 sj |
||
|
||
BS: What price free speech, Mudcat?
|
|
|
Subject: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Nov 15 - 06:21 PM A very strange thing appears to have happened. A thread has been closed (yep, fair enough,not my gig), but, post-closure, and at the end of the actual closed thread itself, a non-moderator appears to have been allowed to have had a considerable "last word". There is even a link in that person's post-closure post. In all my years of posting to various forums, that has got to be the weirdest thing I've ever seen. Just sayin'. Is this God working in mysterious ways? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Bill D Date: 26 Nov 15 - 06:59 PM ?? I see the closed thread, but the only comment at the end WAS from an official moderator. The comment only notes that he is not aware which OTHER mod did it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Nov 15 - 07:02 PM Huh? Hasn't he told us us repeatedly that he isn't a moderator any more? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Bill D Date: 26 Nov 15 - 07:05 PM Nope... all he has said is that he is not HEAD mod any longer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Nov 15 - 07:14 PM If you say so. Let there be truth. However, I've spoken up before about last words then closure. I think that's a rotten tactic. It brings the board into disrepute. Could do better! The last words on that particular thread were in fact out of view, the final deletion of an argumentative post put up by someone who was reposting a nasty message that had already been deleted. There is no way to make everyone happy. You complain when there is an explanation, and you complain when there isn't. So moderators have to play it as it lays. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Paul Burke Date: 26 Nov 15 - 07:18 PM Joe says he isn't a moderator, and has done repeatedly for a few years. However he clearly has privileged access to the MC machine. Not usually a problem; he's basically on our side. It was the British moderators who were the problem when the Cat blew up. Max owns this Cat- he has the absolute right to do what the fuck he likes with it. For him, speech isn't free, it costs money to keep up servers, internet fees et blooming cetera. And it costs him in reputation to be responsible for what sometimes becomes a cesspit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker Date: 26 Nov 15 - 07:26 PM I stayed well away from that thread... so had to do some sherlock holmesing to find out what you're on about. imho... when Joe states he does not know which mod closed it.. well, that spotlights a problem that's always bugged me ... he should know !!! There should be some kind of behind the scenes mechanism whereby thread closures / deletions / editing are logged identifying the mod responsible. At least that way mods could keep check on the activities of their team mates... and a closer eye on any mod suspiciously veering towards the dark side... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Nov 15 - 07:34 PM I don't dispute any of that, Paul. My track record here is one of always shrugging at thread closures and deletions on the two grounds that (1) this isn't my gig, and (2), this is not real life. But I did find the red text at the end of the closed thread to be somewhat peculiar (and somewhat wrong-headed, too, but hey ho). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,DTM Date: 26 Nov 15 - 07:34 PM Are the Mods off their Rockers? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Bill D Date: 26 Nov 15 - 08:14 PM "Joe says he isn't a moderator, and has done repeatedly for a few years." No... that is not what he has said. He has said that he doesn't make the ultimate decisions on 'herding the cats' any longer- which is in line with his comment about not knowing exactly who make the decision THIS time. He had posted IN the thread a number of times, and so had an opinion that he decided to add. He 'mostly' does research & combining music threads...etc... but he 'can' do editing and even 'can' close a thread if he is the first to see a real problem. How do I know this? I see Joe at least once each year, and it used to be 2 or 3 times. I used to commiserate with him ... and even Max... about 'herding the cats'. I have even met a couple of other known mods at the FSGW Getaway.... and I have followed Mudcat since Nov. 1996...right after it was created. I suspect Joe or someone may explain it all better later... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Nov 15 - 08:18 PM I never noticed the Mudcat "blowing up". When did that happen, and were there many casualties? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Bill D Date: 26 Nov 15 - 08:24 PM *grin* There were at least 'injured feelings' I seem to remember. Kevin.. you were around during some of the chaotic metaphorical arm-waving... I suppose 'blowing up' is another metaphor, hmm? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST Date: 26 Nov 15 - 08:39 PM Isn't it a coincidence that the ones who start threads complaining about free speech at Mudcat are those same obnoxious and self-righteous persons who are contemptuous and condescending toward those whose opinions they don't share. Funny that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Nov 15 - 08:46 PM I'm a sensitive sort of chap in real life, perfectly vulnerable to hurt, but I can't conceive of staying on any forum until I get hurt by the people on it. That is preposterous. Internet forums are not real life, fun though they are. If you're hurt by comments in a thread there's something wrong with you. I'm afraid I don't believe Joe Offer on this occasion. Certainly, religion was getting a pasting. My view is that religion fully has that coming. His view might have been that his faith was strong enough to shrug off what he saw as attacks. Actually, the drift of the thread, barring the input of the odd maverick, was one of challenge, not attack. But there ya go! