 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The crack down
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 05 Jan 07 - 06:38 AM But Captain Ginger, most of those who affect the use of the word 'maille' were from my personal experience, habitual visitors to the Fantasy Realms, such as the SCA (been there, done that, still got the funny costumes in the cupboard to prove it!), and want to affect the use of that word to proved that they are living in an Anachronistic World! Robin once known as Robin the Ruthless in Battel from whence sprung 'The Fooles Troupe' there's nothing wrong with me mate, I was in the SCA and it didn't affec there's nothing wrong with me mate, I was in the SCA and it didn't affec there's nothing wrong with me mate, I was in the SCA and it didn't affec there's nothing wrong with me mate, I was in the SCA and it didn't affec affec affec affec affec affec affec affec |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: The Shambles Date: 05 Jan 07 - 06:35 AM Oh, and I see all these anonymous, nonspecific complaints thrown here and there about Catspaw. We don't allow personal attacks, and if I receive complaints from individuals who have been attacked by any Mudcatter, I'll review the situation. The thing is, I have never directly received a specific complaint about Catspaw from an identified person, and most people seem to think his posts are funny and not malicious. If you have reason to object to a post that is directed at you, contact me by personal message or e-mail. Anonymous complaints and complaints posted in the Forum are ignored. Sadly - imposed editing actions from anonymous fellow posters cannot be ignored by those victims whose posts are subjected to the 'silent deletion'. The specific 'complaints' posted from an identified long-term member were to the effect that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is publicly seen to be encouraging the posting of these abusive personal attacks from certain favoured posters at the same time as being seen to be banning another for the same thing. It would appear that the only 'complaints' from one poster about another are ever encouraged and actions - but I see little point in this. Those who post abusive personal attacks only show themselves in a poor light (or perhaps their true colours) and can be ignored. And posters can be encouraged to ignore them and anything else that may not be to their taste. But if it is announced by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team that a 'crack down' on such postings is in operation - our forum may be puzzled as to what effect he judges his openly displayed position is having. If you want a formally worded complaint from an identified long-term memeber - here it comes. That the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is being seen to allow, justify, excuse and openly encourge such posts from certain favoured posters whilst being seen to take action against others for the same thing. When at the same time publicly announcing to our forum a crack down on such posts. And by setting this example of unfair and personally motivated treatment - has compromised all on our forum (no matter how well-intentioned this may be judged to be) - and demonstrated a complete unsuitability for this role by threatening and constantly placing posters in positions where they feel they have to publicly take sides. I formally request that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team should resign or be removed from this role - before any more damage is caused to our forum. And despite our best efforts, Mudcat is no longer a pleasant place to hang out and goof off or have a good discussion. So, I think something has to be done. Ebbie's suggestion about putting Secret Santa in the music section is a very simple answer to one major objection I had to members-only BS posting - duh, why didn't I think of that? So, short of members-only posting, what can we do to bring peace to this place? I'd rather have another solution, but I haven't been able to think of one. -Joe Offer- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Shamby-Pamby what is your problem man? Every swingin' dick in the joint has prettty much told you to get bent but you can't take "Fuck You" for an answer! Let me repeat for your benefit.....FUCK YOU!.....and the horse you rode in on. Matter of fact, you need to notice that your horse was killed by the last windmill you failed to topple but a broke-dick fanook like yourself probably beats animals. Matter of fact we DID see that from you before didn't we? Why not drop this sillyass vendetta against Max? You DO relaize that it is Max you're attacking here don't you? Probably not.....what a fuckin' mook............ Catspaw ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles - PM Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship. So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,Captain Ginger Date: 05 Jan 07 - 06:27 AM Mais nous ne sommes pas Francais, ma chere! The OED has five meanings for mail as a noun:
