individual has more-or-less complete control over the contents of his or her individual message, but not over the entire thread. Therefore, it would seem to follow logically that the thread title should reflect the needs of the community that produced the thread, not only of the thread originator. If the thread originator controls the thread then it follows that he/she should control the thread title and should be consulted about any title change. That's not the case here, so I see no need to ask permission of the thread originator for a title clarification. Please note, however, that thread originators ARE contacted if there is any reason to think that a thread title change would make it difficult for the originator to find the thread. So, I guess it boils down to this: Shambles thinks it's an offense against the thread originator to change a thread title, so changes should be made only with the thread originator's permission. We think otherwise, but we do make attempts to contact the thread originator in certain situations when we think it's necessary. I think that's an indication that we've met Shambles halfway. That seems fair to me - I see no need for total compliance to his rules, but we have made an effort to honor his concerns. As for Bert's question about location designators, we usually add location tags for threads on gigs/tours/festivals where the location is not obvious, and on items for sale where international shipping might present a problem. Although the thread in question does not fall into either category, the location addition made sense. We usually try to follow the rules of common sense, not some lengthy legalistic guidebook. Our general guiding principle in thread title renaming is clarity. We have other people who scream at us because we allow naughty words in thread titles, but propriety has not generally been a major concern in our editing - that gets a little too close to censorship. -Joe Offer-
|
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: freda underhill Date: 26 Jul 05 - 11:27 AM Being in any sort of group of people means having to give up control. even those who seem to be in control are not in control. If you accept that there are things you can't control in life, or in Mudcat, you're halfway there. its called surrender. Strangely, by giving up on the thing you really want (control) you get peace. or at least everyone else might. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: s&r Date: 26 Jul 05 - 11:21 AM When I edit copy I use the convention i was taught - editor's comments are put in [square brackets] Stu |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Big Mick Date: 26 Jul 05 - 11:17 AM The poster who referred to folks as bullies is one who, for years, is fine as long as one agrees with her. She seems to think that it is bullying to have strong opinions. Having said that, I still consider her a longstanding cyberfriend, kind of like someone who is so close that they can criticize, be criticized, fight with, but in the end it still works out. So bite me, Harpy. Just because I am a clone does not mean I can't have strong opinions. And I have never edited anyone's remarks other than personal attacks being deleted, per policy. And I won't delete personal attacks on me. I leave that call to others. My opinions about Roger and his incessant trolling for attention are well known, never veiled, and based on reasons that IMO are solid. But it is just my opinion, after all. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: wysiwyg Date: 26 Jul 05 - 11:06 AM I'd just like to add one thing to Kat's post. She and I don't always get along. That has never, ever interfered with a request I've made, or how she's handled it. I can say the same about Joe Offer. These and other expriences lead me to the conclusion that our wonderful site volunteers have excellent personal boundaries-- they are very good at keeping their personal thoughts about stuff separate from their loyalty to the job they have been given to do. Now, I've seen some strong opinions expressed here from a few people who have, at various times, been absent from this community. You know who you are. I'd like to ask that you take a breath and think about some of the people who are disagreeing with you, who are people you also respect. I'd ask you to consider whether maybe they have had an experience with Shambles that you may not fully share or comprehend, because you weren't here. I'd also ask folks to consider that some people posting here have been pushed to the wall, on both "sides," over and over again. D'ya think maybe the posts tend to reflect the reaction about how that feels, and that they may actually think and feel differently later? Once they have had quiet time to reflect? Could we not allow for everyone to take a breath? ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: katlaughing Date: 26 Jul 05 - 10:50 AM khandu, my first post to this thread, within the first twenty: It's fairly common to ADD to a title if it helps to clarify. People on dial-up, at work, etc., often don't have a lot of time to "surf", so a quick scan of the titles helps them as to which threads they'd like to open. I don't agree with Shambles. I did not side-step the issue, nor did I attack him. I think it would be good for folks to recall the way it was before Max implemented the BIG change in the way the threads ran years ago. No automatic line breaks, no preview, no automatic help with blue clickies, and no easy way for anyone but Max, Jeff, or Joe to clarify thread titles or fix typos, etc. in postings. Max asked a few of us if we'd help out by watching for such things, as well as duplicate postings. I was honoured to be