BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?

Subject: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: keberoxu
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 12:08 PM

Recently closed threads give food for thought,
especially the below-the-line ones.

When posts from members display verbal aggression, contention, and combativeness,
is it a family feud
or a territorial power play?

Why is it so important to have the last word
that one member's shrewd suggestion,
about ignoring posts of a certain sort,
goes unremarked and disregarded?

Is the Mudcat the place
to demonstrate where one is in the metaphorical food chain?

Speaking for me,
many of my posts have been called out
for bad manners or trolling or whatever name;
and slow and stubborn as I am,
I have not lost my temper over it --
it is more productive, if more challenging,
to reflect on my behavior [Yankee spelling]
and to make an attempt, however grudging,
to stop giving offense.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 01:23 PM

What k said.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 01:37 PM

Self indulgent navel gazing..

Interfering busy bodies wearing fake halos don't go unnoticed..

k is as much a shit stirrer as any other mudcatters she feels morally superior to...!!!

I say this honestly without malice...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Senoufou
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 02:13 PM

I have always found keberoxu to be very kind, caring and interesting too. But it's sadly true that some people on Mudcat see the forum as a sort of virtual boxing ring and have to have the last punch every time.
I think it boils down to each individual's personal manners and character. Some folk are naturally pugnacious and confrontational. I expect in real life they're a bit prickly and readily bite back when they don't agree with a comment.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 02:18 PM

Sen - I won't dispute Keb is all these positive things we respect,
but she is also a bit of a sanctimonious shit stirrer..

..none of us are perfect...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 02:24 PM

It's usually people with passionately held view being attacked by those who would rather abuse the holder of those views that discuss them rationally in my opinion
In my experience people who have thought out their views seldom revert to aggression - they believe their views are worth discussing and airing - that goes across the spectrum of beliefs and opinions
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 02:42 PM

Anyone taking bets on whether this thread will last an longer than the others? I suppose it gives those sensitive souls who love to tut at the behaviour of other a chance to be sanctimonious.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 02:49 PM

Keboroxu:

What a great opening post! I have felt intense pleasure, animosity, inspiration, and illumination from various posts and posters. Just a few minutes ago I was reading a very old thread where various 'catters posted favorite poems. It was a treasury of clever and sage and funny.

So I say Mudcat is what we've made it. Some elements of care, many of us 'striving to be right'.

I think it's been held together by the common love of music and travails of many being musicians. And by the communities that many of us represent. And by events.

But it's also been a constant. Mudcat must be one of the longer maintained community addresses on the Web. It's got a bit of a history.

Hence much credit for whatever it is goes to the originators, the maintainers, and the moderators.

But you asked a question and I owe you an answer a bit more specific than 'both'. I'm gonna say it's a family. We've brought not only information but also emotion to these little text windows. But it's not the same as blood family... That's where a great American poet lugubriously said...."Family- That's when you have to go there, they have to take you in!" Was that Sandburg or Frost?

(So I answered a question ultimately with a question).

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: keberoxu
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 03:08 PM

Frost, if I recall right.
Thanks for the encouragement.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 04:52 PM

I'm backing you up here, pfr. The person who started this thread seems vulnerable and needy but she's also a shit stirrer, as you say. The OP is a prime example. There are many facets to the average personality. Bolting on extra facets of straightforwardness and honesty is always a good idea.

Be prepared for the pair of us to be jumped on for seeing through it, mate...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 05:39 PM

keberoxu.. it is really not possible these days to even ask about it

.. and it seems that any attempt to rationally discuss such concerns is taken as 'bait' and becomes an excuse to critique and analyze both motives and character.

Some need to look up "self-fulling hypothesis".

"It was all so different before everything changed"

I see the entire complex 'I know what a troll is, and cherish to right to say so' debate heading for a denouement.
   If it happens, remember where you heard it.

Y'all take care..

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 06:36 PM

it is really not possible these days to even ask about it

Bill - There would be no problem at all if it was someone of your calibre and objectivity
who was doing the 'asking'...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 07:24 PM

You got it, pfr. 'Bout time you put in a bid to run this bloody website...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 08:10 PM

I, personally, consider questions and opinions should be considered on their own merits, and NOT by who authored them.