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Steve Shaw Date: 26 Nov 15 - 08:47 PM Er, you won't find one single complaint from me in this thread, Guest. Can you read English? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Amos Date: 26 Nov 15 - 10:27 PM Sigh. Joe has still got the mod's overview, but it is just more constrained than when he was the head nerd, as I understand it. Anyway, there is always a relatively civil way to say anything that needs be said, and part of the civil code of free speech is being sturdy enough to hold your own point of view without getting your knickers in a twist because someone thinks differently than you do. Do not forget, friends and grasshoppers, that there is an infinite supply of opinion in the world, and a much shorter supply of civility and compassion. Apologies for sanctimony! :D A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: akenaton Date: 27 Nov 15 - 03:32 AM I was the OP on that particular thread, It was a VERY interesting thread with some excellent contributions, especially from Joe, who put his heart and his feelings on the line. Steve also put a lot of work into the thread, although I disagree with his particular stance on the place of religion in society. There were very insightful posts from many members Mr McGrath, D McG, Pete....... and some others who agreed with Steve. A couple of days ago, the thread developed into a personal attack on Joe and the return of a group who simply wanted to wreck what had been thought provoking and informative. I have always been against the personalising of discussion or the stalking of members on these pages and I mentioned that I was thinking of requesting the closure of the thread, before ant further damage was done. I did not make that request, but the thread was closed and I believe it was time to do so. However, if as I believe, moderation has moved into a new phase where discussion of SUBJECTS is proscribed by the moderators, because opinions are expressed that they do not PERSONALLY support, or that they THINK may cause trouble, we are in a very sad and dangerous place. All subjects should be open for discussion here, personal attacks and abuse should be dealt with firmly.....then perhaps we can have more threads like "The Pope in America", without the need for closure and the weakening of our forum, by handing victory to the abusers.....Ake. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Nov 15 - 03:36 AM Joe Offer has been the most fair and reasonable mod on here...and even when he was the mod below the line, he would often explain just WHY he was taking exception to the tones of the thread, and where it was going. I have NO complaints, whatsoever, about the way he conducts his affairs on here. The fact that, of all people, Steve opens a thread complaining about Joe, and his treatment of a thread that Steve threw off course, with his childish name calling, defies gravity! There are other mods, who shall remain nameless, who will shut down a thread, or delete posts, just because I or someone, criticizes the phony behavior of their favorite candidate, pointing out her hypocritical deceit, is another story. You would think that, even if that particular candidate is the darling of wannabe 'so-called liberals' you'd think that character matters, and people would want to know the history of the facade she has/is painting about herself, to protect the other facade that 'the party' is promoting. Before I cast a vote, I'd rather have an idea, given her history, or any candidate's history of double-talk, lies, and actual voting record, BEFORE I would vote for a person, who you know is continuing to lie, and play on the emotions, for the sake of manipulating the election dialogue...because, in fact, she is lying to YOU!!..nor can you discount the fact that her character and behavior, has ANYTHING to do with what and how she is trying to come off!! While not having decided on which candidate I will eventually vote FOR, some candidates(and agendas) will definitely NOT get my vote, based of their RECORD, regardless what they SAY about it now ...besides, how can you believe them????.....and BTW, that goes for both parties.... ....and anyone should be able to be free to express that, or say anything that vets any of the candidates, and let the other people research those facts for themselves. That's what free speech is about, not just for the media, which often, only one side is presents...and usually 'less that totally truthful!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Nov 15 - 03:43 AM I had something to say at the end of the "Pope" thread and I found it was closed, so I thought I'd say it anyhow. I added my comment to an existing post so the thread wouldn't go up to the top of the Forum Menu again. I didn't think anybody would mind. I'm the registrar and music editor here, and I have a number of other duties. I don't handle "peacekeeping" moderation at Mudcat any more, although I did that for about 15 years. And yes, there is a tool that can tell which moderator did what; but we generally operate on trust and have little need to use the tool, which is rather time-consuming to use. The thread was closed for good reason, and that's good enough for me. -Joe Offer- Here's what I said that Steve Shaw objects to:
