New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'

Subject: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 01:07 PM

WARNING: DON'T READ ANY FURTHER IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR A BIT OF THE WAY IT "USED TO BE"....

Never thought I'd feel this way, and now, find myself in agreement with the longer-time Mudcatters who said the same types of things when I was a newbie....so maybe it is just part of the Mudcat experience, to reach this point of semi-curmudgeonliness, BUT anyway...

when the BS designation first came about, it was generally to denote a thread which was about someting worthwhile that just wasn't specifically music related. Often music did enter into it, eventually. I am NOT saying every BS thread was fantastic, some were very silly, BUT we did have some great, thought-provoking subjects such as compassion or honesty; Liberal Education; Passing the Torch; On Killing and War; Hokey Pokey and the Druids and many more.

Anyway, I am really saddened at the inanity which seems to prevail today. When someone posts such threads as "Don't post to this thread" or "XXX sex etc." and others, I am suggesting the use of "UN" as a designator at the beginning of the thread title. This would stand for "Utter Nonsence."

Okay, I know this will offend some people and they will attack me, but that seems to be the modus operandi of the Mudcat these days, so what the hell...hopefully most will consider it and take the time to understand that it has a lot to do with how the Mudcat is these days and why there are many good people who just aren't posting much anymore because of it...BSEED, Lonesome EJ, Dave Swan, Don Meixner, Art Thieme, Frank Hamilton, Sandy Paton, and Dan Milner, to name a few.

Thanks,

kat

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: DougR
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 01:30 PM

I get your point, kat, but I'm not sure how it would solve the problem. The designation of a UN wouldn't bring those people back would it? They probably aren't posting as much because they think the threads you describe are silly and a waste of time anyway. Just my opinion, of course. DougR

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: hesperis
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 01:37 PM

Most of the people who aren't posting as much are still posting on the music threads, as far as I know.
I do think that the designation is a good idea though, for those of the 'Cat who want to concentrate on music.
Would it make a difference though?
In some of the threads that were started as total BS, we did end up back at music...
$0.02

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Mrrzy
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 01:55 PM

I also want to recommend another set of thread types: History Info requests/adds. Sometimes what people are interested in is either the history behind the lyrics (à la my Tom Dooley thread) or behind the tune (à la what my Thy Cheek Is Of The Rose's Hue thread crept into). I'd like to add a Hist. Req. and Hist. Add categories.

But about your suggestion, katwitha(nother)goodidea, I started using BS for non-musical stuff but soon switched to adding NONMUSIC in the thread title, in deference to someone who'd asked for that. So I use BS when I want to chat about something musical that doesn't fall under Lyrics Requested, Lyrics Add, or Help categories, and BS (NON-MUSIC) for the ones I just think people who share one interest might ALSO like to discuss. Under this category I include my Joe Lieberman thread. I don't think I am guilty of posting anything nonmusical that pissed anyone off, in fact I tend to get Good Thread Mrrzy comments. (Feel free to correct me on this one! But kindly, please!) But I do think that just because we all have an interest in music in common doesn't mean we have nothing else in common. Anyone who doesn't want to participate in a thread, don't. Just click Back and go on to the next one. I don't understand why people who don't want to participate in one thread feel that others shouldn't be either, so they post things like This thread is crap. If you think it's crap, don't post to it. But just because YOU think it's crap doesn't mean it IS. Opinions aren't facts.

Rant off.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Pseudolus
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 02:25 PM

Wouldn't it be nice if we could "hide" the threads that we don't want to see? Kinda like trace but the opposite. You click on hide and then the thread never comes up again. Hey, I can dream can't I???

I'm also a firm believer that someone who requests upgrades should be willing to help fund the project. Considering my current finances, I'd like to say, this is NOT a request!! *G*

I do understand the reason behind the request but I wonder if the folks who post the threads qualifying as "UN" would agree that they qualify. Could be a futile project.

Frank

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 02:31 PM

I agree with you, kat. Threads like xxxsex are not why I'm here- if something like that, implying that it's offering porn, showed up on my email, I would delete it forthwith. Why in the world would I want that subject being offered on my favorite website? I consider anyone who would begin such a thread seriously lacking in judgment.

