BS: Why closed threads?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 11:05 AM

Didn't realise you're in the poultry business, Ian.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 11:11 AM

I don't believe that a civilised society should tolerate racism bigotry or fascism, or indeed, their supporters. Even the USA, the vanguard of "free speech", racial abuse is forbidden.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 11:39 AM

I agree Richard, sadly in the UK many sections of the community use it to their advantage in the most simple of incidents. I feel insulted when groups spat on the coffins of dead service men and women or burned Poppy wreaths on armistice day. But I don't have the privilege of taking a case, it is shut up and accept it mate.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 11:52 AM

I don't, either....but what does that have to do with this subject..unless you are attempting to cover YOUR ass, and justify YOUR inclinations to call people those things....even when they are NOT racists or bigots.

People who tend to LEAN to the left, are doing so, because in reality, they are sitting to the right! (and the reverse is true, as well).

People who want to keep steering things to the 'left's (or 'right's) 'talking points' tactics end up just going round in circles, going nowhere, and accomplishing NOTHING!......except being boring.

IF 'we' are so 'hip', why aren't we progressing? Seems to me, we just keep going over the same tactics over and over again, in circles...

...and by the way, I'm not seeing ANY evidence of racism on this thread...unless you include voting, (or not voting) for a candidate solely on the grounds of the color of his skin!!....and thinking, "Wow, we've come a long way........in circles"! Makes you wonder who the REAL racists are. Personally, I don't vote for people based on their skin color..nor do I vote for people who are talking out their ass!......because I'm NOT racist....and another,'BTW, I've played with more 'black' musicians than most of you have ever lived next to!!!

Sorry, Richard..your 'rap' doesn't hold up.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:32 PM

"BTW, I've played with more 'black' musicians than most of you have ever lived next to!!!"

I lived in Harlem. Ya might wanna revise that statement just a bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:32 PM

"People who tend to LEAN to the left, are doing so, because in reality, they are sitting to the right! (and the reverse is true, as well)."

Ummm... a new law of Nature has been discovered? Or perhaps a Freudian manifestation? (to go along with "Distrust all generalizations!")

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Megan L
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:42 PM

Hells teeth aw this leanin tae left or right at least in Orkney we jist hiv tae worry aboot leanin intae the wind no a bunch o hot air.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:42 PM

Ok, time for me to be serious for a moment...

You.. how would you feel; if you look over the latest new thread titles
and see one that is most probably a standard issue cheeky double entendre enticement to look within.
You ignore it.
A few hours later out of bored curiosity you give in and open the thread.
Turns out the title is not at all a saucy pun, as the subject is actual full on hardcore sex related.
Then you notice the name of the opening poster.
It is YOU, your name has been stolen and associated with a 'filthy' subject,
by whoever unknown, and for whatever malicious reason to discredit you in the eyes of the mudcat community.

Recovering from the shock & unpleasant surprise you request a mod
check the IP of the imposter and make a clear note that this thread
is a case of malicious Identity theft.
But not to delete the thread, instead leave it open
so mudcat members can be aware of what has happened and you are in fact an innocent victim of malicious ID Theft.

The mod complies positively to your wishes swiftly & effectively.

But shortly after the thread is deleted anyway despite your request
for it to remain open to clear your name.

From this moment on, because of inadequate & ineffectual mods handling of the affair,
any mudcatters who read the thread but not the clarification of ID theft,
will continue to think of you as the dirty beast who created a disgusting thread..

is that fair ?

These are the facts, ok I exaggerate the sense of shock & disgust,
but I'm sure that's how some of you more sensitive souls would feel
if it happened to you, and not me.

TO BE CONTINUED>>>

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:53 PM

But that thread wasn't just closed, it was deleted so from that point on, no one could read it.

A long time ago, Max came up with memberships because one person was using other posters' names. Any guest is suspect now, but especially those who are posting different from their usual M.O.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 01:01 PM

Y'know, sometimes life just ain't fair.

Past time to get over it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 01:05 PM

Well this thread was fairly sensible! I was even pleased to see it stay open and for people to make sensible/cogent comments.
Well that has all gone to pot hasn't it?
If you can't address the subject, or if you can't post without dissing another poster, I suggest you go play somewhere else.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 01:26 PM

CONTINUED >>>>>

I present this case study as a contextual evidence contribution to this threads debate.

I suspect some folk here would be quite upset if it happens to you.

Ok, now I'll talk about my individual take on the matter.
Personally, I can't help finding it hilarious that I've attracted my first ever internet stalker.
In all honesty, the 'dubious' thread title and content
was actually quite an accurate replication & pastiche of my writing style
and the kind of crap I might post when late night binge drinking.