But this thread was getting worse and worse, so I said my goodbyes a couple days ago and left the thread. I came across a video today that honestly addresses a number of issues addressed in this thread. It's a very thought-provoking presentation, critical of all sides without condemning anyone. I think it's worth your consideration, whatever your thinking might be. I keep trying to find a quote I heard once from architect Louis Kahn. It goes something like this: Everything everyone says is the truth. It may be their truth, but it is nonetheless the truth. I think that's true here. People said what they think in this thread and told their truth, and some of it was hurtful. I know I got hurt, and that's why I left the thread. I hope someday we will be able to discuss these things without hurting each other. I thank the moderator who decided to close this thread. I think it was time. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Nov 15 - 04:35 AM Joe Offer, do me a big favour, please. Stop misrepresenting me. I did not object. Quite the opposite. I started an enquiry in this thread. You did this kind of thing an awful lot in the Pope thread and, in my view, that contributed greatly to the embittering of the atmosphere that you're getting so "hurt" about. And to others posting in this thread, until this post (which IS a complaint), I have not complained. Thank you! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Nov 15 - 04:48 AM If it looks like a duck... Quack! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 27 Nov 15 - 04:48 AM Of course you were complaining Steve. You said it was the weirdest thing you had ever seen and it brought the board into disrepute. How is that not a complaint? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST Date: 27 Nov 15 - 05:03 AM "And to others posting in this thread, until this post (which IS a complaint), I have not complained" Thought that was pretty clear. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,# Date: 27 Nov 15 - 05:13 AM I don't like anybody very much, so screw the lot of you. But have a nice day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: DMcG Date: 27 Nov 15 - 05:15 AM What made the thread that was closed interesting for me was the many byways we went down that had nothing specially to do with America and less to do with the Pope (and least of all where the Pope was) We had recently got onto the topic of whether law is supreme and when it might be appropriate to defy or at least bend it. I think it really unfortunate when we begin discussing something of relevance to everything from apartheid to radicalisation some would rather just call others names. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 27 Nov 15 - 06:44 AM One of the weirdest things I ever saw was a naked couple riding on a chopped motorcycle around a campsite in Rhos-on-sea. It could well have brought the site into disrepute. This is not a complaint regardless of what some people may think. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Kampervan Date: 27 Nov 15 - 09:02 AM Well, I don't think that there are any restrictions of free speech om Mudcat, and anyone who says there are should be banned. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,HiLo Date: 27 Nov 15 - 09:56 AM There really is no such thing as free speech, here or anywhere else. What we have is controlled speech. There are those who post here that others would deprive of any speech at all. So this "free speech" thing is a bit of a red herring. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: akenaton Date: 27 Nov 15 - 10:55 AM It's all in the hands of the moderators, Joe was a good moderator he let things roll(even things he disagreed with) until personal abuse replaced discussion, then he started removing posts and explaining why he removed them. Some of the moderators have strong views on WHAT can be discussed, not the manner of the discussion. This is never a positive in internet forums.....moderators need to make their point(if they feel they must) then step back and let civil discussion continue. Regarding moderation, they should guard against bullying, libel, and abuse.....and never get so involved that they begin to take sides on the subject matter. There are some posters who are never abusive, but are labelled as troublemakers due to their views on political and social matters, with which a majority of the membership disagree. On an internet forum, disagreement is positive, as an atheist I learned a lot from the views of Pete, Mr McGrath, DMcG, Joe and others, I am still not a believer, but I have started thinking seriously about what motivates these good people and how a spiritual dimension in ones life is an absolute necessity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST Date: 27 Nov 15 - 10:59 AM Of course, being able to put your comment after the thread was closed is a privilege. One that only one forum in the whole world tolerates. Mind you, it tolerates a lot of things that some people find upsetting. Free speech and bigotry are confused sometimes by terminally confused people. If religion was getting a pasting then either it's God can do something about it or perhaps the rational people fed up with having to pretend they respect the unrespectable are right in the first place. The thread had many people, in their own way, questioning the role of religion in society, which is well in tune with the thread title. As ever, ignorance starts a thread and ignorance tends to close it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST Date: 27 Nov 15 - 11:12 AM I agree completely with Ake. Once moderators start "moderating" positions and opinions that they don't support the forum is as good as finished. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,punkfolrocker Date: 27 Nov 15 - 11:18 AM Trusting mods is all very fine... If I were boss admin of a forum, I'd want to [say once a month] press a button to bring up a graph/chart of stats analysis of modding behaviour, just for the benefit of fairness & transparency to monitor the performance & quality of mods. Mods with an unusually high score of post deletions and thread closures would require closer scrutiny and maybe a a quick informal pm chat. Mods with a high intervention pattern on particular 'controversial' thread topics might require extra attention and additional 'feedback' pending review of their modding status and privileges....... This procedure shouldn't reqire too much time per month... seems fair enough to me.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Nov 15 - 12:06 PM How ironic...that the person who started whining about 'free speech' is the same person criticizing Joe's right to exercise his!!...AND is most abusive to any poster who, he feels, even alludes to anything that HE may construe as being 'religious'.... nor, can he see any correlation between anything spiritual, consistent with anything in physics...and yet claims to have taught 'science'...and science, itself, is thought to be the compilation of consistencies organized by an IMPARTIAL OBSERVER....and THAT, (the 'compilation of consistencies organized by an IMPARTIAL OBSERVER'), is even taught, and stressed in science classes and studies. Oh well.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Backwoodsman Date: 27 Nov 15 - 12:07 PM Free speech doesn't exist on this forum. There is a small cohort who seek to silence anyone and everyone whose opinions don't align with their own. They present their opinions as 'fact', declare their opponents '...ists' or 'bigots', and refuse point-blank to review and modify their own opinions in the light of perfectly reasonable and justifiable submissions by others. There are also Moderators who abuse their position by deleting posts they disagree with, or delete whole threads they don't like, or post their two cents-worth and then close the thread. No point bellyaching, it's the way it is. Live with it, or Foxtrot Oscar. Or do as I mostly do nowadays - lurk, read and piss your pants laughing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link Date: 27 Nov 15 - 12:14 PM I had just posted and it had just closed. a little frustrating, but I try to do shorter posts now precisely because of threads closing without warning. personal attacks are sadly getting too common. I don't worry about attacks on me ,as it only serves to highlight the abusers lack of substance in their opposition. it might be helpful if we were told if there are any subjects off limits 1, so we know what to avoid if possible , and 2, so the people that think that having a different opinion to them in and of itself, is offensive and abusive, have no excuse for complaining. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Mr Red Date: 27 Nov 15 - 12:34 PM what price free speech? responsibility |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST Date: 27 Nov 15 - 12:38 PM "what price free speech?" It's Black Friday today, probably 50% discount until midnight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Louie Roy Date: 27 Nov 15 - 12:45 PM I guess I'm lucky that I missed the original thread but as far as Joe Offer goes in my opinion over the years he has done a superb job. Maybe he didn't please all of us all the time but again in my opinion he was fair |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Stilly River Sage Date: 27 Nov 15 - 12:56 PM Hate speech, attacking others, and stalking aren't tolerated and when those posts go away the person who originally put them up acts offended, like their rights are being trampled. Those are the three things that tear up a good thread the fastest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,HiLo Date: 27 Nov 15 - 01:02 PM The problem Acme, is that people are often accused of "hate speech" or one the isms, just because they disagree with many others or, God forbid, they disagree with those who are always right. We do not all share the same definition of hate speech and isms, there is the problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Nov 15 - 01:22 PM ..and another observation...A few threads ago, (and I can't recall which thread), Joe gave a small list of those that he felt were more 'Conservative' or leaning that way....and it's those same people defending Joe, and the way he has conducted his duties on Mudcat...whereas, those who identify with being 'liberal', are the same name callers, those who label other people as bigots, racists, homophobic, and religious nutcases , and who disrupt threads with such antics, or the mods who delete posts which they don't agree with...and attack anyone who doesn't tow the 'party line', even when the 'party line' is completely misleading!!! ...just an impartial observation...observe it yourselves...then wonder about what some of you have fallen into, by manipulations, of a compassionate nature turned 'political'.... ...but then, a lot of those same people, are the ones who spend so much time arguing on here, because they can't win an argument with their spouses!