 sj |
||
|
||
In the UK......? (thread title change complaint)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: jpk Date: 27 Aug 05 - 04:16 PM just too much complaining fer me |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: katlaughing Date: 27 Aug 05 - 04:07 PM Screw this indeed, Spaw! Go to PalTalk and listen to Max, his band, The Other 99%, plus Chance and his other half, and Roger in Baltimore making music!! Look for the music room called "Mudcat Gig." |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: jacqui.c Date: 27 Aug 05 - 04:06 PM YESSSS!!!!! Seconded Spaw. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 27 Aug 05 - 03:46 PM Screw that! What we really need here is another new prefix. I propose the prefix CBRSS.......Contains Boring Repetitive Shambles Shit. Or maybe we could just put in one of those toxic waste warning signs for any thread the little dude posts to!!! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: The Shambles Date: 27 Aug 05 - 03:27 PM Joe Offer said – presumably just as a fellow poster but using still using the word 'we'- in a conventional post that did refresh the thread. Shambles, if anybody has any wish to locate altered thread titles, I'll send them to you. You've very good at identifying them, so why should we bother? Well I think our anonymous volunteer fellow posters should be bothered – because they obviously can be bothered to impose nit-picking changes on the thread titles of selected targets – allegedly for reasons of clarity only. So it is only fair that our anonymous volunteer fellow posters can be seen to be given the credit for their imposed and improved titles and for the bother they may have taken. Or prepared to take the blame for them - if these impositions do not prove not to be an improvement. Our forum has a thread creation screen where it implies that the title of the thread is a choice of the originator and where it quite clearly states - that the choice of using a prefix is optional. Common Prefix (optional) Thread Title (please be specific) The above is now dishonest when Joe Offer states (again presumably just as a fellow poster but using still using the word 'we'- in a conventional post that did refresh the thread)? Learn to live with it. We change thread titles because we want to change thread titles, and because most people seem to appreciate it. You say changing thread titles is offensive to the creator of a thread - but this is so only because you assert it to be so. Changing a thread title is not a power thing or suppression or censorship or anything like that. It's just indexing threads so people can find information in them. We're not intentionally offending anyone - we're just doing something you don't want us to do. You are offended because you have chosen to be offended, because you have chosen to make an issue out of thread indexing. That's all. it's not a big deal, Roger. Get over it Is doing what - our anonymous volunteer fellow posters - now 'want' – more important than any other consideration on our forum? And is what they now 'want' to do - a consideration that now supersedes what our forum's thread creation screen instructs new posters to be the case? Can I formally request that either the thread creation screen is changed to make it quite clear that the use of a prefix is not optional (for the thread's originator) – or that any proposed change o a thread's title - and certainly the intended imposition of any prefix by our anonymous volunteer fellow posters - is only undertaken with the originator's knowledge or permission?