I may indeed be suspicious of the motives of someone I already have reservations about, but I don't (usually) make that part of my public responses. As I have said, I have debated several folks at length.. on various issues... but I **tried** to argue the issue and not to call their character into question... even when I had issues with it.

I struggled with Shambles.. and Pete.. and several others... without directly insulting them... and as far as I remember, the only direct insult I got was a half-hearted one from Martin Gibson.

I am quite aware of the tendency of some to "call a spade a spade" and not mince words-- but when several of those are on the same thread, things just simply escalate as each defends his 'right' to free speech.
I'm reminded of this... stretch the metaphor to fit...

"Here lies the body of Henry Grey,
Who died defending his right-of-way.
He was right, dead right as he sped along,
But he's just as dead as if he'd been dead wrong."

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 08:36 PM

Bill - I studied moral philosophy, and concepts of belief/ideology
as a major part of my Humanities degree back in the early 1980s..

What I think might be a difference between us,
is that when I was a student, we were taught not to just take an individual
or institution's arguments in isolation, at face value, on neutral terms;
but to actively analyse the core bias and motives of the people communicating them..

Then address the people behind their smokescreens, with clear focus..

Such was the trend in British higher education I experienced in that era,
which is to a large extent still ingrained in my character & intelligence now...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 08:36 PM

The right to free speech is an obsession of you yanks, Bill. Over here, most of us not on the far right don't see that as a cherished right at all. We see it as both a right and a responsibility and we see limits. You simply can't just say what you want. If what you say isn't measured and carefully considered, if it's hurtful, hateful or prejudicial, you have forfeited your right to say what you want. This is a massive problem with this forum. The moderators here, who don't actually act as moderators at all, seem scared of shutting up even the most hateful kind of speech. In the last couple of days, two of them are actually indulging in it themselves. The upshot is that decent (yet combative: bejaysus, not exactly a mortal sin...) people are openly insulted (currently by one man, Iains, and, unlike those "mods," I'm not scared to name his name). Now I don't know about you, Bill, but I personally don't care to be insulted openly on a public forum. You keep yourself carefully off the front line, as it were, a fine strategy for avoiding insults, and I recognise that as a valid ploy. But decent and lusty political discussion requires heads above parapets. Political discussion walking on eggshells is a total con. But lusty discussion shouldn't invite "shaw/backwardsman/little jimmie" (and I wouldn't blame you had you not seen any of that, but it happens. A lot). Yes we can avoid it by caving in to our resident idiot-troll. Of course. But we love talking and we are human beings, and I wouldn't take his insults in the pub or in my house, so why here?

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: keberoxu
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 09:08 PM

A line has just been crossed,
a line which has been openly delineated and defended
long before on the Mudcat.

And so this thread's days are numbered.

I say again;
family?
or,
territory?

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 09:11 PM

You crossed the line with your tendentious and disingenuous troublemaking opening post. The rest of us have tried, somewhat, to rationalise things for you. Deal with it.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: keberoxu
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 09:12 PM

Oh, and thanks, Bill D.

I may not be a grown-up yet,
but you are the sort of grown-up
that I aspire to be.
(maybe in a future life)

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 09:24 PM

You have this one life. You can choose to grow up or not. I never want to grow up. Always stay childlike but not childish. That way you will always love life, love the world, always want to find out more and not lust after something that a hundred billion sperms and a million eggs never got the opportunity to sample, because the one sperm and one egg that got there first to make you kicked all the others into touch. Carpe diem and stop whingeing. You're a winner.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: keberoxu
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 09:27 PM

guess who's done for the night?

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 09:49 PM

family?
or,
territory?"

Neither, of these two over-simplistic alternative propositions..

One is too sentimentalist,
the other too accepting of nationalism and protectionism..

Your opening post tends towards passive aggressive hypocrisy,
considering your unhelpful interventions in British politics threads..
imho...

[You seemed to be asking us for comments on your behaviour,
and I hope my honest constructive replies are helpful...]


I like to think of mudcat as an international shared interest community
of very diverse folks and opinions..
Amicable is preferable to antagonism..

