BS: A non-political BS section, please?!

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: Alison M
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 07:49 AM

I think political subjects are interesting to debate, I agree with Divis on this one.

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 08:15 AM

Alison, I think we all can learn something from them, I understand some members find the subject heavy going, but as different people we all have our own subjects.

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 08:38 AM

I don't think it's "heavy going" in terms of subject areas or even the risk of encountering "stronger" views that troubles people, Divis...

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: Jeri
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 09:03 AM

Joe's got it. It's not about what I think is right or how I'd like Mudcat to be. It's about how I think it is. Ragdall, if your experience here is different, it's a good thing.

Mostly, people give an opinion here and others jump on it to let them know why it's wrong and they're idiots. There's one big argument/debate with very little attempt to understand one another. The people who are here now like this, so I don't expect anything to get nicer. I could deal with change, but what's happening here seems like a lot of social tearing down with no building. Maybe I've just missed all of the recent inspirational threads?

I still like the members-only idea, with people needing either cookies or passwords to post.

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 10:57 AM

I still like the members-only idea, with people needing either cookies or passwords to post.

Then PLEASE go away and form such a place and leave the rest of us, who like our forum to remain open to all - in peace from your judgements, blame and complaints and futile attempts at controlling what has always been beyond your control.

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: Peace
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 11:01 AM

Do NOT start with Jeri. You got a friggin' beef with Joe, that's between you and him. Jeri is as friggin'-well entitled to her opinion--this one with which I agree 100%--as you are. I really don't give a rat's ass what you post, Shambles, but do not start with her.

Start with me instead. She has violin to play and better things to do than be arsed with you.

Sorry, Jeri, I know this makes me third-in on a post, so give me shit via message. And Shambles, you can give me shit in public, but leave the gal be.

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 11:31 AM

Shambles you are the fly in the ontment, YOU go find another place where you can bore the arse off the other contributors.

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 11:35 AM

You are being drawn in. Careful.

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 11:42 AM

Can someone please explain to me the logic of entrusting our forum to 'moderators' like Jeri, Joe Offer and kat who quite openly post to say that they do not agree with the basic principle of our forum and who seemingly will not rest until they have turned our forum into the private member's club that they already treat it as?

Could 'moderators' with such views be seen to have any real store in trying to make a such forum work? One that has always been freely open for to the public. Is it any surprise that they constantly talk our forum down and blame everyone except themselves?

As our forum in is current form is not to the liking of these 'moderators' - what has ever been stopping them from forming their own site where thay can exclude who they wish?

Is it not totally dishonest for any 'moderators' with such views to be seen to be carrying on with the pretence of supporting an open forum? Why would they still wish to?

Other than a reluctance to give up what control over other posters that they currently feel they have some qualification for? And in order to continue to impose their judgement on their fellow posters?

It can't be for the common good of our forum as it currently stands? For there is no common interest with those who wish our forum to remain freely open for the public's contributions.

Music posts by Guests to be reviewed
Proposal for members only posting of BS

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 12:38 PM

I am Mick but just for this once.
Shambles in the same way as you are allowed to inflict your utterly boring tripe on this site ad nauseam [and I do mean nauseam] So also are those other contributors that you denigrate and insult, entitled to their opinion, and I am bloody glad that the Joe Clones on this site take less notice of your shite, than you do of their posts.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 03:26 PM

A thread started by a clone unhappy with the way max runs his site. Why couldnt she just pm him? And now full of clones and wannabes arguing amongst themselves!

Priceless. Please carry on, you are providing much amusement for us. And you have the nerve to ball out shambles.

Subject: RE: BS: A non-political BS section, please?!
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 05 Sep 06 - 03:34 PM

Ladies and gentlemen, lets take an hour off and come back tomorrow. Please just think about it.

Thanks
DS

---

It's too confusing to carry on this discussion in three different threads. Please continue in A return to only one section? .
Thanks.
-Joe Offer-