But the serious principle still stands.
Yes Jeri "But that thread wasn't just closed, it was deleted so from that point on, no one could read it."
fair enough rationale for thread deletion.
But that strategy is not sufficient to address the problem of alerting those who had read the thread before deletion
that it was actually not 'you' who posted such 'filth' in the first place.
They will still continue to think of you as that dirty perv....

What if a malevolent ID imposter had perpetrated this outrage against a nice sweet respectable old church lady mudcat regular ????

For the record:

This is what I posted upon discovering the ID fraud:

"Subject: RE: BS: What size is your cock ?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 05:06 PM

Let it be known a malevolent ID thief has started this thread - childish fukwit !!!

Possibly a Yank judging by the piss poor choice of euphemisms.

Mods can check IPs to back me up.


I am British - We say 'knob' 'todger' 'prick' 'willy' 'hampton' etc

signed - "The Real Hookey Wole"


However, seeing as you've credited me with a full on 8 incher
I'll overlook your idiot deception
and not demand this thread be deleted.

Mods, please don't delete this thread.
Instead just append a note of this malicious ID fraud to the opening post."

TO BE CONTINUED>>>>>?????

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:00 PM

All you have to do is join GUEST,Hookey Wole.

It is easy and painless.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:17 PM

But I'm not just talking about 'me'.

'me' is the least important aspect of what I am discussing here.

I thought I make it abundantly clear that I don't take the 'me' very seriously at all.

It's the issues about mod/clone strategies and accountability that are
most pertinent to topic of debate in this specific thread..

isn't it ???

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:39 PM

But I'm not just talking about 'me'.

You just posted two longish complaints about something that happened to you. That is what I was responding to.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:44 PM

In a simplistic sense, yes it happened to 'me'...

The situation described is an example to illustrate a point of debate.

But the emphasis is on the 'what' happened, and by extension
the 'how' and 'why'...

and implicitly, how could it be handled better & more constructively in the future....?????

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Will Fly
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:51 PM

Good advice from KB in Iowa. Join the 'Cat properly and stop being a Guest. You won't get your good name "stolen" - and perhaps you won't get good people's backs up by writing stuff like:

childish fukwit !!!

Possibly a Yank judging by the piss poor choice of euphemisms.

Not very complimentary to our Mudcat friends, is it?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:57 PM

... ah... but in original context of a comedic thread....

We love having a frindly laugh with our yank mudcat mates.

But of course, you have to take my word for it as the thread no longer exists..

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Will Fly
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:02 PM

Must just be me - I detest the term "yank" as much as I detest the term "wop" or "dago" or "wog". I have good friends - all good people - in the US, and I wouldn't dream of referring to them as "yanks", even in jest.

Just my thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:06 PM

Fair enough Will, and repectfuly noted..

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:12 PM

Allow me to be first to say I don't give a shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:14 PM

But the emphasis is on the 'what' happened, and by extension
the 'how' and 'why'...

'What' happened you made quite clear.

'How' is pretty easily explained. You are a guest and anybody can post under your guest name.

'Why' is a bit trickier. Some people get their jollies doing things like this I suppose. I have never understood the thrill in that. That 'why' is probably a big part of the problem that leads to the type of behavior that gets threads closed. Some folks like to stir the pot just to see what floats up.

I don't mean to single you out by the way. It is just that you made a particular complaint that could be easliy remedied by joining.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:16 PM

999: maybe it's too much cheese in your diet and not enough fiber.

I see so many people who feel insulted by stupid things that I don't always notice when someone intends to insult me. "Yank" doesn't bother. If I call someone a "Brit" it's not meant as in insult either. "Limey" would either be a joke or so stupid it SHOULD be a joke.

Question: how many different guest names can one use before it would make the concept of someone "stealing" one of them silly?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:19 PM

Simple: thirty-seven.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:29 PM

"What if a malevolent ID imposter had perpetrated this outrage against a nice sweet respectable old church lady mudcat regular ????"

Christ you might have a job finding one around here. Any I have ever met in person could handle themselves better than most men I know.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:30 PM

"Question: how many different guest names can one use before it would make the concept of someone "stealing" one of them silly?"

Bingo !!!!

Now that reminds me of a related point expressed recently by a dubious frivolous chap going under the name of
"Old Boy"

"....But, yes, my latest new mudcat name for this weekend is a hastily concocted daft jokey sounding ID
that is here consistent thread specific..
Obviously I couldn't be bothered thinking up a new one for anywhere else I've posted in the past 3 days.
Next weekend I'll probably be just as bored & restless and reinvent as a new someone else for all our 'mutual amusement'.
Or might even drag one of my comfortable familar old personas out the 'dressing up' costume box.
Fear not good folks, I always try to abide by a personal rule of only being one persona at a time,
none of that multiple identity disorder malarkey
indulged in by some of you regular mischief making miscreants.

Happier now ?."

