BS: Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 04:38 PM

" We've been taught that our opinions matter"

If you think that your opinions matter to anyone other than yourself, you're delusion

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Big Mick
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 04:38 PM

Notice how Spaw puts a very direct post, good analysis, and asks a decent question, and Roger's response is to avoid answering and shift the subject.

Roger, answer Spaw's questions.

But you won't, because you have no desire to be held accountable.

Do you need to be censored? Yes.

Thanks for finding that "Farewell...." thread, Spawzer. I was trying to find it the other day.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 04:38 PM

Shambles again (14 April 7:42) Quotes

Explain the BS rules - 26 Oct 99

Since you are with us, you get to help us make the rules. Of late it seems that it is used for non-music related questions, comments, thoughts and stories. It may be like just a light conversation piece, or just killing time, or getting through a bad day, or anything non-academic (if you will). Or, just don't use it. It is what you make it. Don't sweat the rules, cause there aint none.
Max

O.k. It may have been true that in 1999 no rules were needed, and members could be expected to post responsibly. However, since then things have moved on, and rules now appear to be necessary.

Two simple questions which could clarify matters:

1, Would this forum work better without Joe Offer?

2, Would this forum work better without Shambles?

I know I would answer only one of the above in the negative!

CHEERS
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 04:53 PM

Shambles,

you are so much more funny in this thread when you try to be serious than in the 'peace' thread when you try to be funny. Seeing you judging the worth of fellow posters's posts and fellow posters makes me laugh out loud.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:10 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: ClintonHammond - PM
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 04:38 PM

" We've been taught that our opinions matter"

If you think that your opinions matter to anyone other than yourself, you're delusion(al).

They matter enough that my government periodically goes to great expense to allow me to express them upon a piece of paper called a "ballot". Other than that, you're probably right.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:14 PM

No, no, Clinton, he's in a state of delusion. He's experiencing delusion. It's a far less belligerent state of delusion than yours, but it still qualifies.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:17 PM

Okay. Maybe I'm delusional about the ballot thing as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:21 PM

Do I %$%#in' need to be *^$^ censored? Yer &^%$$$$/!! right I need to be censored!!! With all these stupid *%##%! ^@#$@&&ers *^#$$^ing around and trying to $@#$# chimps I %$@#!@! need to be %^#@#@! censored plenty! As far as I'm concerned you $@$%@$on' human %##@#s can all go ^#%#$#%$#$^#%#! yourselves!!!

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:23 PM

I'm from the ArtBrooks school of thought on this. I love this place!
Above the line, you can get words, lyrics, chords music, etc., and the occasional civil discussion about songs/music.

Below the line, and I really like this, it's a fucking soap opera!

You have your good characters and your bad characters, the villains and the villainesses, the nice guys and the not so nice guys having it out.
As long as no one is using his or her real name, they are all actors playing parts.

It beats the hell out of Days of Our Lives, General Hospital, and for you folks on the other side of the water, Coronation St. or East Enders.

So, when I can, I tune in each day for a good laugh or a doleful sigh at the carryings-on in our own little Mudcat soap opera.

Once in a while it even becomes a Brit-style pantomime where, when the villain enters everyone hisses or boos, and when the hero or heroine enters everyone cheers.
We can even get the equivalent of "Look out! He's behind you!" when a nasty character
lures the innocent hero/heroine into his trap.

I love it! Please don't stop.

Seamus

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:25 PM

$%%@%#in' right, Seamus!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:38 PM

Yo, Chongo! You da man..er..simian!

Seamus

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Janie
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:38 PM

Daggum, Foolstroupe, I always admired Jay Baldwin but I never knew before that he was quoted in the Bible! Wise man, he. Eh?

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 06:06 PM

Chongo seems to be channeling Shane.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 06:18 PM

Yeah, it does sound like that, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 06:37 PM

A good old Cat fight can be quite fun at times...

But I like it best when it turns into irreverant frivolity.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:35 AM

Stay tuned! Coming up int the next episode of As The Mudcat Turns...........

What?

Seamus

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 05:53 AM

The only option open to anyone who does like what other people choose to post on our forum is to leave.

To post only to judge the worth of your fellow posters, to call them names, or to attempt to bully them in any way in some effort to get them to leave or to change is not only is pointless - it is counter-productive.

The only option open is for you - is to leave.

At one time I took this course and stopped posting. But when I thought about this decision - I realised that it was me who liked and accepted the principles of the forum that Max founded it on and that I was leaving because other posters who were staying, did not like nor accept these founding principles.

So it made little sense for me to stop contributing as the same posters were still constantly moaning about having to put-up with what others posted and obviously were never goung to be happy with what ever changes they managed to get imposed upon our forum.

So I decided that if any poster did not like what I or any other poster chose to post that it was none of their business and that if they did not accept Max's founding principles - it was they who should stop contributing here, stop pushing to change our forum to their tastes and start their own.

