BS: From Bruce O.

Subject: BS: From Bruce O.
From: GUEST,Bruce O.
Date: 04 May 01 - 10:40 AM

Over nearly 3 1/2 years I've posted 3184 messages here, with factual information about traditional and old songs, and tunes and given many as texts and ABCs of tunes. This is my 3185th (and last) post to the Mudcat Forum.

This Forum, in my opinion, is now controlled by those who have litle interest in traditional songs and ballads, and just want it for a general chat site to display their wit, profundity, and just about everything else.

As noted at the beginning of the homepage on my website, I will attempt to answer any legimate qusetions put to me by email. I don't have all the answers by any means, and I'm certain no one ever will, but I'll be truthful, and go no further than the facts warrant, so you'll get only real history.

Got my reprint of Ord's 'Bothy Ballads' today so I have that, and many better things than this Forum to keep me busy. Goodbye Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: AllisonA(Animaterra)
Date: 04 May 01 - 10:47 AM

Oh, Bruce, I'm so sorry. There are still (I think) a majority here who truly love the intent of this place and try to keep a positive tone. I'll try to check into your site regularly, but I'm sorry to see you go.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mrrzy
Date: 04 May 01 - 10:49 AM

We seem to have lost another one who can't seem to click Back when the thread isn't what he wanted it to be... Pity, I liked his stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: MMario
Date: 04 May 01 - 10:51 AM

Bruce - though I am probably one of the people that drive you nuts, I am also sorry to see you go. The wealth of information you have presented is invaluable.

On the other hand, if this truly means "Guest, #1" is also gone, I am grateful for your decision.

As with many other situations, there are two sides to the issue.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: M.Ted
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:35 AM

The thing I have always appreciated the most is that, unlike others(myself included, on occasion, I am afraid) you *have* just stuck to the facts that are warranted. With you gone, it will be a bit like having a model kit without the assembly diagrams. I hope that in time, you'll feel better about the place-

You have done a great service here, and I, for one, want to thank you for all of the time that you have put in sharing both your knowledge and your resources. You have set a standard for documentation that can't be overstated--A great many people have no idea that much of what we consider "oral/aural" tradition really can be traced back to definite sources--and your work has burst a lot of spurious claims and off-handed generalizations. Most important, it has opened the door on a great trove of text and music that most of us knew little or nothing about.

I must confess that I have spent many happy hours scrolling through your text files, reading, pondering, and singing old songs. Your work with ABC files has been especially helpful, as have your comments on the technical handling of them. I spend a lot of time matching melodies to text!

Of course, I have often looked up the songs you mention in discussions, and very often, I have learned to sing and play it, as well (I have some nice chord/melody arrangements that I have worked out--songs I had never hear performed or on record, but that I knew from your postings and your files--

So thank you, Bruce! I know that I am speaking for a lot of others as well, when I say that your contributions here have really added a lot to my enjoyment and appreciation of music.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Bert
Date: 04 May 01 - 01:17 PM

...This Forum, in my opinion, is now controlled by those who have little interest in traditional songs and ballads...

Well Bruce, this forum started out being about folk and blues. Unfortunately a lot of us are really not that knowledgeable on the subject. We came here because we liked to sing and maybe were looking for lyrics. But we don't all make a study of folk music, so we often don't have too much to say. So we just drop by and chat because we know that most of us here are in the same boat. We'll chat and bullshit around in our individual styles, just keeping in contact until something musical crops up that catches our interest.

The place has become somewhat like a village where you chat with your neighbors about anything and everything. I was pleased to see a week or so ago that you were entering into these discusssions yourself, sharing your particular knowledge and wit about physicists.

Unfortunately some rather pitiful people have taken to anonymous flaming and trolling, which has thrown suspicion on innocent members of our group.

The reason that they were allowed to do this is because no one is controlling this forum. It's free from control. Anyone can post as and when they please and can come and go as they please, so any talk of a controlling group or clique is just nonsense.

That applies to you as well so, come and go as you please, you will be welcome here when you come and missed when you are not here.

Bert.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: gnu
Date: 04 May 01 - 01:41 PM

Gee, I feel bad about this. I came here looking for a tune and Bruce helped out GREATLY. I began to read the threads and found a group of people I felt were intelligent, generous, knowledgible.... I'd better stop because this could go on to the end of the dictionary.