If we- meaning any of us- got into that kind of posting, I'd be out of here. I like sex as well as the next one but I have no interest in cyber-sex. I agree with those who posted warnings in relation to that particular thread. It is not a door we want to open, and I wish the thread would fall off the map.

Those threads like 'Don't Post to this Thread I take no umbrage at; I suppose there could be valuable responses to them- but how would you ever find them again?? Seems like a big waste of time.

My rant setting is now off.

Ebbie

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: IvanB
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 02:43 PM

kat, I agree in principle on the types of threads we're getting nowadays, but I don't know if the acronym you're suggesting will get much use. Frankly, if I thought something I wanted to start a thread about was utter nonsense, I'd think twice about starting the thread. I'm not sure others will be anymore willing than I to label their threads as nonsense. I do wish we could reach some sort of consensus on thread naming that would include a few more descriptive acronyms, so we'd all have a better idea of a thread's content without having to open it, but I don't know if that's likely to happen.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 03:40 PM

Excellent suggestion but . . .

This is not the only forum, newsgroup, message board, or whatever that I lurk on. I am a promiscuous lurker and I've been doing it for a while.

Bottom line: I am happy with the Mudcat Forum just exactly the way it is. If you think this site has problems you really should get out more often and visit others.

So, no matter what prefixes mudcatters choose to use or ignore, what topics musically relevant or otherwise they choose to discuss, I still find it consistently very easy for me to decide whether I want to view a thread. Sure, I am occasionally mislead or mystified by the title, but no system works perfectly and it does not happen to me often enough to be a significant annoyance. I also don't begrudge the existence of other threads that I don't find interesting enough to participate in. Finally, Mudcat invariably dangles enough interesting (to me) threads to keep me coming back.

Admittedly the level and tone of the contributions are sometimes wanting, but for the threads I follow, the contributions I consider valuable are always a significant majority.

I'm not complaining about complaints. I enjoy those threads too. Keep 'em coming. But to quote another lurker in another thread, "the better the forum, the more complaints about it."

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 05:46 PM

Mrrzy - the thread type designators are optional. You can leave the designator blank and title a thread however you want. "History of Such-and-such" or "Background of So-and-so" would work fine. However, I would suggest that it's not a good idea to split music discussions by having too many threads on the same song. If there's an existing lyrics request or lyrics add thread on a song, it's better to continue the discussion there.

As for adding yet another thread designatior, I hope we don't.
I sure wish the SEX XXX thread would die. A Boy Scout came in this afternoon, asking for lyrics to Scout Vespers and Home on the Range. His thread was right next to the sex thread, last time I looked. I don't mind open discussions about anything and everything, but sometimes I wish we had a little more "class" in the titles that appear on our Forum Menu.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 05:55 PM

Thanks, Joe, that is pretty much what I was trying to say, too..the class thing...appreciate it.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Bert
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 06:06 PM

As Joe says, you can choose you own title for your thread. If certain prefixes crop up and hang around for a while I'm sure that Max would consider putting them in his pull down list.

In the mean time just use whatever you want, explain it, and see if it catches on.

Well I kinda liked the XXX thread. I love bawdy songs and it gave me an opportunity to mention @BAWDY. After all if it weren't for sex there'd be no folk.
If enough people like it, it will hang around for a while otherwise it will sink. As Mrrzy says...'If you think it's crap, don't post to it.'

Bert. (now I'm gonna have to try to think of a 'UN' thread to start)

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Max
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 06:07 PM

But where oh where did it go? Hmmm. Felt like deleting this one too.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 06:10 PM

If you feel the need, please do, Max.

I was just coming in here to say thanks to whomever deleted that one! You know I have never been in favour of censorship, but Joe has a point...some of the the pickings, according to titles, have been pretty low-class recently.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 06:22 PM

kat/katlaughing,

Your presence here is obviously highly valued and respected. You have so much to offer the Mudcat. However, I hope you can understand that one person's nonsense is another person's fun. The Greenman Mudcat Tavern obviously has meaning for you. That's good. It feels like nonsense to me, so I have not posted to it. On the other hand, there is meaning for me in some of the postings to the Don't Post to This Thread, thread, even though to you it seems like nonsense.

