 sj |
||
|
||
In the UK......? (thread title change complaint)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: GUEST,Jon Date: 17 Aug 05 - 04:38 AM I'd better clarify shambles. they would turn on me for suggesting Max should defend them (by something as simple as a statement the the no rules bit you quote no longer stands, deflating one key poin in the basis of many of your arguments). It's just a case of me (again) breaking an unwritten rule round here. By enjoy it, I mean getting the stick you dish out but I don't see why they should be bullied into quitting by you. I think you would find matters a lot worse if there were no volunteers and don't think the current system/policy is a bad one. In truth, and in terms of other forums including ones I do help mod, it is light so I think you would find you have more problems in most other places. It's just seeimg people accused for obeying Max's rules that is annoying me. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: John MacKenzie Date: 17 Aug 05 - 04:26 AM That was his 8534th post, which in anybody's book is one hell of a lot of rubbish! G.. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 05 - 02:51 AM Joe Offer says- And then there are other people who think I there's something wrong with my responding to Shambles at all when he talks about the stuff that I do. I dunno, I find it an interesting challenge to attempt to give a rational response without repeating myself. I also find it an interesting challeng to respond to insults without resorting to insults. Although I guess I have to admit that I have sometimes given in to that temptation, I think I generally do a pretty good job of expressing myself rationally and with good humor.. As an ordinary poster - Joe would be free from such criticism if he returned to posting conventionally - in order to disagree with me or any other poster's views. However, he perhaps may not be free from imosed editing - if he posted (as he currently does here) to mount and encourage others to post abusive personal attacks upon his fellow posters - simply because they hold and express a different view. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 17 Aug 05 - 02:14 AM Jon says- They would all turn on me for saying this but if the truth be told, I don't think they enjoy it but care more for doing thier bit in helping to keep Mudcat going. Jon was once a volunteer fellow poster. Perhaps the best way for them to help The Mudcat now would be to return to contributing on the same basis as the rest of us and not allow anyone to speak for them or compromise the rest of them by expressing their personal opinion (in editing comments) and defending their imposed actions in conventional posts? Joe Offer says For a man who purports to believe that we shouldn't have rules, Shambles can sure make 'em up to control other people. He seems to think that since I do editing here, I shouldn't be allowed to post. And if I have an opinion that somebody might disagree with, I shouldn't be allowed to express it. I suppose Shambles isn't the only person who thinks this, but it's Shambles who expresses it most often. This concept is hardly rocket science - it is just a request for a level playing field and for less confusion and imposition on our forum. I can't impose any of my personal judgements or rules upon anyone but myself. I accept that I have no control over the postings of others and I have no wish to be publicly seen to constantly fail in the vain attempt to do so. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: GUEST,Jon Date: 16 Aug 05 - 08:28 PM Stuff it... The only real questionmark here is why Max over all this time has left the clones to defend the accusations. They would all turn on me for saying this but if the truth be told, I don't think they enjoy it but care more for doing thier bit in helping to keep Mudcat going. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 16 Aug 05 - 01:40 PM Subject: RE: BS: Complaints versus Mudslinging From: El Greko - PM Date: 16 May 05 - 06:04 AM I believe "100thpost-ism" has been largely eradicated thanks to the incessant lobbing (or is it lobbying?) of the Protectors Of Our Freedom (POOF for short) and now Ted and others can enjoy the numerical race unmolested. Folk music, Mudcat and the Internet has been saved from the scourge of the "100thpost-ist" anonymous self-appointed clones. All together now : Let's hear it for our eponymous self-appointed drones! The air is somehow fresher this morning... |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Aug 05 - 12:38 PM The Shambles has the effect of a time machine, transporting you back to the Elizabethan period. This would explain the fixation on quoting very old posts from Max and others. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: John MacKenzie Date: 16 Aug 05 - 12:14 PM Shambles Parts of it are described as extremely narrow! Giok ¦¬] |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: curmudgeon Date: 16 Aug 05 - 10:59 AM Pursuant to a brief conversation on this thread last night, I am hereby commencing my penance for stimulating unbridled jocularity without due notice, by responding to Shambles' latest post. Having read same several times in order to comprehend its true purpose and meaning, I am left with this observation: A new verb, to "shamble" ie., to ploddingly wander about, mentally or physically , with no discernable destination, that information being known only to the shambler. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 16 Aug 05 - 06:11 AM Although I may just be free to post and disagree with everything Joe Offer says states and also the way he jumps from a personal judgement to claims to be something else – Joe at least (along with his own abusive personal attacks on a fellow poster) does address the issues raised in this thread. Joe Offer – in a conventional posting (although again speaking in this post - for 'us volunteers') states the following. You see, Roger, most of us are here to have a good time among friends. All of your adversarial crap is just that - adversarial crap. First I would suggest that our anonymous voluteer fellow posters should be looking after the interests of all of us - rather than just 'most of us. I will leave the readers of this thread to decide just where the posting of any 'adversarial crap' is originating and why the posting of this - is being encouraged? The thread started with a simple request for a return to a less divisive and a more friendly approach – a request that some others posted were in favour of. However, can you think of anything much more adversarial on our forum than selectively and anonymously imposing judgement as a matter of routine - upon the words of fellow posters – without their knowledge or permission? Posters who may also just wish to have a good time among friends.......... We volunteers do what we need to do to keep the peace and tidy things up. If this is so – perhaps our volunteers should be more careful not to fire the first shots? The biggest contribution toward peace – would be to inform our forum how many of these peacekeepers there are and what are the names of these peacekeepers? I think the Colt 45 used to be called the peacemaker? But why would there be any need on our friendly forum - to 'tidy things up' in secrecy? Are these measures really likely to ensure that peace breaks out? Nobody's out to offend your right to free speech - but if you insist on making an asshole of yourself, you're likely to be treated like an asshole. Are there not many examples of posters – in this thread who could be judged to be posting and also making an asshole of themselves? Why are those that post here only to express a judgement of any negative aspect of a fellow poster (who they may never have met) – also not judged (by you) to be 'assholes'? And why are those who are encouraged to feel they can post just to be personally abusive – use offensive language and call their fellow posters names – not judged by you to be 'assholes' or a 'pain in the ass'? Sadly the answer is only too clear..... Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted. Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass. -Joe Offer- The question that need to be answered is - who is that feels themselves qualified to impose their public judgement about who they consider to an 'asshole'? And as a result which poster is not thought entitled to express themselves in the words of their choosing on the part of Max's website that he has set aside for public discussion? Basically, Mudcat is here for enjoyment - not for all this heavy stuff you try to lay on us. You want to play war games, and that's not what we're here for. Whoever does feel qualified to impose such heavy judgement as this - upon their fellow posters – does tend to encourage similar judgement to be expressed from those who may feel themselves to be equally qualified but who do not (yet) have the power to impose their judgement. As a result of this encouragement – our forum now regularly has posts asking for one poster's judgement to be imposed upon their fellow posters……Our forum appears now to be in a permanent state of division and indulging in 'war games' (against selected easy targets) would appear now to be officially encouraged. We (meaning all of us) post for many different reasons – all of them equally valid - the role of our volunteers (if we need any) is to follow Max's lead and facilitate. It is not to judge fellow posters and to shape all aspect of our forum by their imposed judgement. No, I really can't defend our editorial actions, and I have no reason to defend anything to an idiot who can make such a big deal about the addition of three little words, "in the UK," to a thread title. We just try to do what we think is right, to make things run a little more smoothly around here. That's basically what Max asked us to do when he gave us editing buttons. And we volunteers don't pretend to sit in judgment over anybody here, as you so often contend. We're just here to deal with the problems. Please face the fact that feeling qualified to sit in judgement (and imposing it) upon your fellow posters is exactly what you are doing and it is indeed 'heavy stuff'. Is it now the official Mudcat view that anyone who may not agree with the imposition of an anonymous volunteer fellow poster's judgement (for the very good reasons already stated here) is an 'idiot' (as well as an 'asshole)? If that's not satisfactory to you, so be it. Tough shit, in other words. Nobody named you judge and jury. And despite your four-year campaign, you haven't been able to convince Max to crack down on us volunteers, have you? Doesn't that tell you something? -Joe Offer- Yes. I think the assumptions and sentiments in the words of your last paragraph does sum-up our forum's main problem very well. It sadly brings us no nearer to any solution........ |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 15 Aug 05 - 11:36 PM Another pair of pants here Mick!! Damn 'Mudge........that was as funny as anything I've read in weeks.....JUST PERFECT!!! I am so ashamed I didn't see it myself..................LMAO over and over........... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: curmudgeon Date: 15 Aug 05 - 08:47 PM My day job is currently on "walkabout" until the Fall, thus I might find time to do the required penance for my transgressions. But do bear in mind that I have songs to learn, the Portsmouth Maritime Folk Festival to organise, get ready for the Getaway, and continue having a life. However, I will do my best to comply with your request Mick, but I don't think he'll like it. Of course, if he's true to form, he'll ignore it and post whatever dribbles out of his mind - Tom |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Big Mick Date: 15 Aug 05 - 08:38 PM Tom (curmudgeon), I find you guilty of violating one of the prime precepts which we operate on around here. In the gospel according to Mick, one must always give the "warning, swallow all liquids before reading this" comment before making a comment like this. For your punishment you are sentenced to responding to all of Shambles posts for the next 6 weeks. I believe you will have to give up your day job to accomplish this. Vogon poetry ....... ROFLMBIAO Mick, ambling off to change his trousers. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: jacqui.c Date: 15 Aug 05 - 07:01 PM 'Cause it's my birthday I've allowed myself the treat of seeing just how far this has gone. Vogon poetry - that's really good! |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 15 Aug 05 - 06:39 PM That's it! You got it in one! I knew it reminded me of something... |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: curmudgeon Date: 15 Aug 05 - 05:05 PM I'm beginning to think that Shambles could give Vogon poetry a run for its money. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 15 Aug 05 - 04:27 PM Yeah, but I've learned to shut up (at least sometimes) when he starts repeating himself. -Joe- You may have missed the above - as it was inserted into a post as an editing comment and did not refresh this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Clinton Hammond Date: 15 Aug 05 - 02:05 PM Holy fuck will someone just delete this stupid crap please... what a waste of electrons! |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Cluin Date: 15 Aug 05 - 02:00 PM Okay, Shambles may be a big whiner, but he also commits the unforgivable sin of being boring as well. What limb do I have to chew off to get outta here? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: John MacKenzie Date: 15 Aug 05 - 04:30 AM If there was a competition for the person who's Mudcat name suits them best, I'm sure Shambles would win hands down! Giok |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 15 Aug 05 - 02:54 AM See, Guest 615? 48 hours of no entries preceded by several jokey ones, and Shambles was feeling jittery - his lifeline was disappearing off the bottom of the index. First thing he did as soon as the 'cat came up again is refresh this thread through another tirade, responding to nobody, and a propos nothing. As for that "The attempt is only to try and prevent more and more imposed personal judgements ", what can you say? He has appointed himself Saviour of Mudcat and is fighting the sources of evil single-handed. Tilting at windmills doesn't even come near it...:-) "Is it a bird? Is it a plane?" "No, it's sha..." "Shatner?" "No, it's sha..." "Shaun Of The Dead?" "No, it's sha..." "Come on, what is it?" "Too late..." |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 15 Aug 05 - 02:23 AM It may be considered appropriate that in extreme certain cases – speedy imposed judgement – and deletion be imposed to remove a individual contribution from Max's website. That is a right that Max has reserved and one that very few posters would take issue with. Any form of editing action that is speedily judged and imposed without the posters knowledge or permission – by an anonymous volunteer fellow poster as a matter of routine – in circumstances other than these extreme (and rare) cases is a different matter. And as any imposition could also be seen as the most adversarial, provocative and counter-productive action that our forum could take against a poster – this unfriendly imposition should be undertaken only as, rarely, openly and sensitively as possible? When the routine adversarial action is subsequently defended and justified as consistently conforming to some policy and showing equal treatment – and it is plainly not seen to be this – the whole creditability and traditional open nature of our forum is brought into serious question. Especially when there is more than a question that the judgement behind these actions may be personally motivated and selective. I feel there should never be seen to be any question of this. Many requests have been made that the perfectly valid personal opinions, of our volunteer fellow posters – are always to be clearly seen to be this and posted conventionally - so that any assumptions and judgements expressed about fellow posters can never be mistaken for anything other than this. This perfectly valid request has been ignored. Many personal