2 - A bag, pack, or wallet; a travelling bag, a portmanteau. (first found c1275) From which comes the letters, packages, etc., delivered to or intended for one address or individual (first found, in the USA, in 1844) 3 - Any of the metal rings (or plates) of which mail-armour is composed, or armour composed of interlaced rings or chain-work or of overlapping plates fastened upon a groundwork. (first found c1330) 4 - A small coin, normally a half denomination (first found in 1290) 5 - The game of pall-mall; a place where the game was played. Hence: a public promenade bordered by trees, thus The Mall in London (first found in 1660) But for 'maille' the OED lists only an obsolete, historical construct of '3' above, found once in Sir Firumbras, a mid-14th century alliterative poem, once in Chaucer's Clerk's Tale of the late 14th century, and thereafter reappearing only in Fairholt's Costume in England of 1846: Forms: ME mailye, mayl, maylle, meile, ME-15 mayll, ME-16 maile, maill, mayle, ME-17 mayl, ME-16, (18 hist.) maille, ME- mail, 15 mal, 15-16 male; Sc. pre-17 maile, mailee, mailie, maille, maillie, maily, mailye, mailyhe, mailyie, mailzie, malee, male, malie, malye, malyie, meale, mealie, mele. Plural mails; also ME -ez, -is, -us, -ys, ME-18 -es. Thus, unless one is speaking French, it's as silly to talk today of 'maille' as it would be to use archaisms like 'yclept' and 'fysshes'. Sorry, kat, it's just me being a terrible pedant and dragging the thread drastically off-topic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: katlaughing Date: 05 Jan 07 - 05:36 AM French speaking folks might disagree about the spelling of "maille." Maille is also known as "Chainmail", "Chain Mail", "Mail" and "Chainmaille". These terms represent ongoing debate over the origin of the word "Maille". Some historians find "chainmail" a redundant term, since "mail" already defines a material made from chain. However, I like to use it occasionally because it is widely recognised. And I preffer the french "maille" which is derived from the Latin "macula" meaning "mesh of a net" as opposed to "mail" in order to avoid any confusion with the modern worlds of electronic and postal mail (however slim that possibility is). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,Captain Ginger Date: 05 Jan 07 - 03:10 AM And I've got no complaints about Catspaw. The man's a model of restraint in the face of the most extraordinary muleheadedness. Not that one would want to introduce him to one's significant other, of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,Captain Ginger Date: 05 Jan 07 - 03:04 AM OK, point taken. I'll drop the faux this that and the other, and the Nutcracker characters and stick to one name. Captain Ginger it is. As to why - well, a chap's got to have some secrets, though it may be guessable. |
|
Subject: Anonymous Posting From: Joe Offer Date: 05 Jan 07 - 02:25 AM I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for those who insist on posting without a consistent name. For years, we've had serious problems with combative, insulting posts from posters who refuse to use a consistent identity. If you refuse to establish an identity here, it's natural that people will identify you as one of those problem posters. After all, their identity (or lack thereof) is the same as yours - so nobody has any reason to trust or respect you. As I have said before, "Guest" posting is intended to keep this forum open to occasional visitors who come with a comment or question - although even they are generally expected to use a name. The "Guest" posting is also available to people who can't use cookies, for one reason or another. If you want to participate in discussions in this community and be respected as a member of this community, use a consistent user name. Yes, it IS possible to submit an anonymous message here - but the consensus of this community seems to be that this is not respectable conduct. If you insist on nameless anonymity, don't expect to be respected here. Too many people who share your anonymity, have caused us serious problems. -Joe Offer-
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,fauxnograf Date: 05 Jan 07 - 01:53 AM ...until some childish buffoon jumps in and shouts "One Hundred!" Why did that start? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,fauxall Date: 05 Jan 07 - 01:51 AM Jeeeeezuz H. Christ this crap will never end. So true! Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow creeps on... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,fauxmaybe Date: 05 Jan 07 - 01:42 AM Peace, just because it's on the internet doesn't make it right. There's no such thing as 'maille'; it's a faux-romantic afectation you will only see written by Americans brought up on sword and sorcery pulp fiction, Dungeons & Dragons and suchlike. No serious historian or antiquarian arms and armour curator would use the word. Period. Actually just because it's on the internet doesn't make it right. ought to be the BS section battlecry - an awful lot of shit flung around is of the copy and paste variety. What would be rally radical would be to have people posting only what they actually know rather than merely parroting received opinion as 'fact'. That way the music threads would blossom and the BS would wither! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: number 6 Date: 05 Jan 07 - 12:04 AM Jeeeeezuz H. Christ this crap will never end. Keep it going biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: jacqui.c Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:53 PM I guess it depends on the type of guest post. WE do seem to be getting a lot of negative and unpleasant posts right now, mostly from guests, that just seem to want to garner a reaction. Comes back to DON'T FEED THE TROLLS! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: number 6 Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:51 PM "Clinton was on Max's probation" ... probation ... probation ?!?!?! "Maybe Mudcat has grown up" It will never grow up until us middle aged dopes get our heads out of this schoolyard mentality. Goofing off is one thing ... but this never ending primary school sqwuaking and whining rhetoric and finger pointing will get the Mudcat nowhere. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:50 PM I agree with Ron too. Of course it seems pretty strange to allow guest posts and then say ignore guest posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: jacqui.c Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:47 PM Well said Ron. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Ron Davies Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:38 PM Clinton was on Max's probation--or even expulsion-- list--remember? No surprise that he finally stepped over the line. He knows what he has to do if he wants to return. And we can easily live with either decision he makes. And as far as "Guest"--why does anybody ever respond to him?--it's just shadowboxing--a total waste of time. Taking a name or a handle is an extremely modest request--and if he doesn't, that shows how seriously we should take anything he says. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:11 PM Explain why the vitriol on the Irish thread was allowed to remain in place and threads will less of it have been edited or closed? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,Art Thieme Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:03 PM Joe, I'm with you all the way. Just do it with as little damage to your own blood pressure as is possible. No need to deal with the flack from it. Just delete what seems appropriate, including the reactions to the deletions. They'll never understand why it's necessary---which it is. A moderated forum is in the interest of the music. And that's why we're here. Art |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: number 6 Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:39 PM "Maybe Mudcat has grown up" ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: ragdall Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:29 PM Third, nastiness and personal attacks are not only tolerated when they are against anon posters, but encouraged, by both members and management alike. As long as that continues, you will have number four... The worst of the nasties/personal attacks in the last couple of years have been coming from members, not guests. As to why this level of nastiness and animosity is growing, see #3 above. Once you allow and encourage people to be nasty and mean to one group, it is impossible to stop it from spilling over into the forum at large. I agree. The net result will be a shift in the standards and attitudes of this community brought about by filtering out of all those who do not wish to engage in, or read, the nastiness. Those who like to brawl will remain behind to populate Mudcat and attract others like themselves to the site. New members will leave quickly, unless they are of the latter inclination. I couldn't find any rules here, except "no racism or hate". The apparently arbitrary nature of the "discipline" applied to members when they break unwritten rules, lead many members to assume that the moderator's actions are based more on the personal feelings of those in power than on the needs of the Mudcat community. This causes a great deal of distrust and bad feelings. Maybe Mudcat has grown up enough to have a set of written guidelines and consequences which can be applied equally to all members? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: *guest* Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:27 PM Throw a rock into a pack of dogs. Only the one it hits, will yelp. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:24 PM And people new to this site kat are not interested in it's history. All they see is some spawn of the clampits writing in big red letters in a torrent of personal abuse against another member. Can the clones not agree at all? Either leave personal abuse alone or delete it all. It doesn't matter one jot to most of us if there is an R in the month and a full moon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: kendall Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:20 PM Starting right now I am going to try to not respond to insults. Even such transparent ones from *Guest* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: katlaughing Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:18 PM Kendall, you haven't ruined anything. Regarding Catspaw, bullshit. People who don't know the history of this place have no clue of what used to go on. If he and Joe or anyone else who has been here a long time goes after Shambles it is his own doing. He ignored Max-the owner's request to leave, continually reposts the same shit going on several years, completely ignoring requests from many members to stop. He used to write beautiful songs and had a lot of support, but he went nuts over some stuff several years ago and derailed, trying to take Mudcat with him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,#guest# Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:09 PM Nor is being female. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: *guest* Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:07 PM People with gigantic egos can not ignore anything said about them. They must respond. When it is positive, they bask, preen, and feign humility. When it is negative, they strike back and then feel shame. Then they run to any available authority to eliminate the other person rather than taking responsiblity by ignoring what is said about them or settling the dispute privately. They must exhibit themselves. Either way, they bore. Being male is no excuse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: number 6 Date: 04 Jan 07 - 09:58 PM I agree with Guest 9:03 P.M. If anyone cares I'm getting really tired of all this crap, and I'm probably not the only one. We go and on about Clinton, MG, ... how many threads, posts regarding these 2 ... there have been a couple of members I know of, who contributed good thoughts, info, threads and they just up and left (quietly I may add) cause of all this ... no one even noticed. Does that say something, or doesn't .... I dunno. That's my 2 cents worth ... not much I know, but it's all I got left to but into this schoolyard. Spent way too much on this sh$t already. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: kendall Date: 04 Jan 07 - 09:32 PM How about a special section for shit storms and personal attacks only? Call it THE TOWN DUMP. Seriously, I like the BS section. It's a chance to get to know others, and it can be a very friendly place. Most of the time it is just that. Let's not let a couple of hotheads like me ruin it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Sorcha Date: 04 Jan 07 - 09:21 PM Thank you Guest 9:03. But they won't listen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST Date: 04 Jan 07 - 09:03 PM A couple of things still aren't being addressed honestly, though. Nastiness against another poster, including personal attacks on them, is still a double standard offense. If you engage in such nasties but management likes you, you won't suffer the consequence of being banned, or at least threatened with it. If management doesn't like you, you will be blocked. Second, as has been pointed out by several members now, there are plenty of instances of management personally attacking members they don't like, and getting very nasty towards them. Shambles is the poster child for this, but he isn't the only one. Third, nastiness and personal attacks are not only tolerated when they are against anon posters, but encouraged, by both members and management alike. As long as that continues, you will have number four... Right now, the worst nasty/personal attack problems regarding non-member posting is spam, not anon guests pissing people off with provocative opinions and namecalling. The worst of the nasties/personal attacks in the last couple of years have been coming from members, not guests. As to why this level of nastiness and animosity is growing, see #3 above. Once you allow and encourage people to be nasty and mean to one group, it is impossible to stop it from spilling over into the forum at large. And finally, catspaw. He is as guilty of offensiveness, personal attacks, nastiness, etc. as has been Martin Gibson and Clinton Hammond. Difference is, he is a Mudcat Royal--an insider, a clone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 04 Jan 07 - 08:02 PM "We really want to make it easy for non-members to post on the music threads, so we're taking our time figuring out a solution. On the other hand, we have to do something to limit nonmember posting, since we're being flooded with Spam and general nastiness." Support all you techie guys 100%. Currently the biggest technical hole is on the Help area, where any anonymous nastie can spoof being anyone, regular Member-name or not, and endlessly post nastiness in their name. Catch 22 - kick a foul mouthed arsehole out from being a regular member, and the real nasties will figure out ways to make as big a stink as they can. One suggested way to still allow most of the current Secret Santa fun is to allow only guests with a 'SS-' prefix (and of course all regular members) to post in only 'SS:' prefixed threads - maybe even during only a limited calendar period - say from Sept/Oct to 1 Feb. Of course only those up to their elbows in the mechanics of the system can make a decision on that. This would probably mean that "GUEST-God" et. al. would no longer be able to post at all - but there are some ways I can think of to set up to technically get around that - if any of the 'Mudcat-Engineers' really wants to ask my opinion, they know how to email me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Jan 07 - 06:29 PM Hi, Ragdall- We split off the BS section maybe three or four years ago. The way Mudcat is set up, the threads with the most recent posts go to the top of the Forum Menu page, and the non-music thread seemed to be pushing the music threads into obscurity. Since we're a music forum, we wanted visitors to see our music stuff first, not the insider chit-chat that might not be of interest to them. We thought of starting a separate forum for non-music stuff, but Jeff came up with the idea of dividing music and non-music - putting music up on the top. Right now, we don't have a way of excluding non-members only from the BS section - we're working on that and some other ideas. My experience is that very few Mudcatters go anonymous to "troll" - my guess is that fewer than five do that on a regular basis. Most of our anonymously nasty Guests have been consistently anonymous - and most NEVER have a thing to say about music. We really want to make it easy for non-members to post on the music threads, so we're taking our time figuring out a solution. On the other hand, we have to do something to limit nonmember posting, since we're being flooded with Spam and general nastiness. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Peace Date: 04 Jan 07 - 06:28 PM Shane mail is what the '85 billion' posters want. And friggin' soon, too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Bill D Date: 04 Jan 07 - 06:26 PM chain 'mail' is a scheme for making money thru the post...