I agree, however, that thread titles that can cause problems for the Mudcat should probably be left off of the forum.

With great warmth and respect,

Carol

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 06:36 PM

Thank you, CarolC, yes I can see that and I appreciate your posting.

I know you just used the Tavern one as an example, but for anyone who might not know, the Tavern threads have a great and long history on the Mudcat and have been ongoing for over a year. In their own way, they have served as very healing for Mudcatters in the tradition of the first one which was started as an antidote to some very nasty stuff that had gone on.

I really do NOT have a problem staying out of threads I do not care for; what I don't like is the overall tone of many of the BS threads lately...they make the Mudcat seem low-class...and I know it is not.

Oh, well, it is an old debate and I probably should never have said anything. Max, if you still have an itchy finger...this one should die. Thanks,

kat

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Max
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 06:51 PM

Please note that I was asked to delete the thread by the thread's creator. That, the lack of anything interesting in its content and Joe's thoughts were the factors in my decision to delete that thread.

Joe, do you address such issues in the Newcomers Guide?

kat, perhaps this may have been most appropriately addressed in the Newcomers Guide thread. I'm not being critical, I just want to isolate these type discussions in an environment we are more free to delete messages once the issue has been addressed and summarized by Joe.

All Community Commentary/Critiques/Complaints/Suggestions should be discussed in specific place with the implicit understanding that most will be deleted in time. Sort of a mudiquette permathread concept.

Just thinking out loud I guess. I feel the community nature of the Mudcat is glorious. I would not ever want to do anything to discourage it. However, my little overactive mind always thinks about the data. Without changing too much of the technology, I always like to create/preserve/enhance the reference like ability of the discussion forum. There is a lot of great knowledge and information in this forum, and I want people to be able to find it... fast.

Some of our discussions are timely, so they may not make sense down the road. I just feel that once the issue has been dealt with, and perhaps documented or legislated, the discussion needs not take up space in the database and potentially disrupt the real point and process of the Mudcat, as in Joe's case noted above.

Bla, bla, bla.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 06:57 PM

Good thoughts, Max and new to me, re' the discussing of these types of things in that specific thread. I think that is a terrific idea and would welcome it.

So, as the one who started this thread, how about it gets moved to the newcomer's OR you start a permathread for such content as you noted above, OR you go ahead and delete the thing? Whatever is fine with me...I really like your concepts.

Thanks,

kat

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: SeanM
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 07:05 PM

In the meantime, in the interest of what's stated above, click on the The Newcomer's Guide to be taken to the thread.

M

Subject: Thread and Message Deletion Policy
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 10:17 PM

Well, I think this is a pretty good place to discuss what we'd like to do. Once we come to an agreement on policy, then we can post the policy in the FAQ/Newcomer's Guide.
I've pretty-much stayed away from discussion of etiquette in the Newcomer's Guide. I figure the well-mannered folks don't need guidelines, and the bad-mannered folks won't follow 'em. Still, I think Max has a pretty good idea. It's time for us to start deleting threads that are of temporary value, and maybe it would be nice if we could combine duplicate threads. What I've been doing with duplicate threads is cross-linking - putting a big, bold link in the first message of a thread, so people will know where to go for related material.
However, we've had too much posted that's of a temporary nature. It's nice, but it's cumbersome. The huge amount of data we have in the Forum makes it very hard for me to find songs when I'm harvesting, because I have to sort through so much garbage to get to 'em. Maybe it's time to start being a litlle more liberal in what we delete. Up until now, I've generally deleted only duplicate messages, messages that were direct threats or attacks on individuals, and messages where the person who posted the message has asked me to delete it. I sometimes delete flame or garbage messages, but I tend to leave them alone because deleting can tend to provoke a flamer to do worse harm. I think Pene and Max may be a little more quick to delete than I am. I grew up in the sixties, and I have a strong anti-censorship gene in me. Pene and Max may be a little more sensible about it.
But maybe it IS time to delete more. I guess nobody would object to our deleting chit-chat threads that are six months old, but what about the Mudcat Tavern? What about the long threads that hash over the philosophy behind the forum - threads like this one, for example? Would it be OK if we deleted all old threads other than the music threads that have permanent value - I think that might be going a bit far, but maybe we could find some middle-ground guidelines. I suppose there's no need to preserve old HearMe and Mudcat Radio threads longer than a month or so, maybe less. Same with lyrics requests that are answered by directing people to another thread or to the database.
What about garbage threads? Would people object if Max or Pene or I would summarily decide to delete something like the XXX SEX and DO NOT POST HERE and DO MUDCATTERS HAVE... threads, just because we think they're terminally stupid and make the Forum look stupid? It seems that we have enough people here that are stupid enough to keep that stuff alive, that maybe we should delete them. (actually, the "Do Not Post" thread turned out to be pretty good)