asked and I believe I have done a good job. Max must, too, as he's never called me to task. This kind of constant carping by one individual who has been notorious for this kind of behaviour for years, makes me think "why the fuck bother?" Esp. when another member whom I usually respect and get along with, calls me a bully. I am a joe clone and I am OPEN about it. Many people PM me asking for help in changing their postings, adding blue clickies, and adding or changing their thread titles. To them, I say "thank you." Otherwise, right now, I say "fuck it." Being a joe clone involves volunteering; there's no malice, no vendetta, no mountain. I give careful consideration to anything I do as a joe clone, as do the others. Anyone, including Shambles, who has a problem with a clone should take it to Max. This has been repeated and repeated, yet Shambles does not address that issue. Roger, take it to Max. kat |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Wolfgang Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:25 AM It is your preference that other poster's preferences are ignored and subject to needless impostion... (Shambles) Shambles, it is my very strong preference that you may refrain from posting your comments into your paraphrasing of what you think my thoughts are. You're welcome to criticise my thoughts and preferences and you're also welcome to to say that my preferences lead in your eyes to 'needless impostion'. But your addition of 'needless' is a comment within a paraphrase. I have stated my preference very clearly and I do not need you to restate it in your own words in a deliberate attempt to make my preference look stupid. If you want to restate what you think my preference is to make clear to which understanding you respond that's fine. If you want to comment that's fine too. But when you talk to or about me do not make your frequent mistake of not separating between statement of fact and comment. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: GUEST,Bert Date: 25 Jul 05 - 11:29 PM Thanks for your reply Joe. The problem is of course not just that particular thread. It has been an ongoing issue that is very sensitive to Shambles. The way I see it is that if a Mudcatter FEELS that he/she has been dealt with unfairly then it is an issue that we must address. And first we must come down firmly on the side of the member (or guest) who feels that they have been slighted. I know that Joe is doing his very best for Mudcat but I think that changes to threads and titles should be only made in a consistent manner. When only 25% of threads have location information then that is not consistent and any poster who has this information added to his/her thread title could rightly assume that they are being singled out. Let's decide if threads should have location information in their titles and then put that information in ALL threads or let us clones keep our fingers to ourselves and leave well enough alone. In several years of having had the ability to edit threads, I have found a real need to add location information to ANY thread title. Bert (on Kelly's computer) |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: khandu Date: 25 Jul 05 - 10:00 PM I will admit that I have no idea what it is like being a Mudelf, JoeClone or any of those who have editing powers, by whatever name you choose to call them. I am just a common member of Mudcat who ocassionally makes worthwhile posts and who often makes inane posts. I can speak only from this side of the fence. Here is what I see. Apparently, The Shambles irritates the hell out of many of you. You (from what you have said) seem to see him as a whining, complaining, redundant asswhole. A nit-picking, mountain-making swine that you would prefer to either shut up or go away. It appears, that whenever The Shambles creates a thread of complaint, it is met with a dismissive/offensive attitude. Maybe he is all these things and more. I do not know, because The Shambles and have had very little interchange in the years I have been here. Go back & look at his opening post on this thread. Now look at the first twenty posts of those who responded to him. How many actually dealt with the issue he voiced in the opening? Only those who agreed with him; the rest were either side-steps or personal insults. I, for one and for what it's worth, agree with The Shambles on this issue. I have enjoyed Joe Offer. He has held my respect for the years I have been here. But on this, I totally disagree. And, Joe, though you said "I changed the title of this thread to In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) The purpose of this change was to give readers the freedom to know what was inside the thread without having to open it. In other words, it was done for the sake of clarity., it really appeared to me that the purpose was more to show contempt to The Shambles. It seemed mean-spirited. Joe said "...Adding "UK" to the thread title eliminated that confusion, and certainly did no harm to the thread originator or his intentions. Adding (thread title change complaint) to this thread did no harm to the originator, either. Sending a PM to the originator prior to adding "UK" would have done no harm to anyone, either. Though I will probably fall into the disfavor of some, that is my honest view point on this. I will say no more about it. Ken |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: RobbieWilson Date: 25 Jul 05 - 09:23 PM May I start off by thanking whoever took the time and trouble to clarify both this and the PEL thread title for my benefit. The sheer waste of time that is this thread is the clearest possible illustration of why simple, sensible, beneficial to us clarifications should be carried out rather than discussed. If the clones were to waste indulging the self obssessed lack of perspective represented here then nothing would ever get done. An explanatory pm might be a little more polite but would I suspect have still resulted in the same unreal complaint about enforced censorship. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: GUEST,Jon Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:46 PM Hey Harpgirl, what we need is another in your "hey max" series to establish whether or not Joe et all are working under Mudcat guidelines. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: harpgirl Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:31 PM Another relevant question, what harm has ever been done by protesting the action of a clone? Predictable: Roger complains about someone screwing around with his post and kat, catspaw, Mick, Jacqui, MMario and Joe Offer verbally abuse him. Let's see, did I miss any of our biggest bullies? |
|
Subject: (thread title change complaint) From: Joe Offer Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:41 PM Well, Bert, we try to use common sense in our editing. If a location designator seems be need to help a thread make sense, we add it. Most of the time, there's no need for it. In this case, "minister" means government official in the UK, and a religious functionary in the US, so the title was confusing. Adding "UK" to the thread title eliminated that confusion, and certainly did no harm to the thread originator or his intentions. Adding (thread title change complaint) to this thread did no harm to the originator, either - and it allows readers to know what they will be reading without having to open a hundred-message thread. Yes, certainly there are times when it makes sense and is relevant to a discussion to post a copy of a message you've posted before. But if you post a lengthy diatribe and copy-paste it into two other threads at the same time just so it gets noticed, that's more like Spam - and Shambles has had a few of those duplicate messages deleted. So, yeah, if a reasonable person would think that the duplicate messages are accidental duplicates or that they're posted for the purpose of flooding Mudcat with the same information, we're likely to delete the duplicates. You can get all legalistic about it and draw everything out to the point of ridiculousness, but there seems to be no need for that. We edit, sparingly, when it seems to make sense. In all of the cases Shambles complains about, there's little evidence that our editing has done any harm. He's very good at making mountains out of molehills. Most of this stuff is just no big deal. I think the relevant questions here are these:
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Bert Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:24 PM Joe, right now, I looked at the first twenty threads, only five of them give any indication of origin. So if clarity is REALLY the issue then you'd better get busy on the other fifteen. You say "that messages from Shambles have never been changed." That statement conflicts with other information that I have received. It is my belief that Shambles has had some of his postings deleted. You also say "Duplicate messages are routinely deleted. It just isn't fair to post the same message in several threads." That is just not true. Many times I have copied a message of mine into anther thread where I deemed it a relevant contribution to that thread. For such a posting to be arbitrarily deleted would be wrong and unethical on the part of the deleter. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Wesley S Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:14 PM I doubt that |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Ebbie Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:10 PM Years ago, a (later) brother in law of mine and his girlfriend who were battling over everything both trivial and profound decided to get married- so that they at least would no longer have that to fight about. What would you do, Roger, if this issue were settled to your satisfaction? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: GUEST Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:07 PM Promise ! |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 25 Jul 05 - 03:58 PM Sigh I rest my case. |
|
Subject: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Joe Offer Date: 25 Jul 05 - 03:55 PM I changed the title of this thread to
In response to Bert's comments, let me say that messages from Shambles have never been changed. Thread titles and duplicate messages are another matter. Thread titles are an index to our threads, and are routinely changed when clarity is lacking. If at all posssible, we add a clarifying tag or parenthetical statement to the thread title, and avoid changing the essence of the thread title. We are well aware that Shambles believes that thread titles should only be changed after consultation and such, and we respectfully disagree because that process is comubersome and most people just don't seem to think it's a really big deal. I think it's safe to say that it's a matter of opinion, one that will never be resolved. Such is life. In the thread in question, the title was originally Minister say's jamming OK. For the sake of clarity, one of our volunteers changed to thitle to Minister say's jamming OK in UK. I suppose I would have changed it to (UK) Minister says jamming OK, but that's neither here nor there. In the end, it doesn't seem to make a whole hell of a lot of difference, but the UK designation does make it a bit more clear. We also routinely change thread titles that are ALLCAPS. We routinely add dates to obituary threads, and we move non-music threads to the non-music section - usually without renaming them. it's just normal housekeeping, nothing that should make much difference to most people - so it seems silly to go through some lengthy approval process. Duplicate messages are routinely deleted. It just isn't fair to post the same message in several threads. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: MMario Date: 25 Jul 05 - 03:35 PM Silence is an answer. You don't wish to accept it. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: The Shambles Date: 25 Jul 05 - 03:17 PM It seems to be generally recognised that this is a public dicussion form - set up on Max's website - so perhaps we can have an open public discussion...and not a battle. However, it also seems to be overlooked (by some) that Max is perfectly able to read everything that appears on this forum - along with the rest of us. So any post to the forum is at the same time a post to Max - who can respond - publicly or privately - to what is posted here - - if and when he chooses to. It is my view that anonymously imposed judgement as a matter of routine - upon fellow posters - has no real place on our open public forum. And that whatever the original intentions were of this increase in their number - (and I am sure they were good) - the move of the role over time - from well-meaning helpers to anonymous volunteer judges imposing changes on the contributions of their fellow posters - as a matter now of routine - is not a good move. Its present form has nothing to do with the thinking that has created what many folk fondly think of as the spirit of The Mudcat, where all have traditionally been welcome to contribute equally. Being anonymous prevents a well-intentioned volunteer from defending their actions if they are thought to be or are accused of acting improperly. And secrecy when there is no real need for any - just creates paranoia. For defenders of this secrecy to accuse some posters of being paranoid - is I feel a rather poor joke - in the climate this secrecy and division needlessly creates. I post my opinions about this publicly. I do this as I think that there is not much that cannot be a subject for open discussion on our forum (if it moderatly expressed). I also stress the word volunteer. I do this intentionly as I feel that IF the current anonymous recruits volunteered to be known (and join their upfront fellows) or volunteered not to be anononymous volunteers - this problem at least would be solved. For as has already been pointed out - a simple personal message to the thread title's originator - from a volunteer about any proposed change - would have prevented this controversy. However, it is not possible for a anonymous volunteer to send a personal message - and remain anonymous........ |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: katlaughing Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:52 PM Bertdarlin'...I've been here for over seven years and I DO remember people asking for just this kind of thing for clarification...less confusion. I think we are all adult enough to NOT be divided by such a simple thing. We have enough REAL LIFE contact through get-togethers that we wouldn't let a little thing such as location keep us apart. You and I certainly didn't let it get in the way, now did we? luvyakat |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: Bert Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:20 PM Spaw, No this is not the dumbest yet. It is a reaction to the treatment that he has received on this website. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: Bert Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:18 PM Mick, "I swear we will never learn. This person has a pathological need for validation" No, he has a valid reason for being touchy about his postings being edited and sometimes deleted. So would you be if it had happened to you. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: Bert Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:14 PM Katdarlin' you said "Bert, if you know which "elf" it was, why don't you discuss it with them by PM?". Well, I said my piece in my post above. He knows who he is. I have long suspected a little over enthusiasm in his editing. But when it comes down to singling out one member for particular attention then it's time for him to stop and think and maybe cool it down a little. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: Bert Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:03 PM No Jerimeluv, I didn't take Shambles side without question. Firstly I have the right to my own opinion regarding this issue. "Either leave things as they are or add place of origin to ALL Mudcat postings." Willy nilly adding origins to a few threads only doesn't appear top me to be a good solution to the imagined problem. And it is an imagined problem, we have been doing fine for years without adding origins to threads. If we do start adding origins I see the posibility of Mudcat being divided along national lines. This is something I would not like to see. Secondly I have exchanged pm's with Shambles about his postings being subject of unnecessary editing and removal. So I can also see why he is a little sensitive about his thread being changed. If we had received the same treatment that Shambles has then we all would be up in arms about the problem and would come down firmly on his side. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: The Shambles Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:01 PM A simple PM could have made a big difference and possibly prevented this whole controversy. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: catspaw49 Date: 25 Jul 05 - 10:00 AM Aw gee Mick....He's so good at copy and paste!! And I can hardly wait for that 6 year old off-the-wall comment by Max to resurface. I think my last post should do it. But you're right. He gets these things going and has a great time diggin' the attention. At this point though the problem is still that we are all so verbal that it's nigh ass impossible to shut up and he knows it. Tat's why the thread removal works so well at the other site! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: Big Mick Date: 25 Jul 05 - 09:48 AM I swear we will never learn. This person has a pathological need for validation. He knows all he needs to do is start one of these and he will get it. And you all will act as though you are going to help this poor deluded man to finally "get it". Trouble is, he doesn't want to "get it" because then he wouldn't get the attention here that he can't get elsewhere. I look forward to this pointless thread reaching 1000+ posts, with 40% or more coming from Shambles. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: catspaw49 Date: 25 Jul 05 - 09:17 AM Ah yes Roger.....I knew that would get you! Now if those same rules were used here, I would be playing by them here as well. Take your complaints about me here to Max.......and while you're there get an answer to your other questions as well and hopefully that will put an end to these silly threads. Or do you lack the cajones to do that? Are you afraid that a definitive answer will possibly rule against you? C'mon now Shambles.......Write to Max and see what he has to say. It makes a lot more sense than these threads do. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: jacqui.c Date: 25 Jul 05 - 09:05 AM I, personally, know four of the clones. None of them are compainers/troublemakers. In fact, all four are very popular and well liked and respected on this forum. Get your facts straight GUEST 8.47. BTW, are you scared to post under your Mudcat identity? Frightened that people might not like you if you did? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: GUEST Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:47 AM I think it was some clone's passive aggressive touch. Why would anyone edit one of Shambles posts except to stir up trouble? Everyone who has been around here a long time knows that the clones were chosen because they were the biggest complainers/troublemakers on the board. The owner just wanted to shut them up. They certainly don't have any more integrity, intelligence, or morality than anyone else. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: GUEST Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:42 AM I think this is an over reaction which could have been avoided by a one line pm sent to the originator. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: Richard Bridge Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:35 AM Aw c'mon - a very sensible addendum to a title and we get all this? I've been deleted in the past (not often), and while there may be some issues there, by and large we have a good forum with a light touch here. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: The Shambles Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:33 AM 100 |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: The Shambles Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:33 AM I belong to one such forum and the place works quite well. People are friendly and discussion is excellent. We all play by the rules and when someone doesn't, it is dealt with immediately. *Smiles* You also are a member of our forum - and as the sample of your posts in this thread alone demonstrate - you have hardly ever failed to post abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material. Sadly such material posted here by you on a pretty regular basis - will be not only tolerated by our anonymous volunteers but even thought to be worthy of praise and to be humourous - as long as it is directed at what is thought to be some easy target. The very last thing our forum needs is any more imposed rules for you to ignore. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: jacqui.c Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:25 AM GUEST 8.10. I and the others you have mentioned have minds of our own and no need to 'schmooz' anyone. For myself, if others don't like me for what I am that is their loss not mine. I grew out of that need many years ago. I just get tired of the whining and moaning coming from the same few people about how this FREE site is moderated. And I have never posted anonymously. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: GUEST Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:10 AM Another example of the mudcat brethren schmoozing the people they want to like them and dumping on the ones they choose as scapegoats. It's pretty sickening to watch! Mario why don't you go back to your knitting? You're the worst on this thread, along with Jacqui C. and katlaughing. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: katlaughing Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:46 AM THANK YEW, SPAW!! Roger, if we are upfront, then we ARE known to fellow members. You are, as usual, making a lot of paranoid assumptions. I wish Max WOULD use something like Spaw posted. It'd make the clone job a lot easier and less murky. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: GUEST Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:20 AM Where do I sign? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK..............? From: jacqui.c Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:20 AM Well put 'Spaw. |
| Share Thread: |