Now that the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Staff has publicly admitted his failure to impose his required 'peace' and has formally proposed to Max that the posting of BS be brought under further control by him and confined to members only - there is no going back from this point.

I see no public statements to the effect that Max has changed his basic wishes and founding principles for our forum nor that he is going to accept the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Staff's proposal.

So until I read otherwise - I and I hope others will continue - despite the bullying- to try and post on our forum according to these principles.

And if other posters do not like this - they are free to form a forum of their own - with as much imposed censorship, limitation and personal judgements of each other as they wish............

Do you need to be censored?

No I do not.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 06:08 AM

Shambles-you bloddy mone to mutch.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 06:26 AM

O.k. It may have been true that in 1999 no rules were needed, and members could be expected to post responsibly. However, since then things have moved on, and rules now appear to be necessary.

What are the reasons why members could be expected to post responsibly in 1999 but not expected to do so in 2006?

As many of the members are still the same members in 1999 as they are in 2006 - what is the main element that has changed in this time?

Could one factor be that there are now many levels of poster and that all are now encouraged by the example set - to publicly judge the worth of each other? Even though the site's owner is still happy to invite everyone to contribute to our forum?

Guests, named-guests, named members with edit buttons, unamed members with edit buttons and members without edit buttons and Joe Offer, The Chief of the Mudcat Editing Staff?

I make that six levels of poster.

Perhaps when all posters post once again on equal terms and are encouraged to concentrate on their own posts and once again to tolerate the posts of others - the imposition of more and more rules will not appear to be necessary at all?

Especially when all those who do not accept Max's principles of opening our forum to the public - will have left to form their own private members forum which conforms to their own tastes.

Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:09 AM

The end result of all the dissent sown by The Shambles is likely to be Max pulling the plug on the whole site. Why should he have to put up with all the shite he gets, and pay for it too, out of his own pocket?
I know that I would have done so some time ago, who needs all the whining that Roger puts out?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:13 AM

i thought we all donated money to this site so it can maintained?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Alba
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:38 AM

How much do you think it takes to keep this place running Guest...not nearly as much as it gets in the way of donations that's for sure...and considering a lot of people work behind the scenes for nothing, zero...can you imagine if they had to get paid into the bargain.
No the Mudcat comes to us virtually free.
Can you feel the Love and the Gratitude for that..*smile*
J

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:44 AM

Two more examples of 'love and graditute'.

Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 11 Aug 05 - 03:28 PM

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..

Subject: RE: In the UK......? (thread title change complain
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 12 Aug 05 - 03:30 PM

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. We volunteers do what we need to do to keep the peace and tidy things up. 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. 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.

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.

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-

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Alba
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:49 AM

Yawn

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:51 AM

Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:54 AM

Ooh quick matron the screens, I think I'm going to laugh uncontrollably!
G

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:58 AM

Censorship, like charity, should begin at home, but, unlike charity, it should end there.

Clare Boothe Luce

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Alba
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:59 AM

Deep Breaths now Giok. We wouldn't want you to be having a wee laugh.
Wid yi ever catch a grip and get serious.

Och Doctor Finlay the patient isnae responding...

ROFLMAO too!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: bobad
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:10 AM

"Unless you are prepared to give up something valuable you will never be able to truly change at all, because you'll be forever in the control of things you can't give up."
Andy Law
Creative Company

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: catspaw49
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:10 AM

Some of your funniest stuff yet Roger!!!!

Ya' gotta' love a post where Sham bitches about "judging others" which is made up almost exclusively of personal judgements and opinions. It doubles up as well when he bullies others to leave and then complains about bullying.

Go for it Sham. Like Seamus and others have mentioned, you have a future with soaps! Call the BBC.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: catspaw49
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:15 AM

BTW, I would be remiss if I didn't bite here so here we go.......

Okay Sham......I know I'm going to regret this.........You seem to have added a new phrase to your volumes of "Sham's Liturgical Bullshit." What the fuck are these "founding principles?" I get this vision of Max in colonial garb and sitting with Franklin and Jefferson................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Alba
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:17 AM

Thanks Spaw...just spat Coffee on the Screen need to go and get a Kitchen Towel...rofl

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:56 AM

Spaw, had to change keyboards, a mouthfull of coffee was a bit too much for it.

I am really new here compared to others and had a tendency to try to protect "The Shambles"

Now I must say that the Mudcat isn't really a true democracy but comes so close. With that view, I believe it is imperative for all to relent somewhat and obey the somewhat meager rules. This continual harping is a waste.
Roger, from now on when I see your name in a thread, I shall disregard all those posts. Fall back a bit and relinquish this attack. No one is going to win with the exception of the board.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: artbrooks
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 09:12 AM

I like to think that Max opens threads like this, gets his morning giggles, and goes on with his real life.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 09:26 AM

" What the fuck are these "founding principles?"

If anyone really needs to ask (and using such language to do it) - they are sure to find a welcome in the new private members club that the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team are going to start.

The founding priciples of this new club would appear to require its members to be as intolerant and as unpleasant as possible and to encourage them to gang-up and bully anyone who may not be in total agreement.