I think I'd like to see the number of categories cut to the bare bone, maybe Songs, General Music, General Discussion, and Chat - and nothing more. I almost think it might be an idea if one of the editors were to assign a category to a thread AFTER it has started, to ensure uniformity (and to allow changes if the discussion drifts into another category).
Maybe I'd add one more - "To Be Deleted." An editor to mark a thread to be deleted, and then leave it alone for a week or so, so people could ask that it be saved if it's significant for one reason or another.
I think I'd restrict all discussion of songs to the "Songs" threads, so Susan and I wouldn't have such a hard time finding lyrics. This bit of "Add Lyric" "Add tune" "request lyric" "request tune" "request/Add chords" - all makes for a big, muddy mess, especially when people get the idea they need to have separate thread for requests, tunes, chords, lyrics, and nose-blowing.

So, anyhow, my big question is whether people would object to our deleting threads. Which threads should we delete, and when? Who should delete them?
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Mbo
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 10:23 PM

IS there anyway you could tell us what threads you're going to delete? So if there's something I want to preserve, I can cut and save it before it's lost forever...

Subject: Thread and Message Deletion
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 10:33 PM

Yeah, Mbo, that's why I'm suggesting we rename the thread with a tag that says "to be deleted," and maybe we could give a date for deletion. then people could either save it themselves, or file an objection to deleting. There's a little matter of Max working out the technical details, but I firmly believe that Max is a technical genius who could whip something like that up for us in a jiffy.
As for the "Garbage" threads like "Sex" and "Do Not Post Here," I think those should be killed immediately, before they become hundred-message threads that just might have sentimental value for somebody.
I admit that there are problems with deleting, and somebody is going to get toes stepped on. I deleted half a dozen flame messages a couple of weeks ago, and I got an indignant message from somebody who wanted copies, so he could protect his honor by proving he did or didn't say something. Sorry, I'm not here to protect evidence. Not my job. But with the harmless chit-chat threads, I don't see why they can't be held in limbo for a week for those who want to take one last sentimental look at them.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Mbo
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 10:38 PM

I guess the oldtimers are getting their old Mudcat back. I'm not even allowed to chat in places for chat anymore.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 10:46 PM

Aw, C'mon, Mbo. I don't think that's the idea. I think the idea is just to delete some of the temporary chat threads once they've had their run. Once a chat thread is maybe six months old and hasn't been posted to, then maybe it should be deleted.

It also sounds like a good idea to stop the really stupid threads before they get out of hand - but I think this applies just to the really obnoxious threads, not the friendly chit-chat. I don't really think we need threads like "how many Mudcatters have heads?"
Or am I misunderstanding your concern?
-Joe-

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Mbo
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 11:02 PM

No no, I was just saying that I'll be sad to see the friendly chatting get deleted. You can read those threads and see my life progress. Is it possible that all the deleted chat threads could be saved to a CD and be purchased by some who may find them of value, while thus making more room on the Mudcat servers? Everyone wants to move the chat to a chat room. But they get mad when I talk to much in HearMe too. Definately the pointless threads should go, starting with the "Killing The Thread" thing.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: catspaw49
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 11:04 PM

Joe, when it gets down to brass tacks, Max can delete anything he wants and for whatever reason he wants. I would agree with deleting the radio and hearme threadsas you mention. Also your lyric request idea is good, bu often those threads are the only link to a particular song, not in the DT. I suppose it makes no difference as we generally answer them agian without backchecking in a lot of cases. But as long as its the ones with only a few posts and not the ones where discussions of the song continue.