You are hereby informed, so there's no need to be startled next time you witness this wonderful, generous, selfless act of service. Next time you create a thread, remember the above statement. Since nobody else seems to care, there's no reason to put it on the thread creation screen. Most people just don't care to see all that verbiage. You, on the other hand, are obsessed with verbiage. Sorry, but we have no interest in catering to your obsessions. Most people who have a question simply ask, and don't require us to post caveats about every possible thing that might cause them displeasure. But for your benefit, here goes:
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: katlaughing Date: 27 Aug 05 - 01:25 PM volunteer fellow posters ANYONE who posts on the Mudcat, presumably does it voluntarily! Are things now enough tur-gid for you?! |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: GUEST,Yawn Date: 27 Aug 05 - 01:01 PM Rather like parking your car only to be unable find it - as the car park's attendents have not only judged that your car needs moving from where you chose to park it but have also judged that they do not like the colour and have also re-sprayed it to the colour of their choice. Bad analogy, S******s old sock. You own your car. You don't own any of the threads. Anyway, you got something against turds? I know what it is - you don't like your thread titles to be al-turd. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 27 Aug 05 - 05:13 AM http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=84052&messages=38 There would no seem little point now - in placing the thread's title in any link - for the title may have been judged as unclear by our anonymous volunteer fellow posters and a new title imposed without the originator's knowledge or permission. Rather like parking your car only to be unable find it - as the car park's attendents have not only judged that your car needs moving from where you chose to park it but have also judged that they do not like the colour and have also re-sprayed it to the colour of their choice. And also to find (or not be able to find) that your car is the only one to be subject to this imposed judgement |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Aug 05 - 04:53 AM Nope. Probably we should talk about turds, an essential bodily function far more important than thread title changes or the banning thereof. Turds stink. Maybe even Shambles would agree with that. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 27 Aug 05 - 04:13 AM Or you could just ignore both threads? Just think of all the thread title changes that will need to be imposed - for reasons only of clarity of course. Unless all these imposition are undertaken - how will our readers know where to find all these recipes? But I understand that you are only following the example set by our volunteer fellow posters - and you can't go wrong if you do this - can you? Perhaps we badly need a have a prefix like - Includes Recipes - Includes Vital Information About Turds or - Includes Abusive Personal Attacks, Name-Calling and Foul and Offensive Language? There does now appear to be an urgent need for the last one especially. Or you could contribute to or even start another thread clearly titled to enable our readers to also contribute to the subject and to ensure that no recipes are lost for the lack of clear thread titles. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: JennyO Date: 26 Aug 05 - 11:16 PM ...followed by grilled cow patties with shambled eggs...... |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: JennyO Date: 26 Aug 05 - 11:01 PM I would never have thought I would see the day when Father Joebro wanted to talk about turds! I guess desperate times call for desperate measures! If it helps any, I could whip up a nice bowl of "NSW South Coast Dairy Cow Poop Soup" for the other thread.... |
|
Subject: Turds From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 05 - 05:36 PM Well, Spaw, I want them turds to go away....just like You-Know-Who. Not that I would compare You-Know-Who to a turd or anything. It wouldn't be polite. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Aug 05 - 05:16 PM Joe, we have known each other for 6 or 7 years now and I gotta' tell ya' I would never have thought I would see the day when Father Joebro wanted to talk about turds! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: wysiwyg Date: 26 Aug 05 - 05:16 PM No, Wes-- but you may use Holy Moly or Golll-olll-olll-LEEEE! ~S~ |
|
Subject: (turd complaint) From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 05 - 04:44 PM Turds. We need to talk about turds. My dog Ralph has been regressing back to puppyhood, and he's been leaving turds in the most inconvenient places. Pee, too. It's gotten so Ralph has become almost as much of a bother as You-Know-Who. -Joe Offer, all pooped out- 632 |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Wesley S Date: 26 Aug 05 - 04:40 PM Susan - Are "Lo", "Hark", and "Shazam" interchangable in your previous post ? I rather like "Shazam". |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 04:37 PM So, as I said - what are we going to talk about now? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: wysiwyg Date: 26 Aug 05 - 04:36 PM Would it be fair to say that most posters who were posting here at the time would credit Joe Offer with the creation of the FAQ? Or would that look just too much like some form of agreement between us - on something? I don't think so. 1. I recall a number of discussions about what ought to go into it and how it ought to work. Joe did compile a lot of the help-text because he was the one who had been writing answers to people's repeated questions in the Help Forum-- he had great familiarity with what the Freq. Asked Q's actually were, and he had gotten good at answering them concisely and accurately so that people understood them. Some things needed to be made clearer, and lo! The community asked that their desires be met, and lo! Joe worked with ongoing community input to make it so 2. I also recall-- and the FAQ of today reflects it-- that in its infancy, people posted in it things like, "Shouldn't we have this" or "that"? And lo! Joe took their contributions and sorted them into the whole and lo! Thus even today people contribute to the FAQ. And lo! In the fullness of time there also was a Tech Tips thread fashioned similarly. 3. I recall that after it got posted in draft form, lo! Some people wanted the FAQ easier to navigate, and lo! So it was made. 4. Some people wanted a Site Index, and as the permathreads developed, lo! There WAS a site index/permathread index made as requested and lo! It grew as people contributed to it. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 05 - 04:25 PM Hey, the FAQ IS my creation, although it's drawn from community contributions. By the way, if you actually read the FAQ, you'll see that it's only the first ten messages or so of the FAQ thread. Of those ten messages, one is titled What's NOT allowed. The other nine messages are informational aids. I'm particularly proud of the message on search engines and search techniques. I did some pretty fancy HTML there (with a lot of help from Jeri and Jon and Pene Azul and others). The remaining messages in the thread are information being developed for the FAQ, and ephemeral questions and answers. Shambles, if anybody has any wish to locate altered thread titles, I'll send them to you. You've very good at identifying them, so why should we bother? Most people come here for conversation and music information, not on paranoid censorship witch hunts. I'll send the paranoids over to you, and you can point out the black helicopters. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 26 Aug 05 - 04:07 PM to many people "main mover and shaker" would imply that Joe was the instigator - rather then a relucant compiler; "everone else largely left it to him " implies that there was little contibution other then Joe's - which is also false; "it seemed to matter most to Joe" - Other then he was the one stuck with the dirty work, how do you figure that? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 26 Aug 05 - 04:02 PM I said. Way back when - the FAQ was intended to be a forum effort. It would be fair to say that Joe Offer was the main mover and shaker in its creation and everone else largely left it to him as it seemed to matter most to Joe. MMario said. As I recall - following an outcry there were no FAQ's - Joe compiled the FAQ from solicited submissions and then posted it after Max reviewed it. There may be a world of difference between my so-called 'tirade' and your view MMario - but I am not sure that I see it...... Would it be fair to say that most posters who were posting here at the time would credit Joe Offer with the creation of the FAQ? Or would that look just too much like some form of agreement between us - on something? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 26 Aug 05 - 03:51 PM "Tirade is hardly the word " no - But how about slanted, biased and subjective view? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 26 Aug 05 - 03:46 PM Rog's latest tirade about the FAQs being Joe's creation has been proven (yet) another blatant lie, Tirade is hardly the word - nor is lie. For I don't really think that anyone on our forum would deny Joe Offer the main credit for our FAQ - even Joe Offer! For this fact - it is hardly a revelation..... |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Aug 05 - 03:17 PM How about if we all ask you to do the same Roger? You've said it all repeatedly and yet you persist. You ask me to please stop and expect that to work. Okay......I'll stop "digging." Your turn.......Roger, please stop digging. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:57 PM Please just stop digging. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:56 PM Once again ....... Reread that.And the read again my last post. If you took that as a cut at your wife you are wrong. Like I said, I think she deserves a sainthood! But if you're troubled about it still..............Take it to Max (along with the rest of your complaints) Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:51 PM From the 'FAQ'. We don't allow hate, racism, stalking or other intimidation, or personal threats or attacks. It matters little what insults are publicly directed at me no matter were they emanate - for they say far more about those posting them and I can ignore these and not respond in kind. The move now to public speculation about members of my family and the attempt to encourage others to follow the sad example of conversations about fellow posters - in posts like the following - is a move too far. Enough is enough. I imagine your wife.............Ya' know really I can't imagine your wife at all. I have a good imagination but that's just too bizarre even for me. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:50 PM So, now that - Joe has explained (for the umpteenth time) to Rog The Sham that thread title changes are traceable because of their difference to the first message title - Rog's latest tirade about the FAQs being Joe's creation has been proven (yet) another blatant lie, ...what shall we talk about? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:48 PM six-eighteen! Hike! |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:47 PM Spaw, snap! I guess Rog the Sham's PM to me must have been about the same thing then - well, like you, I said nothing about his wife, only about the kind of cards Rog might give her at anniversaries. So if it was about that - yah-boo-sucks, wrong again. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:44 PM Sorry, Sham - "I was posting here and you weren't" is no proof, no basis for such an assumption, and so inadmissible. BTW - thanks for PMing me, but as I promised you some months ago, I no longer read your PMs, so I deleted it unread. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:41 PM I was here then too and Joe didn't want to do it either! We were all complaining about the need for a FAQ but no one really wanted to put it together. Joe took it on but ask and received input from manyof the rest of us. I had to feel for him a bit. He's trying to include us and we're trying to help, but we all have some kind of agenda we want included and Joe tries for awhile to do just that. The end result is an "adequate" FAQ but it is pretty long and cumbersome and we all complain. So Joe tries to trim it and change it and in typical Mudcat fashion back then, we all continued to bitch. Eventually the FAQ became acceptable to all (pretty much, if you know what I mean) and Max and all gave the basic blessing and for quite awhile no one made much mention of any new things the site needed!!! Once again, don't let Sham tell you things that aren't true. Oh, I suppose they are true to him in whatever reality he lives in but here in the Mudcat world, he's full of shit. AND BY THE WAY>>>>>>>>>>>Another member wrote me saying that I shouldn't make disparaging remarks about Roger's wife. Please read that post again. I did not say anything even remotely bad about his wife or family........I would honestly love to know a lot more about that end of his life and if he behaves this way there too! If he does, I have nothing but admiration, and certainly some degree of amazement, that any woman would tolerate him. No, I am not and have not made any untowards remarks about his wife. Christ, if you ask me, she deserves a Sainthood!!!!Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:30 PM As I recall - following an outcry there were no FAQ's - Joe compiled the FAQ from solicited submissions and then posted it after Max reviewed it. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:22 PM Mainly because I was posting here then - and you were not. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:08 PM Why would it be "fair to say that Joe Offer was the main mover and shaker in the creation of the FAQ's", way back when? On what do you base this assumption (for an assumption it certainly is)? |
|
Subject: Another Shambles thread title change complaint From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:07 PM But Shambles, you know how to tell if a thread title has been changed, and nobody else has ever expressed any desire to know. Most people seem to think that the title of a thread is just the title of the thread, and don't really seem to care who gave the thread its title. Their concern seems to be what people say, not how they title it. So, if you're the only one who cares, why should we bother? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:05 PM Spaw, regarding your reference to Roger's marital life vis-a-vis his cutting and pasting habits: This could start a whole conversation in and of itself. For example - does she get the same card for anniversaries, with the year scratched out and replaced? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:03 PM I love Sham's use of "largely" (as in "the FAQs were largely written by Joe Offer..."), trying to discredit the FAQs of Max's site now. What shit for logic. What does "largely" mean? What percentage? And what percentage would it need to be before one can claim that Max had nothing to do with them? Or did it mean "with large letters"? Or what the heck? Way back when - the FAQ was intended to be a forum effort. It would be fair to say that Joe Offer was the main mover and shaker in its creation and everone else largely left it to him as it seemed to matter most to Joe. As to me discrediting the FAQ - the best answer to that is to ask - what is a FAQ supposed to be? A list of answers to the most frequently asked questions on our forum (not to Max's website) - is just that. It would appear that our FAQ has now become something else but it would still be fair to say that it was always largely Joe Offer's baby. There even used to be a link in the FAQ to a thread that I originated (on PMs). If it is still there and not deleted - I suspect a change will have been imposed on the thread's title.... |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 02:01 PM If nits had nits, they could do worse than ask Rog The Sham to pick them; honestly, moaning about Joe adding an editorial comment TO HIS OWN POST, which was already at the top of the thread when he made it, and claiming the action was done to avoid refreshing the thread! Laughable? Pitiable? You choose. And then of course, once more, cutting & pasting a paragraph a bare 15 words later in the thread "in case we missed it". Good one, Roger - that gets you plenty of credibility, keep it coming... |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: MMario Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:49 PM Shambles - obviously that comment - appended AFTER I made my post is not the one I was referring to. And As he said in the latest editorial comment - he does take responsibility and accountability for thread title changes. Of course he has said this before - and you ignored it, so why should you pay attention now? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:48 PM I find it amusing that you consider the FAQ a "considerable document" when your own postings on the subject are likely to equal the combined word count of War and Peace AND Dr.Zhivago. You seem to think that Max has plenty of time to read your pulpy drivel of no redeeming social value and yet has not had time to read the FAQ on his own site. LMAO.....Actually I'm not.......I'm laughing directly at you Sham as you are a laughable ass. You lower the status of "Dork" to a new nadir. Just thinking of you gives me a chuckle. I'd love to see your cut and paste files! Say, does the rest of your life work this way? I imagine your wife.............Ya' know really I can't imagine your wife at all. I have a good imagination but that's just too bizarre even for me. I bet you have actually beaten a dead horse haven't you? Not just as a figure of speech.......I mean you have actually beaten a dead horse. Was there anyone around to take pictures at the time? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:48 PM HA! I got one this time. I dare you, Oh, Master Of The Delete Button to alter the contents of this thread to your advantage! You wouldn't |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:39 PM MMario Joe Offers editing comment was inserted into this thread so as not to refresh the thread- as I said. Did you miss it too? Good idea, Roger. It's always been our policy. You can tell what the originator's thread title was by looking at the title of the first message. If the thread title is different, it probably was changed (although there are a few exceptions - if the first two messages have titles different from the thread title, then you cna be almost certain the thread title was changed by somebody other than the originator). And it the thread title was changed, I'm the person responsible for those changes, whether or not I made the change myself. If you have a complaint about a thread title change, contact me by personal message or e-mail. I'll be glad to respond, although I can't guarantee you'll like my response (and in Shambles case, I can almost guarantee he won't like my response). That's our policy. -Joe Offer, the person responsible- Joe - It may be very clear to you when a thread title has been subject to imposed change. And there are exceptions as you say. But any other poster reading the 'Minister say's jamming is OK' thread' will be under the incorrect impression that as the first post in the thread has my name – that I would have given the thread its title. Perhaps - for purposes of 'clarification' – some clearer indication that the title chosen has suffered an imposed change – for clarification purposes - can be made? And for more accountability - perhaps the fact that the current thread title should NOT be credited to the thread's originator - can be made clearer than at present? This will enable any credit or blame for the imposed change – to be placed where it belongs? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:34 PM Dang! That Greek so-and-so beat me to it. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:32 PM 600 |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:32 PM I meant 600 |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:31 PM 500 |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:31 PM Roger sez: Now that we have anonymous volunteer fellow posters who can impose any change to a selected orignator's thread title as and when they want to - would it be possible and would it be a good idea for clarification purposes - to always indicate to our forum - where and when such an imposition has taken place and who was responsible? This would avoid the current situation where there is a current thread title that has had a change imposed upon it by an anonymous volunteer fellow poster but which is now less clear and more incorrect as a result of this imposition - but where the title is still credited to its originator? Perhaps as such imposition looks now to be a fact - such action should be seen to be more accountable?
Thread titles are not "credited" to anyone, they're just thread titles, used for indexing purposes. Message titles are the work of the message originator, except in certain obvious cases. If a message contains lyrics, the message is given the title of the song. -Joe Offer, the person responsible- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 26 Aug 05 - 01:30 PM I love Sham's use of "largely" (as in "the FAQs were largely written by Joe Offer..."), trying to discredit the FAQs of Max's site now. What shit for logic. What does "largely" mean? What percentage? And what percentage would it need to be before one can claim that Max had nothing to do with them? Or did it mean "with large letters"? Or what the heck? Sham, you use a lot of words - but so do parrots, and mynah birds and budgerigars. |
| Share Thread: |