views and judgements continue to be expressed in editing comments - that are inserted into posts and do not refresh the thread - and many claims to be speaking for what is editing policy – continue to be expressed alongside personal views and judgements – in conventional posts. This practice is confusing and hardly likely to be generally seen as impartial. Perhaps our volunteer fellow posters can now be asked to make a choice – between one role - or the other? This is our open Discussion Forum on Max's Mudcat Café – perhaps it can return to being run as such and not run like a government department, a newspaper with an editor or an abusive and bullying mob. I can impose no rules upon our volunteer fellow posters and there is no attempt by me to do so. The attempt is only to try and prevent more and more imposed personal judgements by anonymous fellow posters from shaping our forum and allow it to once again be shaped – as it was and should be – by the contributions of posters in the words of their choosing. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: John MacKenzie Date: 13 Aug 05 - 01:35 PM Wellow wellow wellow well, tell me more tell me more tell me more, did she give you fellatio, or was it a fallacy? Uh huh uh huh uh huh. G.. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: JennyO Date: 13 Aug 05 - 01:29 PM And if you followed the fallow fellow into the hollow and wallowed with a pillow in a furrow, while feeling mellow, would you be a mellow pillow wallowing fallow fellow follower? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Amos Date: 13 Aug 05 - 01:17 PM Fellatio on fallow fellows is a felony, fellas. A |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: catspaw49 Date: 13 Aug 05 - 12:57 PM And could it be if you came along and followed the fallow fellow that you'd be a fallow fellow follower? Or would you just be a shriveled nuts, broke-dick, fuckwit, mamalucca? Like Shambles. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Big Mick Date: 13 Aug 05 - 11:20 AM It's OK, kat, I am a fellow and igottitstoo. Goes with being a large, aging fellow. Now, if one were to not participate in the verbal masturbation, it could be said that they were a "lying fallow, fellow". The there is the whole issue of a fellow performing fellatio, but I will have to wait until after 10:00 pm to post anymore on that. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: katlaughing Date: 13 Aug 05 - 11:05 AM LOL, Jeri! Something like verbal masturbation got it in one El Grecko! I was going to suggest, awhile back, that we all just leave the thread as it's a bit intrusive to watch someone as they jack off... kathowcanIbeafellowwheni'vegottits?! |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: wysiwyg Date: 13 Aug 05 - 10:59 AM Those who post to this thread to criticize those who post to this thread are being a bit silly. Nothing wrong with silliness though. Jeri, let me be the first to twist your words. :~) Naw-- nothing comes to mind.... You're just too sensible, as usual. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Jeri Date: 13 Aug 05 - 10:39 AM That's why you're not a VOLUNTEER fellow poster (VFP), El G, and merely an FP. You either failed to volunteer to be a 'fellow' or to post. I can't see you posting without volunteering to post unless there are terrorists in your home holding a gun to your head saying "Hit the SUBMIT button, or we'll mess up your screen BAD!" I can, however, understand why you might be a non-volunteer fellow. In other words, your fellowship has been imposed upon you by fellow fellows who don't have the courtesy to ask if you want them for fellows before they join a thread to which you volunteered to post. Since you're Greek, perhaps you'd be happier joining the other Greeks here as a fellow phyllo poster? Or join BillD as a fellow philoposter? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 13 Aug 05 - 10:05 AM Don't you love that expression, "fellow posters"? Well, we are all posters here, but I don't extend my feelings of fellowship equally to all, and certainly not to hypocritical and malicious trolls. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: John MacKenzie Date: 13 Aug 05 - 09:58 AM OCD |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: artbrooks Date: 13 Aug 05 - 09:40 AM Jeri, a little bit of silliness helps start my day, and any thread begun and nurtured by Shambles is sillier than most. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 13 Aug 05 - 09:12 AM Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: Joe Offer - PM Date: 19 Mar 05 - 10:52 PM Well, the irony of it all is that Shambles has never been censored. He has always been allowed to say exactly what he wants to say. Now, I will admit that we have sometimes thwarted his desire to post multiple copies of the same message in multiple threads, and we have combined threads when he has see fit to start multiple threads on the same subject - but at least one copy of every word Shambles has written remains posted here at Mudcat. I have just tried to establish the true situation and present this here for our forum to judge against the 'spin' - the extent and manner of which the ordinary poster's freedom of expression is slowly being eroded on our forum by imposition from their fellow posters. Please note the date of the above post. The claims contained in it were incorrect then. Dispite this being corrected