As to BS.....you're free to delete anything I have ever written here. None of it has any value in any way outside of the moment. I think most of us would like to see some of the BS threads remain. The tavern has had lots of fun and beneficial things come out of it, but I'm sure the serious folks of the site see that as only things "of the moment" also. Same's true of the Thought for the Day threads. Same can be said of the topical threads such as the ones on the Columbine or the Kursk. And opinion threads are easily done away with too. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks about gun control, VietNam, or Northern Ireland.

Kind of a can of worms ain't it? Bottom line is we've had some worthwhile and worthless discussions of topical stuff and songs too.......where do you start? I think your ideas I mentioned in the first paragraph are good....after that?????? Well, except for being truthful about deleting any of my stuff you'd like, the rest of the above is obviously tongue in cheek. I would suggest as I have before, that someone goes over and deletes and closes that simpleass "Killing the Thread" thread!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 25 Aug 00 - 11:27 PM

I think deletion is a good idea and your suggestion of tagging a thread so people could save/ object makes sense.

What about the old stuff Joe - are you planning on working your way back through them to see how much space can be reclaimed?

If you do start on this, I have a feeling that it will get very political though - rather you than me. Here a couple of my view points.

The Hearme threads only serve for information at the time a)Announcing that an event is on and b) providing information on song titles and possible pointers to lyrics afterwards. I think that they could be safely deleted after a week.

Threads like the Mudcat Tavern are only of interest to those who participated in them at that time and if anybody wants to keep them for sentimental reasons, they can save them.

An arguement for the chit chat BS threads has alwas been that lyrics do crop in them. This is true but I assume there are either harvested if suitable for the DT or alternatively, Aine may place worthy candidates in the Mudcat Song Book. Once that has been done, is there any value in keeping the threads?

Jon

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 12:43 AM

Let's keep thinking out loud on this for a while. I think we're getting somewhere. As for Catspaw's objection about lyrics request, I think I'd better explain official policy - if a song is the database or in the Forum, then we should answer requests by posting a link or giving search instructions. If, however, the song is NOT in the database or Forum, then we generally should copy and post the lyrics. I suppose if it's a really dumb song you think noboy here is going to ask for again, that's another matter - but generally, we should post lyrics, not links. So, song requests that are answered by pointing people elsewhere asre something that quickly lose their value. One other problem with song requests is that they show up in a search, even though they may not have any substantial information. This can turn people away from threads on a song that DO have information. I think the decision on deleting such threads is something that's best governed by individual judgment, not rules.
Then there are the "XXX Sex" and "Do Not Post Here" and "How Many Mudcatters Have Heads" threads. I don't think there was any particular malice intended by the person who started the "sex" thread, it certainly was ill-advised. Heck, we haven't had a Boy Scout in here for years, and wouldn't ya know he's come in today! (Hey, maybe he found us by searching for XXX SEX, eh?). Max deleted the thread, and I guess there was no harm done. I think I would have preferred to rename the thread to something tamer and let it be, but I don't have the ability to rename threads.
Now, when it appears a thread was started with malicious intent, like the "How Many Mudcatters Have Heads" thread, maybe it would be an idea to delete it outright, before it gets really nasty. I dunno. Maybe not. I do know that there are times when I look at the Forum enu, and it appears that the idiots have completely taken over.
I wish that people would take a moment before they post and think a bit about our image. If you post a message to a thread and keep it alive, will the thread make us like a Folk Forum? One or two silly threads is nice - but if the majority of threads on the Forum Menu mean noting to most people, then there's a problem.

As I understand it the overload of temporary information here is not so much a matter of storage. It takes up a lot of space to store every word typed by every Mudcatter - but not THAT much space. The problem is in having our search engines search through all that stuff. Maybe the solution is to move the temporary stuff into a non-searchable archive, or maybe just set the search engines to bypass certain threads that are temporary in nature. Maybe they could still be searchable by title, but eliminated from our regular searches that look mostly for music information. Maybe we could even have somebody write a summary of each archived thread, and that summary could be scanned by the search engines.