I come here for education and stimulation,
challenging debate,
and an occasional good laugh with virtual mates.
Somewhere to pop in a few times a day for short breaks from all the stressful problems
of daily life...

Like so many others, I have invested many years of my life in this site,
and don't need any other social media..
Which I only visit when absolutely unavoidable..
.. and I want mudcat to continue long into the future..

A future I hope we all still have...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: mg
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 10:10 PM

family..well, i had an abusive mother so i have no desire for optional abuse. one person here i consider very abusive and i would have no contact whatsoever. i would not remain in the same room with him/her.. another i would be civil more or less and not really interact and remove myself as quickly as possible. another i would not consider totally abusive and i would be civil and would have no desire to interact but might not try to escape immediately as i think he or she has some redeeming qualities. there are others that were in the past and are hopefully not around.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 25 Apr 20 - 10:31 PM

Lots of Mudcat-centric discussion going on lately. These never end well.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 03:35 AM

"These never end well."
True Maggie, but they are necessary
I don't want to think of a world where we are unable to discuss how we are governed, but that seems a popular destination with some
Our premlem here is it only takes one individual out to cause trouble to bring the whole structure crashing to the floor
Some of us react rather than stay silent and bang goes the whole sheebang
Sweeping this under the carpet worsens the situation by spreading the resentment
Open government woks better for me - pass it on
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Iains
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 03:50 AM

There is a peculiar arrogance displayed by several here. They are guests and presume to dictate to the site moderators what should or should not be tolerated, and who should or should not be allowed to participate.

Such bubbles of delusion demand constant pricking.

---

Iains - get off of your two-faced soap box. Consider this your final warning - you are the major troll tormentor at Mudcat these days. We see you calculating just what types of posts and when will set off an undisciplined set of thread participants. The "Mod Squad" has discussed this extensively - and you're on the top of the "to go" list. See this size of this font? Not subtle. --mudelf

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Iains
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 04:36 AM

THOSE WHO SPEND THEIR TIME LOOKING FOR THE FAULTS IN OTHERS
USUALLY MAKE.NO TIME TO CORRECT THEIR OWN.
Art Jonak

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 04:44 AM

Well, he got the other Mudcat-centric discussion closed. I suppose it will happen here before long.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 04:49 AM

What a world of trite homilies we do live in.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 06:40 AM

But isn't homily where the heartily is?

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 07:23 AM

The question of family or... is a bit inane, we know who are family is and to a lesser degree where we are.

A better question is who 'invited' you here?

I come here to hear people who are smarter than me and learn different POVs. In 'real' everyday life there is alot of stupidity out there but in mudcat town, it is to a delightful lesser degree. Its even fun when I learn the stupid one was me. But over the years my elders are mostly gone and I try to fill their shoes which I can't do. With the help of others I am reassured some of my opinions are shared. Other opinions are still unique to me - just like everyone else.

I was 'invited' by two gracious ladies at two separate times..

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: keberoxu
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 08:50 AM

Families are not without conflict. Who says otherwise?

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: keberoxu
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 09:04 AM

From whom is this quote?

"Maybe I'll do it like the old days
and get both sides mad at me
instead of each other."

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 10:46 AM

PFR... you said:
"... What I think might be a difference between us,
is that when I was a student, we were taught not to just take an individual or institution's arguments in isolation, at face value, on neutral terms; but to actively analyse the core bias and motives of the people communicating them..

Then address the people behind their smokescreens, with clear focus..

Such was the trend in British higher education I experienced in that era, which is to a large extent still ingrained in my character & intelligence now... "

I must say, I am curious who 'taught' that form of analysis and whether it was represented as classical moral philosophy or was merely the interpretation by some particular individual(s). Whichever, it explains a lot. It feels to me like a charter to do battle... and if those who you analyze and find wanting were taught the same basic concept, it is a formula for incessant bickering.