Something well worth expanding upon in this thread as soon as I find time to work it into a sensible relevant contribution

TOO BE CONTINUED >>>>

Hookey Wole, you have to understand that you are conducting a conversation in this thread with the person who set up that bogus thread in your name. There is a lot of "between the lines" stuff in this conversation. Since you are a guest and not a member you can't receive Personal Messages from another member or from one of the moderators who might answer your well-founded and thought-out queries about the incident. The fact that two different moderating actions took place on the "cock" thread simply means more information became available. It has been suggested that you ask to join Mudcat and all will become clear. I suggest you follow that good advice.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:48 PM

HW, or PFR, or T, it seems you think everybody is doing what you do, and they aren't. And the consistent identity isn't limited to one thread. Most folks stick to one name.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:55 PM

"T" ????????

'We' all know you got sophisticated space age secret agent IP tracking and posting behaviour analysis gizmos..

but who the F is "T" !!!!!????????.



Like I said, a sensible post from 'me'is due soon as I find time to concentrate on the matter....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:56 PM

Hookey Wole and his eight incher.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 04:13 PM

Well, I've had a post deleted, already......care to explain that??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 04:14 PM

I can't help but think Star Wars fans might be disgusted with you linking to a site about Wookie holes!

(Actually, wouldn't that make a cool name to call someone? "Why, you're such a jerk, such a sausage, such a wookie hole!") Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with our Hookie Wole who has completely different initials (most of the time).

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 04:17 PM

'It's the issues about mod/clone strategies and accountability that are most pertinent to topic of debate in this specific thread..

isn't it ???

No...Mudcat has been thru all this before. We will always have trolls and frauds who try to stir things up. THAT is the issue "it is about".

If people resort to that, causing confusion & consternation, what the mods have to do to even attempt to ease the effect is merely a side issue. There is **NO* way to edit or not-edit contentious threads that will satisfy everyone. Some (look above) want to just keep bickering...'defending' themselves... asserting that any editing or censoring is to be avoided. Others want any name calling or naughty language or 'offensive' remarks deleted...or edited... or.... whatever.

I can't see how there is any choice except "doing the best they can".... with very few 'explanations', as explanations just provide another topic to bicker over.

It IS obvious that UK members *often* have a different 'pain threshhold' and attitude toward disputes than 'local' mods....but *shrug*.

As to membership or not..... you pays yer money, you takes yer choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 05:46 PM

Sorry Bill but the issue is about moderation. We know it's a tough job. We know you can't please everyone. But at the end of the day everyone has the right to complain. If the person making these tough decisions cannot stand a bit of criticism when someone else believes they have got it wrong, they are in the wrong job!

I agree wholeheartedly that the mods should not be subject to abuse but if, for instance, someone was to delete a post of mine which I felt was relevant or pertinent to a debate, for no GOOD reason, then I would feel hard done by and would voice that opinion. I would not abuse the mod, call their parentage into question or any such nonsense but I would ask for an explanation. If no explanation was forthcoming then I would assume that the management have reserved their right to unilateral censorship. Fair enough. It would say a lot more about them than about me so I would have no further need to comment.

Unless, of course, my complaint was deleted as well :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 05:54 PM

"If no explanation was forthcoming then I would assume that the management have reserved their right to unilateral censorship."

You got it in one.

And that's the way it should be. We're all guests in his home.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 06:30 PM

We HAD a system where official complaints could be sent directly to head moderator,,,by PM or email. Ask Joe how that worked...and how much time he spent trying to sort it out.

"But at the end of the day everyone has the right to complain."

...and 'management' has the right to decide how - or whether - to deal with complaints. In a forum this large with as many issues as there are (3-4 going on right now?) I cannot see how any unpaid person ...or small group.... could keep up with individual replies when, as I said it would often lead to meta-complaints about handling of complaints.

When I was in high school, our American History teacher entertained almost an hour of bickering opinions about how tests, grading, class participation, etc... should be conducted.
Next day he walked in, went to the board, and wrote on the board:

This class is run democratically!
       signed, King Harmon I

This place is 'almost' as democratic as that.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 07:12 PM

LOL, excellent, BillD. Both of your posts nail it.

I was on another site today and saw this when I posted as a named GUEST. I know we've talked about it before & it may never happen, BUT it does give one pause, esp. the first two paragraphs:

Thank you for submitting your post. Since you have not logged in or registered yet, you are considered a guest on the site.

All guests' posts are reviewed by our moderators and if found to be a violation of our Terms of Use, they may not be published at all.

Registration enables you to make new posts, reply to existing topics, get email notifications when your post gets replied or when you receive private message. By registering right away, the post you've just typed will be saved and posted under your registered username.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 08:29 PM

Max has said 'guests' will always be allowed.... but I'd be willing to see their comments held for review first....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 10:40 PM

All this issue, for just an explanation?????