The way Information Technology works in the corporate world is that a bunch of managers tell the IT people what they want, practical or not; and the IT people try to do what they're told, practical or not. then IT gives the impractical software to the workers, who then have to adjust their entire lives to accommodate the idiocies of the software.

A better way to approact problems is for people to discuss the matter and throw out all their dreams and ideas, and to give some idea about what they think is most important. then IT goes to work and prepares several options, which are presented to the workers, and then they work together to come up with a solution that works well and satisfies as many needs as possible.

I think we've agreed on these priorities so far:

• Delete as sparingly as possible.
• Do what we can to enhance the music aspects of our Forum without impeding the friendly conversation that makes it so much fun here.
• Make it easier to find music information that has been posted
• Eliminate duplication of effort by making it easy to find ALL the information that has been posted on a given topic
• Without heavy censorship, do what we can to control animosity and flaming in the forum.
• Make our search engines faster and more accurate by bypassing information that is not likely to be needed

Any other priorities?
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 01:06 AM

I know this will be rejected but it seems the ideal time to suggest the 2 forums again. that would make the music topics very accessible.

Jon

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 01:17 AM

I have not read this whole thread, just the last 6 or 8 threads. But I must tell you that I am a bit troubled by it. Who is the arbiter of what has value? If it is valuable to someone like Mbo, but not to me, then should it be eliminated? I know that you have said you would exercise caution and only the ones that seem to be unimportant. I can see getting rid of announcement type threads for the radio show, but the hearme threads are documentary of what each person performed. It was only a short time ago that Max said he would never get rid of what was posted here, that it would be saved no matter what. Now, as far as I am concerned, Max can get rid of anything he wants to. It is his site. But based on his earlier posting, I would assume he would only get rid of the filler stuff. But for anyone else, especially someone who has expressed an opinion on what the Cat should look like to do so would make me very uncomfortable. I am free thinking here, so forgive the meandering.........

Mick

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 01:21 AM

I would hate to see any of the Thoughts for the day and a lot of the more serious BS threads get deleted, esp. those by PeterT, as they are real literaty gems that I like to go back to at times. Also, some of the Tavern threads are absolute classic stories, part of the real fabric of the Mudcat, IMO.

And, for all that Spaw says he only posts crap, he does show off his depths here and there and they are real gems, as well. I suppose if we could search on that person's name, as we've always been able to, to see all of thier postings it would be okay, but a bit more tedious, unless the Subject could be reinstated in the Forum Search we use in the Quick Links for that.

What happened to the search by elimination that Max tested once, where all BS threads could be by-passed if one chose? If we had that option it would take some load off of the search engines.

When we thought the Mudcat had been shut down, on that infamous day in April last year, I saved threads like crazy, all day long and into the night, thinking we'd lose them forever. I still have about twenty of the classics in my WP program. Remembering the panic and sadness that caused, I would be very reluctant to see too much deletion.

I do think deleting the HearMe's and maybe the radio ones would be okay, but only with a warning, so that people could save what they wanted. I also totally agree with deleting the nonsense as you've mentioned, Joe.

The Mudcat is a Reference Volume...I'd prefer it stay as Unabridged as possible.

Thanks,

kat

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 01:33 AM

Joe,

I'm afraid I've taken something you said personally. It's hard for me to understand how some of the vicious and hostile fights that take place on some of the serious music threads (most often perpetrated by the revered old-timers) have more value than the joy that people like me derive from the harmless (and in my opinion frequently very intelligent) word-play that takes place on the threads that you consider stupid.

I understand the fact that you are concerned with the volume of data, and I can't argue with you about that because I'm not the one who has to deal with it. But I think I belong to the category of people that you have called stupid and that just makes me sad.