I have only been able to help others musically a couple of times. Most of the time, it's banter. So I feel as if I am part of the reason you are leaving, Bruce. That's why I feel bad.

Then again, if I leave instead of you, I won't learn and I won't be able contribute. Nor will a lot of others who are not as talented, knowledgible, generous, etc, etc, etc, as you. Of course, you could consider reading and posting in threads that suit you. But, I assume you have a good reason for leaving, so, best wishes from me. And thanks for your help. I really do appreciate it.

sadgnu

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 04 May 01 - 01:47 PM

Well I also contribute to the BS but I am sorry to see you go. Regardless as to whether you were Guest# 1 or not, I was quite ditressed to see that Amergin views you as "more of a worthless, lice infested jockstrap than I thought possible" and that Sorcha "would like to see you say something besides "It's on my website, see Scarce Songs file blah blah." - fine treatment for a someone who has contributed so much quality in music related posts.

I am also concerned about the possibility of a faction at least thinking they can control this forum. While I belive sorcha sent the email to you without consulting others, I note that she says "We know that if we "out" you, you could just get another stupid guest name.........".

Why we? One way of reading this is that at least one person believes that she is part of a group with the power to "out" people.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Roger in Sheffield
Date: 04 May 01 - 01:54 PM

Thanks Bert, that is kind of what I wanted to say, and put a lot better than I could have
Its a shame Bruce has gone as I would like him to explain further, at the beginning of this thread he puts forth his factual side while ignoring that darker side he seems to have been venting against people of late - for which he offers no hint of regret

Hope Sorcha is back soon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:02 PM

I used the wrong tense in my previous post, I should have said "believed", not "believes".

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Sandy Paton
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:10 PM

I'm really sorry, Bruce, but I'll keep in touch via that other list you led me to. Thanks for that, too.

When I'm very busy, as I have been recently, I find that I can only take time to look at a few threads. So, please, folks, title your threads carefully to assist us in finding those that we might find of particular interest. Others might be fun, and I occasionally participate facetiously in them, too, but I have to be selective when I'm working under deadlines that can't be avoided. I know you understand. With careful titling, we might keep scholars like Bruce around and thus benefit from their research.

Sandy

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: IvanB
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:43 PM

I, too, am sorry to see Bruce's decision to leave Mudcat. However, if he published Sorcha's private email in a public forum without her permission, I believe that to be a reprehensible action and its distastefulness to me is not lessened by the perceived value of the person to Mudcat in general. Perhaps just a polite way of stating what Amergin already said.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:44 PM

I know that you consider me as one of the "major downfalls" of this place, but Bert said what I think far better than I could. No one controls this place, least of all me or you. This is not the first time you have left and it may well be that you decide to return. These things are strictly your decisions.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: nutty
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:50 PM

I was always taught - If you can't say anything nice , don't say anything

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: gnu
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:52 PM

A related thread is underway, titled, "BS: or not BS? a suugestion", with some ideas that may appease Bruce... hopefully. I certainly don't wish to see him leave.

Spaw.... For what it's worth, I agree that publishing a private communication without consent is, at least, rude.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Justa Picker
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:56 PM

People that aren't planning to return leave quietly and do it without fanfare.

People that plan to return at some point start a thread about their leaving (so they can gauge public opinon, at least from what I've seen and read around here.)

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:01 PM

gnu....It was Ivan B. who said that (we cross posted) and I could not agree more. It has happened before here and the member involved was roundly denounced. Bruce O. should be no different.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: gnu
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:13 PM

Spaw... my sincerest apologies for being so dense. Apparently, the weekend has begun too soon for me. I shall take my leave now and go forth to do good deeds (when you own a truck, everyone thinks you have nothing to do but good deeds requiring a truck) and then, to even things out, I shall play my Hran with great gusto at the BBQ.

They think the free BBQ is all that is required to rent my truck and time for a few hours. Perhaps, if I play and sing long enough, their neighbours will complain and my truck will move down the list of, "Who can we bum a truck from ?"

