 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion'
|
|
|
Subject: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: The Shambles Date: 20 Apr 07 - 07:55 AM The owner of this site has always had every right to delete from its forum any contribution they do not wish to host. The posters of this forum may not have the right to be informed where, when this right has been exercised but perhaps it would be wise and sensible for them to always be informed? If only for the simple reason that threads subjected to this selective 'silent deletion' tend to make nonsense reading? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: beardedbruce Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:06 AM NOT passing any judgement eother way on any particular topic being deleted, IMO it would be a good idea to have a message inserted ( when deletions are deemed needed by the Powers That Be) indicating that there HAS been a deletion, and who the original poster was. If a member then desired, he/she could then PM the poster to find out what was said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Mr Happy Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:08 AM But with pm's, there's no audience to play to!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: jacqui.c Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:11 AM Exactly Mr H. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:15 AM perhaps it would be wise and sensible for them to always be informed? (Shambles) I strongly disagree. It would neither be wise nor sensible to be informed each time about deletion of porn links, deletion of other spam, deletion of each GUEST-with-no-name post as the policy towards this is well known. It would not be necessary to be informed about each deletion if for instance it has been stated clearly in an Obit thread that controversial posts will be deleted etc. Of course, there are new cases in which I'd like to be informed but the suggestion to be always informed is complete BS. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: George Papavgeris Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:17 AM People can (and do) post messages and comments on my page on mySpace. Some are spam, one or two have been advertising sexual favours, the majority are legitimate. I go in daily and delete the spam and offensive ones. I control that page - even though I do not "own" it -, it is MY page and I have every right to delete postings; just as others have every right to post in the first place. So what's different with Mudcat? Nothing really. Except we have the occasional malicious persistent oddball to contend with; and if the moderators clear such crap, they are doing me a favour. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: beardedbruce Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:17 AM Exactly! If the Powers That Be see a need to delete something, I will presume until shown otherwise that they had a reason to do so- BUT the point that is made is that the thread then becomes non-sensical if there is no indication of deletion. Since guests do not get PM, the postings BY MEMBERS can be obtained IF DESIRED without offending anyone else ( I presume one would agree to possibly be offended by requesting ( by PM) a deleted post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: beardedbruce Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:19 AM OK, in the case of spam or such, there would be no reason to indicate deletion. But in the case of postings BY A MEMBER, I would think my comments hold. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: The Shambles Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:49 AM Some recent examples of threads where 'silent deletion' of the posts of members (and the deletion of an entire thread) have anonymously been imposed. There may well be more examples..... http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=100832&messages=66 http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=100153&messages=152 http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=100151&messages=101 http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=97787&messages=354&page=1&desc=yes |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: kendall Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:58 AM He never quits, does he? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Mr Happy Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:07 AM Possible explanation here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: GUEST,Russ Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:18 AM Hi Shambles, On issues like this I am consistent. I like Mudcat just the way it is and has been for the years I've been a lurker. Russ (Permanent GUEST)0 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:44 AM I love it when someone finds a need to create a catch phrase such as "silent deletion". Very clever tactic. I have no problem with editing as long as a clear picture of the discussion remains. The deletions that I am aware of have been unnecssary comments. If anything, these threads could use a little more editing to remain coherent. I don't think it would be either wise or sensible to be informed of such deletions as it will bog down the thread with comments and posts of little relevance to the topic. There are no assumed "rights" for any of the users of this site. I've only had one serious disagreement with editing of a thread, and due to the sensitivity of the particular issue I did understand their reasoning, even though I felt and still feel differently. I can respect their decision and put my trust in them to keep this site operating properly. Discussions of nonsense like this aren't very productive are they? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:45 AM Some recent examples of threads where 'silent deletion' of the posts of members (and the deletion of an entire thread) have anonymously been imposed. (Shambles) None of the examples you have provided show the deletion of an entire thread as you wrongly claim, Shambles. An example of a thread that actually has been deleted would be the following: Please expel Shambles now? Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: bobad Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:48 AM Don't feed the trolls. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Stilly River Sage Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:48 AM Too bad they didn't act on the source of the problem, and not just the thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Stringsinger Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:54 AM There will always be someone who is malcontent with something and keeps hammering away at it as if it is the most important thing in the world. From what I've seen on Mudcat, the "powers that be" are doing an excellent job and if a thread gets out of hand which happens occasionally, I am grateful not to have to read it. If I get out of hand, because I am very outspoken, I hope that they will delete me too. I think Mudcat is one of the last hopes for free democratic expression left in the US. Frank Hamilton |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:54 AM It seems fashionable to beat up on Shambles, but I think I see a considerable degree of mellowing on his part in recent months. Dave Oesterreic |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Donuel Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:05 AM the most silent deletion of all..................... the function that selects and removes a poster's name from ever appearing in any thread you open in the future. So if you wonder why people do not respond to your statement, question or cry for help... its because they have exsponged you. Then they forget and they don't even know they are ignoring you You don't exist, poof you are gone...its like a virtual death. While your ghost words wander around only for you to see, everyone else is having a jolly time. You can see them but they can't see you. You are in the land of the ignored. A lonely disembodied opinion without humanity, without human contact - OHHH THE HORROR 8^U it doensn't matter, no one will see unless unless I do something really big that will make the whole world stand up and notice. THATS WHAT I'LL DO I'M GONNA GO OUT SIDE AND clean up all that dog shit in the front yard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Peace Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:10 AM Do you want fries with that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: The Shambles Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:11 AM http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=100151&messages=101 None of the examples you have provided show the deletion of an entire thread as you wrongly claim, Shambles. The thread linked to here was 'silently deleted' by persons unknown when a link to a published local newspaper article was posted to it. The article was a factual account (with all sides having their say) of a court hearing which explained that the cancellation was due to concerns expressed by the police about the event's organiser. That thread was later replaced, less a few posts which were deleted from it. It was then closed - with the following editing comment inserted. Miskin 2007 has been cancelled. I'm closing this thread because history has shown that there is no way to discuss a topic like this at Mudcat in a peaceable manner. I have deleted the discussions of this matter that have taken place, and I will not permit further Forum discussion of the Cancellation of Miskin 2007. Nonetheless, I think it is important that the full story be told. This source tells the story. Please note that I have some question about the credibility of the story because I found essentially the same story with two different bylines, purporting to come from two different newspapers. However, it does appear that the stories are at least partially true. I have invited Miskin Man to respond if he wishes, but I do not intend to allow Forum discussion of the matter. Thanks. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: The Shambles Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:19 AM I think Mudcat is one of the last hopes for free democratic expression left in the US. That then - is very little or no hope at all for the US............... Where not all of us live. There will always be someone who is determined to stick their head in the sand, ignore the facts and paint things as they wish them to be - rather than having to face up to the reality of the way things really have become. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Bert Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:22 AM Glad to see you still around Shambles. I completely agree with you about the deletions. If we knew what was happening then maybe Mudcat wouldn't be quite as boring as it has been for the past month or more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:22 AM "There will always be someone who is determined to stick their head in the sand, ignore the facts and paint things as they wish them to be - rather than having to face up to the reality of the way things really have become. " True, but there are also people who are going to have different opinions than you. You may wish to label them as individuals who "stick their head in the sand", but you also should recognize that others feel differently than you do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Mr Happy Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:26 AM I could suggest another place to stick His head - but I won't! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: jacqui.c Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:33 AM Speak for yourself Bert. I have been enjoying a more tranquil and relaxing Mudcat than has been the case for a while. The kind of muckraking that had been going on certainly wasn't to my taste and, from the number of people still posting, I would guess to the taste of many of us. The discussions are still good and with many disparate views coming out, but the dearth of the constant plugging away at one subject and the demonising of a certain group of volunteers is very refreshing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Donuel Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:34 AM What is cool here is that a subject or an ivestigation or a revelation or a great idea OFTEN appears here BEFORE I hear it on NPR or PBS. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:36 AM Bert, are you really serious that each single spam or porn deletion should be documented as your complete agreement with Shambles implies? Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Peace Date: 20 Apr 07 - 11:53 AM Well, there is deletion and then there's deletion. Slag some people and your fuckin' post goes by-by in a flash. Slag others and it will linger and linger. There are clones with their own friends about whom nothing can be said. There are a few who diligently ensure that nothing bad is EVER said about themselves. Then there is the constant horseshit with members posing as guests and guests whose purpose is to cause shit to fly. So, what the fuck is new? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: MMario Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:00 PM Then there is the constant horseshit with members posing as guests Joe, and I believe, Max, have both stated that this is far less frequent then implied, and primarily confined to a very few. and as far as:There are clones with their own friends about whom nothing can be said. There are a few who diligently ensure that nothing bad is EVER said about themselves I have talked with a a number of people with edit buttons - and doubt this behavior can be attributed to any of them. As far as I know normal procedure is that a clone doesn't edit comments about themselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: kendall Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:23 PM Keep repeating, it is not a democracy, it is not a democracy.