Carol

Subject: Deleting threads and messages
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 01:38 AM

Hi, Kat - the Forum Search in Quick Links still works very well for searching for the "subject" line in individual messages. That's why I ask people to put ADD: Song title in the subject line of messages when they post lyrics - it makes it very easy for me to find new songs when I'm harvesting. You'll note that I put birdies ^^ in the subject line when I harvest - that way, I can tell by a search if a song has already been taken care of. It's ALWAYS a good idea to toy with the subject title to make sure it reflects what you said in the message.

Sounds like we have a consensus on deleting as little as possible, and that seems to be a #1 priority among those who have posted to this thread.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 01:58 AM

One question: While I am in favour of stuff being deleted and mentioned space, I do wonder about the search problem. I am not saying that it does not exist but going by the layout Max described in a previous post, and basing this on my experience that when "Shorty" is struggling, "Loki" seems to be flying, I would guess that the actual database queries including searches are less of a problem than handling the volume of requests made. Am I right in thinking that the biggest bottleneck is actually in the converting of the returned dataset to the HTML document and would not be cleared by deleting threads?

Jon

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Pene Azul
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 01:58 AM

I think deletion should only be performed under special circumstances and to eliminate duplicate posts. Editable threads can be created to catch some of the discussion of limited import. Data-handling and indexing methods can likely be devised to ease the strain on the hardware and improve the effectiveness of the search engine.

PA

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: harpgirl
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 02:23 AM

...Have the mudcat elves thought of having posters pick a certain color for the title of throw away threads? Then everyone who posts will know the stuff is not going to be saved! Mudcatters could then be involved in the censsorship decisions at the outset...just a thought

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 03:15 AM

Well, I just took a look at the Do Not Post to This Thread thread. It's pretty good. No, I don't think a thread like that would be deleted, although I might throw the word "limerick" into a couple of message titles to make 'em easier to find. It's all a matter of balance. I do think the best thing we could do to achieve the balance is this:

Do Not Respond to Flamers and Trolls

If somebody starts a thread that has a menacing tone to it, let the thread die. DON'T respond, just let it die. Attempts to turn a flame thread around to something worthwhile may occasionally work - but not usually. If you don't respond, then we can quietly delete things, if there's a need for that.
I know there are many of us who, in true folkie fashion, would like to "save" the flamers and trolls, but please don't. They'll eat you alive, and they'll make a mess of the Mudcat in the process.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 09:38 AM

Joe, I didn't post last night when I read this because I found myself reacting instead of thinking. I hope I'm a bit better now. I'm very uncomfortable with one person, or a handful of people, deciding what's worth saving and what isn't. On the other hand, there is a lot of "banter," but it often takes place in threads with valuable (IMO) discussion. If the banter is terribly witty, is it worth saving? I'd hope so. Now, who decides what's good and what isn't - that's the problem. If you edit for quality, it's all down to your opinion and it WILL be censorship, not file cleaning.

I like the idea of "short shelf life" threads, and I think harpgirl has a good idea with the color coding. If that can't be done, maybe a prefix like "Temp" would work. There are threads which were started with the intention of being temporary - radio, HearMe, gig announcements - which are past what would have been an expiration date. Even threads posting lyrics and tunes could be deleted once the lyrics/tune are collected, if no other discussion of the song has taken place. Other than those types of threads, I don't see how you'll be able to delete things without winding up with accusations of censorship and numerous additional threads started about you deleting things.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Pene Azul
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 09:55 AM

IMHO the radio and HearMe threads are part of the historical record of the Mudcat.

PA

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 12:34 PM

Pene, when you come right down to it, they all are...

I'll try to remember that when I post. It's probably better than deleting what's already here, but I and many of us are notoriously bad at editing ourselves.

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: DougR
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 02:01 PM

Joe: I think you have made some very sensible suggestions.

Mick: Wouldn't Joe's suggestion that a warning be posted that the thread was going to be deleted, be a good idea? It would allow people who object to the deletion to get back to him and if the majority of those objecting have good reasons, perhaps it wouldn't be deleted.

Perhaps we tend to fall so much in love with our own words that it clouds our thinking a bit when faced with the possiblility that they might be deleted. :>) I'm referring, of course, to the BS threads when I say that.

As far as I'm concerned, Joe, delete anything I have posted to date.