Some of you might ask, "What about the dust bunnies ?" Well, in ten years..... But, that's another thread, Bruce.

haveHranwillsessiongnuevenifyoudon'twantmeto

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: GUEST,Neil Comer
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:17 PM

I have to agree with Bruce. There is no doubt that there were some memorable threads- Carrickfergus etc- but the Forum has become a platform for too many other subjects. I signed off when the politics took over

Slán agus beannacht Neil Comer

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Fortunato
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:20 PM

I'll see you elsewhere, Bruce.

Chance

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:21 PM

I can't say that I agree with making the contents of a private e-mail public but I do draw a distinction between what the reaction to an attempt at a THREAT and using the contents of a personal e-mail to bolster an arguement.

As spaw has indicated, it has happend before. The only occasion I can remember reading was of the second type and is here. From what I can make out from the thread, it passed without the type of name calling Amerigan used and I can't see much in the way of "roundly denouncing" although comments may well have been passed elsewhere.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:22 PM

Bruce O.

I have no feelings one way or the other about whether or not you stop posting to the forum. I just want to say one thing to you and to everyone who thinks this forum should just be about song lyrics...

I am an instrumentalist. I do not sing songs. Songs are not the only form of traditional music. Instrumental music is as important a part of traditional music as are songs and ballads.

I play an unpopular instrument. There aren't many people who want to talk about my instrument. When I get into a serious discussion about my instrument with other mudcatters, people feel perfectly free to turn my serious musical discussion into a joke because they feel my instrument is a joke.

There's not a hell of a lot I can do about this except laugh along with them. Please don't contribute to the invalidation of my instrument and the traditional music I play on it, by only talking about traditional music as being only songs and ballads. That's not right, and you ought to know it.

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Peter T.
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:25 PM

CP, you are what in scholarly circles is referred to as a scatological inversion. Your character as portrayed here is tied to the mirrored need to maintain ordered structures through the occasionally acceptable appearance of the contrary, yet necessary anal, excremental figure -- often associated with Dionysus, the Devil and other threats to implicit or explicit norms. Musically of course, we need go back no further than the association with the Feast of Fools and other events (such as the Feast of the Holy Innocents) in the liturgical calendar. The appropriate carnivalesque and burlesque roots in the folk traditions are, I am sure, your constant study. Was it not you who made passing reference to Bakhtin's study of Rabelais in your own flatulent way?

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:34 PM

I don't know Bruce, so I haven't had an opportunity to be impressed by his scholarship. But I can't say I'm all that sympathetic. If he wants to avoid BS threads, it's easily done. Even when someone forgets to use the BS prefix, you can usually tell what a thread is about pretty quickly, and make your exit in favor of another thread that you find more to your liking.

Also, I might suggest that, if you want to join an exclusive club, don't look for one that meets on the internet. The doors to this place are wide open, and we all have our own reasons for being here.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: katlaughing
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:42 PM

Thanks, Bert, Justa Picker, and Spaw for saying what I feel and believe, too. Bruce did leave before and came back. It is my understanding he signed his real name to a couple of Guest #1's postings, thus outing himself, long before anyone else made mention. Now that he has failed in his attempt to coerce us all, he makes a big fanfare about leaving.

Before you got so angry about the BS, Bruce, I always appreciated your insight and scholarship and your website, but as Guest #1, you went way over the line and I will not miss that.

I would like to say one more thing. A few years ago, Joe Offer and I got into it and I posted a portion of a personal message he'd sent to me, which was particularly vicious. He and I have made our peace and even enjoy PMing back and forth, at times. However, when I did post that posting, from a personal message, much the same as Bruce did with Sorcha's email, I was castigated, excoriated and vilified up one side and down the other. One wonders where the outrage went when Bruce did virtually the same thing.

kat

took too long to post this, so didn't see the
link provided above...now you can read the whole sordid story:-)

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: paddymac
Date: 04 May 01 - 04:01 PM

Bruce has been a valuable contributor here, and I thank him for that. I don't have much interest is pissing contests, at least not unless my leg is getting wet, so I don't know and don't really care about whatever was going on between Bruce and Sorcha. I will say only that "personal feuds" don't need to be aired here at all, and that most of us, at one time or other, can revert to rather juvenile behavior. It's a human trait that we need to be alert to on an individual basis, and check it first in our own deportment.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 04:05 PM

Years ago Mudcat really was dedicated to folk and blues music. It was not just folk but traditional folk and any attempts to blur the boundaries where met with fierce debate. In those days the prevailing view was that indulging an overbroad definition of folk music was like feeding a stray cat. Before long you have a house full of stray cats. At the time I thought that was a pretty harsh assessment but ultimately it proved true.