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Rapparee Date: 27 Nov 15 - 01:23 PM Words and actions have consequences for which you are responsible. The rules for posting on the Mudcat Cafe are quite clear. Play by them or leave. This is not, and never was, a "democracy" or anything else other than a moderated forum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST Date: 27 Nov 15 - 01:42 PM Apparently, saying I shouldn't be allowed to marry, putting "" around marriage when applying to me and countless others, saying I have a sexually transmitted disease and that laws to make us all equal are pathetic all come under free speech eh? Even when the two worst perpetrators lie and twist health figures in order to substantiate their hatred? Oh, it's alright, they have free speech. Yet the worst creature is quite quick to run to moderators and claim that he has seen some imaginary solicitor when accurate observations about him are put out. Moderators close them down because free speech applies to homophobes but not offended gay men. Fuck off This hateful and pointed little rant is going to stay in place instead of being deleted to make a point. Because Musket/s can't just say something, they have to keep twisting the screw, bringing up again and again the thing they hate about the person they stalk, starting the same fight in a new location. GET OVER IT. Your life is yours, and the party you disagree with isn't going to change or go away. Neither of you will. Find something else to talk about. You kill a lot of threads with this particular running battle, and logging on as an anonymous guest or as Harry Forest or anyone else doesn't disguise the huge chip on your shoulder. I would hazard that many moderators agree with your political views, but what is deleted is the stalking behavior. ---annoyed mudelf |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,HiLo Date: 27 Nov 15 - 01:43 PM You have missed the point Rap, totally. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST,HiLo Date: 27 Nov 15 - 01:52 PM If free speech does not apply to everyone, then there is no free speech. Ugly as some of the views expressed here are, on both left and right , they do fall under free speech. The answer is to continually challenge those views. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Joe Offer Date: 27 Nov 15 - 02:51 PM So, HiLo, what is or is not being done at Mudcat that affects free speech? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: gnu Date: 27 Nov 15 - 04:39 PM "Some of the moderators have strong views on WHAT can be discussed, not the manner of the discussion." Here's some free speech... bullshit. "I don't like anybody very much, so screw the lot of you. But have a nice day." Ditto that free speech eh? 13C here today. Very windy. Gonna drop temp and rain and snow tonight. Yes, the weather is far more important to me than |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Kampervan Date: 27 Nov 15 - 04:56 PM This real issue here is not 'free speech', debate, discussion or persuasion. It is about the freedom for certain individuals to be as rude, insulting and personally vindictive as they chose. It is not what I come to this forum for and I don't believe that it is what the majority of the members of Mudcat want. More to the point, if it is not what the founder, owner and moderators want, then those who don't like it should seek a different forum. If I am wrong, and these people do have a place here, then I, like too many before me, will go elsewhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Nov 15 - 05:15 PM Well shiver me timbers. I think I'm being too subtle. My original post was a sardonic observation on yet another piece of Mudcat moderatorial clumsiness. Not a complaint, not a rant against censorship or the "attack on free speech." How many times do have to say it. THIS...IS...NOT...MY...GIG. I come to the gig and I contribute. Generally speaking, I refrain from calling people names these days. I won't get specific, but at least three confounded idiots post to this thread, yet they are all given a free pass. The three confounded idiots in question all suck up to the moderators and manage to persuade them that they're harmless duffers (one of which is but two of which are decidedly not, but when you've flattered the mods you can get away with anything). I'm not a confounded idiot and I don't suck up to anyone. I'm not in anyone's team. In that thread I repeatedly challenged Joe Offer's denial and he got more and more bitter and aggressive. He called me lots of names. Don't arse about here, jumping to his defence like an automaton because you're his mate. Go and read the thread. It's much harder work to do that and do the collar work and ditch the prejudice that it is to be lazily prejudiced. My posts were detailed, to the point, reactive and direct. I asked one question over and over again, is it right to tell children lies in school about God and Jesus instead of the plain truth, which is that there is no evidence for their existence. Joe's allies alleged that the question was answered but "not to Steve's satisfaction." Well it wasn't answered AT ALL! I didn't go on that thread to be Mr Spock or to twist the knickers of believers. They managed that very well for themselves, if you read the thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What price free speech, Mudcat? From: GUEST Date: 27 Nov 15 - 05:24 PM Another Musket/s clone with a huge chip on his shoulder - give it up FFS, most of us are sick of the repetitive song you are singing. |