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Peace Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:08 PM You are right, Kendall. It is a theocracy. But calling it a name doesn't change the facts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: The Shambles Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:17 PM True, but there are also people who are going to have different opinions than you. You may wish to label them as individuals who "stick their head in the sand", but you also should recognize that others feel differently than you do. I think that by now that I do recognise this. But even if there was such a thing as a inconvertable fact - there would be different opinions expressed about it. If these opinions are based on this fact - that is discussion. And no matter how heated this may get - it is healthy and to be welcomed. When opinions and judgements are expressed about the poster, without knowledge of the fact or expressed in the face of that fact - it is something else. There are both examples of the individuals mentioned by Frank and myself - I can only hope that neither of these examples would describe us. Posters and their families were encouraged to attend Miskin 2007 in Mudcat threads, but were denied in those threads, the reasons for its cancellation. Posters were futher denied this information when the link was provided, and when our anonymous ones 'silently deleted' the entire thread. Because no explanation was provided for this deletion - the assumption will be made that there was some good reason for this censorship. When the (now closed) thread was restored - it was obvious that many posters had made the assumption from this action that there was something questionable about providing posters with the information. When the question that posters should have been asking was why the publicly available information was being intentionally witheld from them for so long. As certain posts were deleted from the now closed thread - posters were further denied seeing the full explanation that I posted for providing the information. So posters saw all the smoke - but had no way of knowing if there was any fire. And the thread was closed - denying any further discussion and any chance for me to correct these personal judgements and the public speculations made about the worst possible motivations for my posts. If this event and the published newspaper accounts of the court proceedings that prevented it - is not judged to be a subject of discussion on our forum - then either ALL references to the event should be 'silently deleted' or all references should be permitted and those posts deleted - be restored. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: MMario Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:20 PM What part of "The owner of this site has always had every right to delete from its forum any contribution they do not wish to host do you not understand? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: The Shambles Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:25 PM What part of The posters of this forum may not have the right to be informed where, when this right has been exercised but perhaps it would be wise and sensible for them to always be informed? do you not understand? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Amos Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:27 PM Shambles!!! Will you please get a hobby other than this one? Couldn't you become a pro-life protestor or something? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: MMario Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:31 PM The former qoute (by me, from Shambles) is a fact. The latter qoute (by shambles, from Shambles) is an opinion. Itr is alos an opinon that had be answered (in the negative) by those responsible for maintaining the site. And I don't know about anyone else - but considering the number of (fleeting) appearances of porn posts and spam that go by in a day - I prefer not to have to wade through "post deleted - porn" messages. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:47 PM "If these opinions are based on this fact - that is discussion. And no matter how heated this may get - it is healthy and to be welcomed." Yes, a DISCUSSION is welcome and very healthy. However, it gets to a point where nothing new is discussed and a dead end is reached. Your past history has shown that you repeat the same mantra over and over, continuously update the thread with similar points to keep it active, and nothing is resolved. You then complain when people attack you. You don't realize that people are attacking your methods, not you. You are doing the same thing in this thread. Hopefully it will be closed soon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' From: Joe Offer Date: 20 Apr 07 - 02:04 PM Well, Mudcat owner Max Spiegel has publicly informed Shambles that he is no longer welcome here, and he has asked Shambles to leave. So far, Max has not done anything to force Shambles to leave, and Shambles has apparently decided not to accept Max's invitation. I won't get involved in that - it's between Shambles and Max. I suppose I could have deleted almost all complaint messages from Shambles as personal attacks, but I haven't done that. From now on, I will. Complaints from Shambles about Mudcat editing policy are no longer welcome, and will be deleted. He may continue to discuss music and other matters, but his insults and attacks will no longer be tolerated. From now on, there will be no "Shambles complaint threads." We moderators delete messages that we believe to be harmful - usually racism and personal attacks and spam and duplications. We now also delete most anonymous messages because they have caused us problems for many years. We can't make public explanation of our deletions because that defeats the very purpose of the deletion - to remove messages that may cause harm. So, there is nothing I have to say about The wisdom of Mudcat's 'silent deletion' other than to say we try to do it sparingly and for good reason, and that all editorial actions are subject to review by Joe, Max, or Jeff. Oh, by the way, it isn't "silent deletion" - it makes a "click" sound every time I do it. Here's a quote from columnist Anita Creamer the April 1 edition of my local paper, the Sacramento Bee:
Granted, the bored and grammar-challenged populace has to have something to do with its time. Perhaps a less-damaging occupation might be in order. Or some therapy. That's why we moderate, to keep some of that cruelty down so other people can carry on reasonable discussion - particularly about music. If you want to see what Mudcat would be without moderation, take a look at the jungle the Help Forum has become. -Joe Offer- This thread is closed. Shambles is no longer welcome to discuss Mudcat policy. Perhaps without his participation, the rest of us can carry on a reasonable discussion when there is something we need to talk about. -Joe Offer- |