*grin* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: katlaughing Date: 04 Jan 07 - 06:22 PM That is exactly what happened at Mudcat, rags. It was one section, developed into more and more BS as community, which angered a lot of original members who wanted it to remain music only. So, Max started a separate section for off-topic. Mail (also maille, often given as chain mail or chain maille, though this is a modern usage) is a type of armour or jewelry that consists of small metal rings linked together in a pattern to form a mesh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Peace Date: 04 Jan 07 - 06:20 PM These folks disagree with that statement, fauxpossibly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: ragdall Date: 04 Jan 07 - 06:04 PM Maybe what all this navel-staring demonstrates is a need by Max to take a long, hard look at the Mudcat and concede that the whole BS thing is a bandwidth-hogging hornets' nest that would be better junked. Why was the BS section added to this board? In my experience, the need for that sort of outlet develops when the collection of posters become a community and begin to interact with one another beyond the intended topics of the threads. In order to keep the threads from annoying drifting, new off topic threads are started. The off topic threads become so numerous that community members who care only about the main topic(s) of the board become frustrated with wading through to find the real posts and complain. A new section is created to house the off topic posts. Did that happen at Mudcat, or have there always been two sections? It seems to me that having the two sections allows members a choice of participating in the larger community, or not. In my opinion, the ability to post on Mudcat as a guest is too often abused by mean spirited registered members with long standing grudges. Many of the problems would be solved if guest postings were not allowed. I'm guessing that the current software doesn't allow different settings for above and below the line, though? I wonder if anyone in charge might consider switching to one of the excellent and inexpensive forum programs, such as Invision, which has much flexibility in settings for individual sections and moderation? rags |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 04 Jan 07 - 05:39 PM "What you say about somfin is always less true than saying nofin." Willie, from Loop's Progress by Chuck Rosenthal |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,fauxpossibly Date: 04 Jan 07 - 05:13 PM I just wish CH would learn to spell. There's no such beast as 'maille'. It's mail. And it's only made of links, even though there are bigger numpties who talk of 'plate maille'. Sorry, had to get that orf me chest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: katlaughing Date: 04 Jan 07 - 04:36 PM Even so, Kendall, I think there are more than one response. In tai chi, one would step aside as they throw themselves on into the brick wall, metaphorically speaking. A no response to such vitriol can speak much louder than getting into a pissing match with a foul mouth.:-) Generally people who speak that way, even if they are being straightforward, hope to get a rise out of you. It worked didn't it? Mind you, I am not making excuses for anything anyone said which was nasty, derogatory, etc. As I grow in age/wisdom(I hope!) I find it is much easier to shake my head and turn away rather than engage someone who wants to be so confrontational, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: kendall Date: 04 Jan 07 - 04:26 PM Kat, a great guru once said that the greatest of all virtues is straightforwardness. True, I agree, and I prefer people who speak their minds. However, to call someone an arrogant son of a bitch goes way beyond that and can only bring one response. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: katlaughing Date: 04 Jan 07 - 04:19 PM Well, he told me I would be welcome anytime at his sets if I ever get up there. I wouldn't hesitate for a minute. And, he makes beautiful chain maille jewellry. I don't like the way he says things, esp. in the past year or two, but I'd much rather have someone who is honest about who they are than nameless snipers or ones like gargoyle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Amos Date: 04 Jan 07 - 04:18 PM fauxmaybe: You are reading between the lines.... :D A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: kendall Date: 04 Jan 07 - 04:16 PM Where I come from that behavior is quite apt to get you hurt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST Date: 04 Jan 07 - 03:14 PM Clinton sounds like a nice guy in real life |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Cluin Date: 04 Jan 07 - 03:00 PM Giok, I never meant to suggest that Clinton's being banned stemmed from his behaviour on only that one thread. I was only trying to synopsize the drama that went on there. I've known Clinton Hammond for a long time. We've shared a stage and seats at a bar many times, though not for several years since he moved south. He's always been one to get in people's faces and piss people off. He's not just some internet coward. He'd say the same things to your face. We disagree very often on many subjects but he'd still be one of my preferred drinking buddies. His abrasiveness is one of his qualities that make him fun to be around. That is, if you don't take things some GD seriously. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: GUEST,fauxmaybe Date: 04 Jan 07 - 01:26 PM Amos, that's not fair! Why, it could even be construed as dumb insolence... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: Amos Date: 04 Jan 07 - 01:00 PM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: katlaughing Date: 04 Jan 07 - 12:55 PM Just a note, guests cannot close threads, nor can non-clone members. Clones hardly ever close threads and then their decision is subject to change if Joe sees fit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The crack down From: number 6 Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:32 AM "sweet Shambles will still be tilting at windmills when New Year comes round again" Good line, I like that. biLL |