If the topic is, 'BS: Why closed threads?'...that, in itself, is asking for an 'explanation', as in, "why"..which is asking an 'explanation'...isn't it?...What else could it mean???

I gave a perfectly clear explanation, didn't I??...which I was even complimented on...and the issue is, now, that it hit 'too close to home', we all are having it demonstrated, right???..(or left)?...in front of you!....think of it as 'virtual drama'......but it came true...and still is, isn't it?

You think this is 'trolling'???? No,, it's at the heart of the topic, right?
Just stop, and think about it a moment....Don't you think this is 'normal' forum and 'blog-o-sphere' interaction???

So what is it?? We can only think 'so far'??....and not anymore than 'allowed'?.....I've got a better idea, why not hear what the parameters are in regards what is the ultimate thing that you want, and What we must know...and no further....tell us a bedtime story, we can all sing Kumbayah....be provided cookies and milk......OH, can you tuck us in, too???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 10:52 PM

Bill, if that means we have to read all of Little Hawk's splinter personalities' posts, no thanks. We'd need to have our own splinter personalities, and I don't think Max wants 73 moderators, even if they ARE only four or five people.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:02 AM

Hey, you can trust my "splinter personalities". They're basically just created for fun, although I will admit that Chongo Chimp serves as a very useful foil for various forms of serious political satire which poke fun at the rest of us for our all-too-human foibles and weaknesses. In that respect, he's like a character in a political cartoon in the paper. Still, he always acts as Chongo would, given the situation...and it's usually quite different from how I would behave.

As for the rest of them, they're all true to themselves. I don't consider them to be splinter personalities of me. They are creatures of the imagination, just like all the characters, say, that Conan Doyle came up with in the Sherlock Holmes tales and all the other stuff he wrote...or like the characters Walt Kelly came up with in the comic "Pogo". Most of them are fairly extreme personalities. They exist not to show a hidden side of the author, but to instead demonstrate a human extreme of some kind for its own amusing sake.

Penelope Rutledge, for example, is extremely wealthy, arrogant, quite full of herself, imbued with an extraordinary sense of entitlement and grandeur, yet she does possess the admirable qualities of idealism, courage, forthrightness, and indomitable determination, the latter being qualities any sensible human being would aspire to. As such, she is flawed, but she does have a certain charm, I think.

Shane is your bottom of the barrel, shiftless, all-Canadian local loser and irresponsible layabout and lawbreaker...yet he is shielded from facing his truly wretched condition by a childlike innocence which causes him to think he's incredibly cool and desirable. Such people do exist, and I've seen them in action. They usually end up very badly! But Shane (like Sherlock Holmes) is protected from that by virtue of the fact that he exists in a fictional story that has to go on to the next chapter. Shane is the last word in his particular archetype. Doug and Bob McKenzie really tried along that same line, but they'll never equal Shane McBrice for sheer incredible hoserhood!

And so on...

They're not fragments or splinters of me...they are archetypes of various exaggerated forms of human behaviour and personality that we see around us, each one taken to its final ridiculous extreme. That is the essence of most humour, is it not? When characters in a story go to ridiculous extremes, that's when things get funny, scary or interesting. If they don't go to some kind of extreme, it's going to be a pretty boring tale.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:06 AM

They're like all of the archetypical characters Miss Marple references in the village when she solves murders. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Janie
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:10 AM

*sigh*

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:24 AM

When I was a youngster, I very much wanted to create comic book style stories...and I did create some, complete with the art, but I didn't pursue that career in adulthood. At any rate, those stories were full of many characters, naturally, all with their own strange quirks and behaviours. I've basically been using Mudcat to do the same sort of thing in the last 10 years or so, merely because it's something I find amusing to do in my spare time, and I still have an affection for making up characters and stories about them.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: michaelr
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:35 AM

And I say amen, kudos and good on you, eh? You are one of the sanest, most enlightened posters on this forum. I mean that sincerely.

Cheers,

Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:44 AM

I'm just sitting here having a few shots of Jack Daniel's Tennessee Honey liqueur and enjoying the shit out of this. Marvellous stuff altogether! Seriously... from both sides... Keep it up!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 01:06 AM

Thanks, Michael. I really appreciate your positive comments. And you too, Seamus.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 02:00 AM

I agree with Michael, LH, though I don't read all of it.:-;

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 02:52 AM

OH!..I get it!...As long as we never get to the bottom of anything ...this must be the center of nothing!

Dang!..I had hopes....or was that change???

Same ol' stuff......

Regards,....and, at least we know...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Megan L
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 03:07 AM

WHAT!!! Shane doesnt exist? jings crivens and help ma boab ahd better tell Granny she wis fixin tae pay him a wee visit.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 03:41 AM

I never saw the thread many of you speak about. I can't help but think Hookey Wole doth protest too much, methinks.

He seems to insist so passionately about it not being true, that people may well suspect the opposite of what he is saying.