   Myself... I was a philosophy major with 130+ hours of courses, and for 2 years a graduate teaching fellow. I have background in metaphysics, phenomenology, logic, Phil. of Science, 'moral' philosophy such as Kant's "Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals" and various bits of Aristotle's treatises.
Nowhere was I 'taught' to call into question the character and biases of those I disagreed with. We had long discussions on the merits and premises of each other's opinions, but seldom did I ever see progress if insults and character were inserted.
   I simply cannot fathom how the background you tout can solve anything. It gives ANYONE the excuse to ... to.. ummmm come to an internet forum and not only disagree with others, but to impugn their motives and character... and when I see someone say "It's OBVIOUS that you are a ****", I can only shake my head & shrug.
Various members want other members censure or censored or 'sent off' based on, evidently, the sort of 'moral philosophy' you say was part of British Higher Education back then. I'm not sure if any of the other 'concerned members' in recent months claim the same basis, but superficially, it looks that way... and saying THAT.. by me.. strays way too close to the attitude I decry!

Everyone knows.... it cannot go on like this. Something's got to give....

ummm Steve Shaw.. I am still considering how to approach your comments, as they include both sensible analysis and personal grievances and premises similar to what PFR suggested. If this thread persists, I'll see if I can sort thru them. I have a lot of other things on my plate right now.

And keberoxu..*blush* thanks for the vote of confidence..

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Mossback
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 12:37 PM

Iains - get off of your two-faced soap box. Consider this your final warning - you are the major troll tormentor at Mudcat these days... and you're on the top of the "to go" list.

Has Joe approved this message?

Promises, promises.

Money...mouth..........

---

Joe doesn't need to approve this message. As a rule he works above the line, other moderators work below. But everyone knows about this status.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 12:41 PM

Bill - This is my quick recollection of 40 years ago..
My memory has got much worse in the last decade..

Brit Higher Ed was divided into traditional errmmm.. 'conservative' Universities..
and modern Polytechnics, which were establishing their place in the pecking order..

Snobby Unis looked down on plebby Polys..

The Polys were at the forefront of Communications and Media Studies degrees,
which appealed to my generation of radical politicised young musicians, artists, wannabe film makers, etc..

This was at the time of the popular Anti N@zi and Rock Against Racism
British youth movements..

The Polys and Unis were at the same time informing and responding to this shift in British culture..

Though most Unis still seemed to be clinging onto their traditional elitist foundations..

My degree at Bristol Poly - a very radical progressive British City,
was mainly devised by lecturers who had been students during the late 1960s
counter culture and radical student protests..

Marxists, Feminists, Anarchists, etc.. middle class radicals..
Some of those lecturers were inspiring, others just intolerant nasty human beings..

That's a potted gist back story..

What I got out of Moral Philosophy was the concepts of "Moral Education" and "Moral Maturity".
Which informed the rest of my life.
I can no longer remember the finer points of books I read,
or which philosopher said what;
but the principle stick with me..

What WE got from the communications, ideological, and media studies modules of the degree,
was the the essential need for critical analysis of the bias and motives
of the communicator,
which could be more far important to consider,
than the leading loaded words they used to manipulate those on the receiving end of their messages...

Recognise and identify the intentions of the communicator,
and the intended strategies of their messages
in influencing target audiences.
Then engage and challenge in order to counter them, and increase awareness of their motives..

[Key theorist names I remember were Gramsci and Althusser ..
but again, I barely remember a word of it now..]

I'm sure such trends must have also existed at the same time in areas of USA Highre education...???

I believe the skills we students acquired of critiquing the writers as much as the contents of their messages,
is a very positive approach when dealing with media propagandists,
and manipulative social media personalities...

A very GOOD thing, which conservatives are keen to stamp down on..

Please forgive my impaired memory, and hasty writing..
I'm preoccupied cooking a massive leftovers curry...

..and this is the first time I've tried to remember these things in a very long time...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 01:32 PM

Not sure which of my comments you refer to, Bill. I've always fully recognised how two-dimensional any online forum is. As such, I switch very quickly between what happens on here and the realities of normal life (in case, I'm glad to say that they are mostly pleasant realities, apart from this bloody bad back...). As such, your remark about personal grievances is a bit off-beam. If that's the way I felt about anyone around here I'd be off to my psychiatrist (I'd have to find one first). What I do feel is irritation about being a recipient of gratuitous insults, directed both at me and at others. I can guess at the motives of the offender but I don't regard him as anything like an important enough part of my life to be arsed about that. The fact that he prevents normal (yet feisty and lusty) discussion about controversial matters is very disappointing and frustrating. Irritation, frustration, annoyance definitely, and I don't mind being direct about it (often a mistaken approach, I admit, but I am very much a head-above-parapet bloke...). Grievances and vendettas on the other hand are soul-destroying. He's not worth it...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 01:42 PM

Bill - what I forgot to add..

is that we MUST conduct such critical analysis and challenging,
I described,
in a calm reasonable rational manner..