DougR

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: GUEST,Bill D
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 02:02 PM

from over a year ago

about BS

also...there IS way to NOT see threads with the BS designation....go here, then bookmark it and name it no BS in your bookmarks

Max did this quite awhile ago, but it got lost

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: catspaw49
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 05:28 PM

I hope you took what I posted in the spirit with which it was written. Yeah, there are some notice type threads and lyric request threads that serve no significant purpose, but when I said it was a can of worms, I meant it. Take a lyric request thread that has answered with a link and has only one comment......maybe that so and so has a great recording of the song. Do you delete it? To some, I'm sure they'd say that the last was not too omportant a comment, but what if that was THE recording that someone may NOW be looking for? Given the everchanging regulars here, maybe no one at this time knows of that recording.

What about some of the BS that was topical, but had serious discussions relating to the subject and oftentimes the music? Again, some of these people are not around now, some may return, some never will.......It is a record that we can have only once, no matter how distasteful. IE--"Armalite"--that was a painful thread for this place, but it is worth the read on almost every level....music, politics, philosophy, psychology.

I always encourage new people to go back and investigate some of the earlier threads to get a feel for the place and to see some of the previous discussions on specific topics. I wish that would happen more than it does, but it certainly isn't mandatory.

Historical record it is...for better or for worse, and I would not want to be the one to make the choice. The job belongs to Max as does this site. I believe him to be a pretty smart youngster even if he is a pissant. Let's give our ideas, but the decisions are his.

Spaw

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: DonMeixner
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 08:08 PM

Kat,

I'm still here and I still post. I like the Cat just fine. Just haven't had a boatload of time to do what I like . Trying to get ready for 3 shows close together puts me in the jewelry shop for long hours and sleep and other work is all thats left.

The Cat has been a little pointless at times of late but I'll take mundane and supercilious to stay in touch with friends.

Don

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 08:16 PM

Good to hear that, Don, thanks. Have a good time at the shows...lucky people getting to see and purchase your work!

kat

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: DonMeixner
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 08:24 PM

I do mailorder :-)

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 09:22 PM

Maybe the question is not how to delete, but maybe how to archive. We have a whole heck of a lot of information here - how do we organize it in a way that's most useful to us?
One thing I'd like is the ability to combine threads. If we have five threads going on a song, that's too many. too much information gets missed. In the process of combining threads, maybe some messages could be deleted - sparingly, of course.
And yes, I think it would be good to give the job of categorizing threads over to the editors. I'm afraid the current system of categories has caused more confusion than it has eliminated. Fewer categories and more consistency would make things easier to find.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: catspaw49
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 09:35 PM

So Joe.............Where and in what category do we put "Major Tom?"

Sorry, just couldn't resist..........Joe, you gave me the best laugh either accidentally or on purpose, that I have had in a month!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Sorcha
Date: 26 Aug 00 - 09:41 PM

I think I am with 'Spaw on this one....there are a few that could be deleted with no consequences, such as Psudelos' house thread, which will probably not be of any consequence to anyone 2 years from now (except maybe Frank).Unfortunately, there does seem to be something of value in almost every thread.......

When I first came here, I lurked, and did my homework on the Old Threads so well that a few people are still convinced that I am kat/katlaughing. If the threads were not there to read would that have happened?

I still have a little trouble with all the different search engines on the site, and miss things I should not because I did not search There, or That. Perhaps if ALL the searches were case insensitive it would help........if I go looking for a phrase in the SuperSearch I can't remember what was in Caps....only the phrase. Example is the She-lyin/see lion/she lyin thread. It was there, I just couldn't find it without the exact combination of capitals.

And what about Wesley's twins thread? It seems topical now, but what if some of us want to know a year from now how the twins are doing?

I just know, I don't want to be the god with the edit button......might be nice FOR ONLY MY OWN POSTS so I could correct typos and delete my own stuff, but nothing else!!

Subject: RE: New Thread Acronym Suggestion - 'UN'
From: Joe Offer
Date: 27 Aug 00 - 03:17 AM

Hmmm. I enjoy being a god with an edit button. Makes everybody act very nice to me.

Yeah, sure.
-Joe-