The founding principles of Max's forum were (and to the best of my knowledge hope still are) to enable all the public's different views to be accomodated and for these to be safely expressed without them being subject to and inhibited by bullying.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 09:31 AM

One more attempt by you to say something as if it were true, or as if you were a respected founding member. Neither of these are true.

There is no founding principle such as you have stated as Spaw points out.

And if one puts in the internet addy he provided above, they will see that you were known as a person who only knows how to complain and moan and set yourself up as some kind of heroic figure. Again, none of which is true.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 09:42 AM

Well, well, well...

I've kinda kept out of this food fight because seems that I have become one of the more popular punching bags of "guestdom" and Bush apologists but...

...with that said, yeah, there are times when posts need to be deleted or threads closed which has nuthin' to do with one's posting history, reputation, etc...

Okay, a little "comic relief" doesn't kill a thread but when a poster's only motivation is to highjack the spirit of a discussion or debate then those posts should be yanked... I've had many of my threads highjacked by the same ol' IP's... (Joe knows who they are...)... There was a period of time when I couldn't hickup without one certain individual responding with the same ol' crap... We all know who that the indivual is...

An' yeah, it does make you angry when you made the effort to put forth a "thought out" opinion only to have someone, who obviously has no real rebuttal, to resort to name calling... Name callin', for those folks who might not have taken' "Debating 101", is ***not*** a rebuttal...

But I can see how we have all come to such a point... I mean, all one has to do is look around the polorization that has set upon our society... And though, IMO, most of it has can be blamed on the dogmatism of Bushites, those of us on the other side have ceratinly gone for the bait more often than we should... Speaking of the Bushites, as their positions have become less and less defendable it is no wonder that most of the name calling is coming from them... Yeah, if one wants to say "Hey, Bobert's pointing fingers", fine... I am doing just that!!! Guilty as charged... But those are my obseravtions...

I mean, just look at how much CarolC gets attacked personally??? And for what??? Making good arguments??? Or Amos??? Or me???

Like I said, if someone can't keep up witha discussion intellectually and finds throwing stink bombs at folks who can, give those stink bombs the ax...

IMHO...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 10:00 AM

Ain't he cute playing the 'foundamentalist'? Pretending that he does not see that he violates his own principles in each of his posts? Really funny are his "you may not have seen" posts repeating a text from a few posts above in a way that is meant to make the self serving 'let me rub it under your noses' motivation look like a positive contribution to a community. Don't you get the impression that he collects all the harsh words spoken to him to sport them like generals sport medals?

The only sad thing is that if he had something new and potentially valuable to say it might not be noticed among all that repetitive garbage he posts. His very methods of fighting for a cause diminishes the chances of him winning an argument. So, I think he does not really want what he seems to argue for, deep inside he masochistically likes his role.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 10:10 AM

Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: clairerise
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 10:30 AM

yes shambles. occasionally yes

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 10:45 AM

oooooooooooooooo!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 10:50 AM

Wolfgang you've got to stop all this psycho-analysis!!
The inner workings of the human mind are much too confusing for a Conservative...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 11:19 AM

Wolfgang,

First of all...

...bite me (Bobert's attempt at comic relief..)

But let's get real here, Wolfster... Okay, I openly challenged a Bushite to pick a Bush policy that he/she felt that he/she could defend... He/she picked Bush's handlin' of Katrina... No this wasn't two weeks a go but long, long ago before the truth started making it into the press...

Well, I laid out my positions and opinions, which BTW turned out to the "real story" (i.e. the truth) and all I got in the way of rebuttals was the same old crap that you have posted above... That is not a rebuttal but a tirade...

Might of ***fact***, just about everything I argued in the mad-dash-to-Iraq turned out to be, ahhhhh, facts as well... Hmmmmmmm???

So, hey, sorry you don't like the message or the messenger but if you want to debate policies you are going to have to get beyond your generalizations and, more than that, your "projections"...

"Before you accuse me, take a look at yourself..."

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 11:31 AM

Was not Wolfgang referring to "The Shambles"?

What is this, guilt by association? (11:19 AM post)

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 11:34 AM

pssst, Beaubay. I think the Wolf is speaking about the Shambles.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 11:37 AM

My deepest apologies to Wolfgang... Unless, of course, he was aiming his post at me... No, forget the "unless" part...

I'm sorry...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 11:53 AM

I've re-read Wolfgangs post ..."masochist", "fundamentalist" "psychlogically flawed" "sad", "repetitive", "egomaniacal poster of garbage".

Could be any of us......actually....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 12:26 PM

Yeah, Ake, I think most of us are so used to being attacked that, hey, they read an attack and automatically think it's them that is under attack... Maybe I'm more sensitive but, hey, I have sho nuff come under a lot of not-so-friendly fire in my years of coming here...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 01:15 PM

Perhaps I ought to be censored for getting hundredth posts !

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 01:16 PM

Like this one !!