Anger and violence is counter productive...

well.. that's my personal belief..


Though, when folks start to get nasty, I get sarcastic...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 01:57 PM

I think it boils down to each individual's personal manners and character. Some folk are naturally pugnacious and confrontational. I expect in real life they're a bit prickly and readily bite back when they don't agree with a comment, QUOTE SENOFOU.
My experience is different,i never judge people on what they say on this forum, because the internet is in some ways a a poor way of communicating there is no body language with any of these posts. KEITH A for example i met him he was a pleasant man who loved singing and trad music was courteous and polite in person, different from how he came over sometimes on this forum

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 02:03 PM

"Here lies the body of Henry Grey,
Who died defending his right-of-way.
He was right, dead right as he sped along,
But he's just as dead as if he'd been dead wrong." quote intersting i know this as
"Here lies the body of Henry Grey,
Who died defending his right-of-way.he was right dead right all the way ,he was dead all right at the end of the day

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 02:40 PM

Sandman.. yes, details differ as folks mentally edit words and add things. I hear jokes told that I knew years ago that have been changed ...usually by shortening them and losing the impact of a careful buildup.

Henry Grey's story comes across either way.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Mossback
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 02:55 PM

As a rule he works above the line, other moderators work below.

Are those "alternative facts? a la Trump perchance?

How many "below the line" interventions/comments/etc of his would you like me to quote verbatim? Give me 10 minutes and I can give you at least a dozen recent ones...

Thanks,

Bill

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 03:18 PM

Man, I had a long post to another thread that, by the time I finished polishing it the thread had been closed, and, when I looked again in case there had been a glitch, the thread had been deleted.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 03:22 PM

PFR... "..we MUST conduct such critical analysis and challenging, I described, in a calm reasonable rational manner.."

*grin*.. and when those you critique don't view your manner as either rational OR reasonable? That's the usual reaction and why I tend to avoid it.
My education was from the late 50s to the late 60s and into 1971. I've no doubt the "counter culture and radical student protests were a little different in the UK.. and very different from conservative Kansas where I went to school.... although my school was an oasis of fairly free, open ideas in a very conservative town & state.
What I gleaned was how to evaluate different philosophical views from many angles, with an emphasis on seeing possible flaws in their construction. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy...especially the part about informal fallacies. There are many sites which try to explain them and a pretty long list when you look at the sub-categories... but there are some very standard ones. (see the bottom of that page for links)
   (I actually have a shelf of books devoted to various forms of linguistic and rational error...some humorous, some serious). It is not something to try to memorize, but rather a collection of problematic ways that people 'rationalize' ideas they already accept by instinct or belief system. There's no way to know the RIGHT answer to anything by using them as a guide, but there are many ways to recognize a flawed way to defend a claim or viewpoint! We all have seen someone use a bad argument to support even the right answer.. and when the same argument form is used to defend wrong answers... well, you have Donald Trump.. and others.

   To me, the issue is whether one approach is practical under certain conditions... here at Mudcat I prefer to avoid direct confrontation and head-butting and character assassination even when they are acting like @$&*&%#@... I will critique answers, but not people. IF I think someone's attitude, belief or reasoning is beyond help, I will state MY position and end the discussion.

Yes... this is way too much for a single post... but umm.. this is the short form! After 23 years at Mudcat, I have a number of examples... *sigh*

Thanks for YOUR input...Now, let's see if I can find a way to answer Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 03:55 PM

Steve.. ".. the realities of normal life (in case, I'm glad to say that they are mostly pleasant realities, apart from this bloody bad back...)"