by me at the time - the same incorrect claim has publicly been made again in this thread. Any reassurances given - that are based on knowingly incorrect information - should be seen in that light and raise the question why. Anywhere else it would probably not need to be pointed out that the victim of imposed censorship may be more likely to remember this imposed curtailment of their free expression - that those who are imposing upon them - as a matter of routine. Jeri - this talk about anyone 'choosing ememies' is just silly (especially coming from a volunteer fellow poster. There are simply different points of view being expressed in this thread on a discussion forum - provided for that purpose to the public by the site's owner Max. Do you still accept that all of these views are equally valid. Ignoring these views and facts - again and again may become tedious - but they do not lose their validity - however tedious ignoring them and making personal judgements upon the poster expressing them - becomes Most folk only have the perfectly sufficient choice to open this thread or not - to respond in it or not or to ignore it. Some have a further option of imposing their judgement upon the views of their fellow posters. And following this public judgemental example - it often appears that whole point of our forum has become to encourage all posters to feel they have to also judge every aspect of each others personality and motivation. Perhaps a more welcoming and more tolerant example can now be shown by those who appear to ready to accept their privileges but less ready to accept the responsibility that goes with it (especially the right to be known and to stand by your actions)? All this imposition and judgement upon fellow posters displayed here - changes nothing - it just makes further pointless judgement by fellow posters - of fellow posters more likely. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: GUEST Date: 13 Aug 05 - 08:22 AM Shambles, grow up and give it up! eNOUGH ALREASY. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Jeri Date: 13 Aug 05 - 08:13 AM He targets Joe because Joe always answers him. Somebody always will, but it's just a tad disconcerting to know that the one person who will consistently rise to the bait is the person I would like to believe is too self disciplined to play games with trolls. El G, the crusade does have a certain wankiness about it, and it seems as though Roger's self worth is defined by who he chooses for enemies. GUEST,615 said: "The only way all of this will stop is if you do not respond to this obvious troll." Herein lies the problem: who is 'you'. Is it Joe? Is it Jeri or El Greko or Amos or WYSIWYG or Jon or Clinton or kat or MMario or Wesley S or artbrooks? The thread is here and will likely remain here. The only question is whether or not each person reading this is going to be part of it, and if you're posting to it, you're part of it. Those who post to this thread to criticize those who post to this thread are being a bit silly. Nothing wrong with silliness though.
-Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 13 Aug 05 - 04:43 AM Guest, 615, I agree that Shambles will not let the thread die. But I disagree about his needing entries from the rest of us to keep going. He has shown in the past that he is perfectly capable of keeping a thread going on his own, for days and weeks. He needs this - and if you close the thread down, he will surely start another. It feeds something in his character, it makes him feel good. Something like verbal masturbation, where reality is immaterial, it's the fantasy that's needed. So one might as well keep this thread open - at least that way one localises the damage to the forum. And if people get frustrated with him, let them vent their frustration here too; it makes no difference to Shambles whether they do or not anyway. You will have noticed how selective he is in his responses and quotes, picking only those that serve his purpose in pushing for an apology from Joe and trying to blacken his name. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: The Shambles Date: 13 Aug 05 - 04:08 AM No, Roger. I see no need to apologize. I haven't found any of your words that were deleted, although I concede that one or two of your 8,362 posts may have been deleted, if they were in a thread that was deleted. I did a quick check, and found none. Joe - you have conceded here that one or two of my entire posts and all my words contained in them MAY have been deleted (for no good reason). Do you accept that this alone makes your public contention untrue - especally when it is made for the second time) - when you attempt to still maintain - And not one word of it has been deleted, except for some of his more glaring duplications that this is untrue and misleading our forum? Will you please apolgise for this incorrect attempt to minimise the true situation and to strongly imply that I am not telling the truth? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: GUEST,615 Date: 12 Aug 05 - 10:31 PM Shambles will NEVER let this die. He's obsessed to say the least. The only way all of this will stop is if you do not respond to this obvious troll. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: George Papavgeris Date: 12 Aug 05 - 07:09 PM Respect is not a right - it is earned. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 12 Aug 05 - 06:41 PM I said - Can we be assured that it is now a thing of the past? Joe Offer said - I'm so confused. What thing? What past? Who cares? Joe I care - Is the practice of deleting an entire thread and every contribution made to it - because you and volunteer fellow posters cannot be bothered to take the time to delete only the offending post - a thing of the past? Can we be reassued that from now on - only the offending posts will be the subject of imposed editing action? And all posts that have may have made honest attempts to move that thread in a more positive direction will remain as posted? Can we also be assured that posts claiming to be the 100th will now be safe from imposed editing action of anonymous volunteer fellow posters? When you once considered and stated that these type of posts (that some posters now find fun) were 'fair game' for lesser volunteer posters to automatically delete? These assurances would be a small but welcome move back to the respect that used to be shown to all contributors to our forum - rather than the increasing and counter-productive judgement of some contributors by volunteer fellow posters - that we have seen displayed and justified so clearly in this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: GUEST,Jon Date: 12 Aug 05 - 05:23 PM Worse that that. I find my firt post explaining the meaing gone now. You can't say "plonk" to mean you have "killfiled" (chose to ignore from now on) over there. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: GUEST,Jon Date: 12 Aug 05 - 05:09 PM (link was to Wikepedia) |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: GUEST,Jon Date: 12 Aug 05 - 05:08 PM Well if the censorship troubles here are bad. Try the BBC site. I gave one to Mudcat today, a MIDI of mine, explaining it wasn't a broken link but Mudcat would be down but they deleted it as broken while leaving several other links (over time) to Mudcat that would also have been broken in place... I also gave a link to the usenet meaning of "plonk" and have just found that is an "unsuitable link" for the BBC. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: The Shambles Date: 12 Aug 05 - 04:51 PM OK, Roger. I am so sorry for whatever you require me to be sorry for; and at the same time, I am especially sorry for whatever else I'm supposed to be sorry for. Joe - For the second time - you have publicly and incorrectly informed our forum that none of the words of my posts have been deleted. In response - you have added to this by attempts to further taunt and patronise a fellow poster invited to contribute to our forum on Max's website. And not one word of it has been deleted, except for some of his more glaring duplications. You have reluctantly accepted (or rather explained and excused) these editing actions to our forum - perhaps you could be man enough aplogise to me and our forum for knowingly and publicly misleading our forum for the second time?
Maybe you just don't get it. It's worthwhile to respond to you when you're reasonably rational, when you address an actual issue. When you resort to two-year-old, out-of-context quotations and ad hominem attacks and one-in-a-million situations, you've gone too far, and there's no reasoning with you. Then it's not fun any more. Go hibernate, and come back when you're ready to be rational. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: The Shambles Date: 12 Aug 05 - 04:34 PM Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted. Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass. -Joe Offer- From the following thread. http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=56969#894819 The whole point about freedom of speech - apart from how those that are lucky enough to have it treat it so casually - and how precious it is to those who do not have it - is that the real test of it - is how you treat the freedoms of those you may not agree with - may not like or who you may consider to be a pain in the ass. Joe Offer will no doubt - in a conventional post or an editorial comment - give his reasons why he posted this judgement - I will leave you to judge the true extent of his feelings on the subject of free speech. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) From: Jeri Date: 12 Aug 05 - 04:31 PM Clinton, I think you asked the question and answered it in the same post. |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 12 Aug 05 - 04:14 PM 400? |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Joe Offer Date: 12 Aug 05 - 04:13 PM Well, Clinton, it's true. If you go to a party and spend all your time complaining about what a terrible party it is and what poor service the host gives, sooner or later, somebody's going to start thinking that you're a real asshole. Or whatever. The idea of a party is to enjoy the party, not complain about it. Same goes here. We're here to enjoy ourselves. We volunteers are here to serve the drinks and tidy things up, as it were - we're not here to lord it over anybody. If you come here to whine, you're going to find that people may not regard you as highly as you may regard yourself. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain From: Clinton Hammond Date: 12 Aug 05 - 03:53 PM "If that's not satisfactory to you..." Why don't you f-off and go somewhere that will coddle to your stupidity... Why oh why does Mudcat let threads like these go on and on and on over and over and over... |
| Share Thread: |