You mentioned years ago that you dealt with a lot of pain/discomfort almost everyday. I often wonder how such a life affects a viewpoint. I know that I get decidedly grumpy and short when *I* have aches & pains.
... but apart from speculation on that...you said " What I do feel is irritation about being a recipient of gratuitous insults, directed both at me and at others." Well... of course.. but then
   "The fact that he prevents normal (yet feisty and lusty) discussion about controversial matters is very disappointing and frustrating. Irritation, frustration, annoyance definitely, and I don't mind being direct about it.." Yes... that's clear... and others seem to agree with that approach. Then:

"(often a mistaken approach, I admit, but I am very much a head-above-parapet bloke...). "

So..your basic answer is similar to Popeye.. "I yam what I yam". It is an honest answer and no doubt a clear & accurate one. I have never encountered the "head-above-parapet" phrase before, but I think I get the gist of it. It resembles some I have heard like "I don't suffer fools gladly." and "I don't take no shit of nobody." and a woman my mother knew years ago who said "If somebody 'does me somethin', I'll stay up all night thinkin' of somethin' to do 'em back!" (she was Cajun, from New Orleans.)

I am not trying to put words in your mouth, but merely trying to suggest that almost any criticism that involves "That's just how I am, take it or leave it." is, to many either the end of the discussion or a dare. *shrug*
I fear I am treading on thin ice here. I hope you and others see that what I wish is for less confrontation and what Backwoodsman said earlier.. "ignore" If several folks say "I can't ignore trolls and I WILL call them out.", then it will continue until threads are closed and other sanctions applied.

I hope that doesn't happen...but.. 20 years of similar conflicts have gone that way...

... and that's the way *I* am...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 05:15 PM

"It is an honest answer and no doubt a clear & accurate one. I have never encountered the "head-above-parapet" phrase before, but I think I get the gist of it. It resembles some I have heard like "I don't suffer fools gladly." and "I don't take no shit of nobody."

I'm amazed that you've never heard that expression, Bill. It decidedly DOESN'T mean that I don't suffer fools gladly, or that I take no shit, etc. Nothing to do with any of that. It means that I'm brave enough (or daft enough) to post under my real name and say what I think without worrying too much about any comeback, which I'm always prepared to take (and I do apologise if I get things wrong, and I think I've done that on this board more than most people, though I'll let others do the count). As a matter of fact, posting under my real name often gives me pause, believe it or not, and I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't know who most of the people here actually are. There's Doug, there's Jim, there's Brian, there's even Joe Offer. Life would be so much better if we all knew who we were talking to. I wouldn't talk to anyone in a real pub who had a cardboard box on their head...

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 05:43 PM

It is said that the best reason for taking an instant dislike against someone is that it saves time.

Just at the moment time is not in such a short supply as usual.

If I disagree with someone I first try to establish why they have a different view to me, have I missed something. If I can identify something that they have missed then I have the basis of a conversation.

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 05:46 PM

When I read, albeit slowly, I am not just reading what is being said but gravitate to the motivation or experiences that cause the writer to take their point of view. I look to see the motivation of comunication as being psychologicaly influenced or some other factor be it manipulation or academic straight forward transfer of information. I then judge what and why it is this being said. This is closer to PFR's notion of looking for bias and why it might exist. I do not however knee jerk into automatically critisizing because I know I have existing bias experiences as well.

When I write, even more slowly, I try to say what I mean despite a playful proclivity to use words and form imo creatively.

Maybe my dyslexic mind is more subjective than average or maybe not, I don't know others reality. My objective-centric wife gave up on the notion of dyslexia and calls it learning disability, to my dismay.

I recognize the mind has the subjective side and objective side and people may have different dominance of which brain they use. The luckiest probably have equal dominance. I suspect the objectivists are the scrappiest.

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 06:11 PM

Because because because because BECAUSE, Mersey. Don't you bloody start! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: The Mudcat: family, or territory?
From: keberoxu
Date: 26 Apr 20 - 06:27 PM

What I wanted, more than anything,
was to open a window and to get some fresh air into the room,
so to speak.

I could not find this thread more gratifying.

---

Enough of stirring up everyone. Let's not have any more introspective Mudcat threads, shall we?