There is obvious a great demand for BS and non-folk threads but it can be a lot to wade through if your are looking for a discussion of folk music. Maybe it is time to split the forum into two sections; one for folk music and one for everything else.

The departure of Bruce O is a great loss to Mudcat. He joins a long list of exceptionally knowledgeable people who no longer post here.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Matt_R
Date: 04 May 01 - 07:09 PM

If I'm a stray cat, then I'm gonna rock this town. Rock it inside out.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 07:55 PM

folk you.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Matt_R
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:00 PM

Been there, done that.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:02 PM

wannabe poser

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Matt_R
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:11 PM

Sure am! But I didn't get my pic in to Alison in time... :-(

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:16 PM

Earl, since you are obviously a serious student of traditional music, perhaps you can help me with a question I've been trying to get an answer to for as long as I've been posting to the Mudcat. I would welcome Bruce O's input as well, if he has any...

I am looking for sources of instrumental music that would have been used in European circuses and similar types of settings, say, in the last couple of centuries, but not after World War II. So far, I've only been pointed in the direction of contemporary circus music, or music that would have been used in circuses in the U.S.

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:42 PM

Carol,

I consider myself a serious student of certain forms of American traditional music which I don't think will help you much. The only thing I can suggest for European circus music is maybe check classical music. I know for American music to find serious recordings of the music of Stephen Foster or other nineteenth century popular songs I look in the classical section.

I saw your post earlier and I agree it must be even more difficult to find discussions of instrumental music. What is the unpopular instrument that you play?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:53 PM

Thanks Earl. I don't think European circus music would have been anywhere close to classical music. Probably more along the lines of Eastern European and Roma folk music. I'm guessing on that, but I do feel pretty confident that it would be some kind of folk music.

The unpopular instrument I play is the accorion. Had one shot right out of my hands in the 'Orient Express' thread just yesterday. Some people's hatred for accordions knows no bounds. ;-)

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:54 PM

Oops. Looks like I misspelled *accordion*

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:03 PM

Carol,

I don't think European circus belongs in classical, I just think, these days, that's where it will probably end up.

As for accordions, unless mudcat has changed even more than I think, there are plenty of accordion players here. I play concertina. There is no reason to laugh at that, it's not like you play bodhran.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:06 PM

Thanks, Earl. I feel better already.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:09 PM

Earl and Carol, I'm sitting here laughing out loud. Bodhran, accordion, banjo- where did it begin?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:14 PM

It began with people, Ebbie. Maybe that's what makes it all so interesting.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Ma Fazoo
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:17 PM

Still feeling my way around the site, but it seems to be a pretty healthy place to be, on the whole. I've learned many things about traditional music, and been amused by the many witty people who post. I think I'll stay awhile.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: SINSULL
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:50 PM

Carol,
Were you wearing black fishnets at the time of the shooting? Maybe someone was just trying to find out what exactly was behind the accordian.

I hate it when we can't play 'nice" together. Sorcha was one of the first to make me feel welcome here. BruceO has (unwittingly) contributed to my list of books I have to read and/or own much to the delight of a few on-line booksellers. Posting someone's private comments without permission is just not acceptable. My question to Guest#1 is: "Do you get any enjoyment out of your study of folk music?" I am baffled by your lack of humour. This music was created to entertain.When all the "t"s are crossed and "i"s dotted, human emotion is the basis for all folk music. If I have missed your connections to this, let me know. Please.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:56 PM

Some spot-on points, Jon. But IvanB, I don't think you're being realistic. If you'd got that message from Sorcha, with its threats to publish more widely, I think you'd have been tempted to post it too.

I'm a bit surprised at your line, Kat. What does Bruce's name at the end of a post prove? There was a time when your name appeared at the TOP of a post, and everyone here was quick to accept that you'd had sod all to do with it.

That's interesting advice, Nutty, but in my case it would amount to a gagging order.

But seriously, folks, I wallow around in, and add to, the crap here as much as anyone, but I'd never come to this site at all if it wasn't such a terrific folk-music resource. We wouldn't have to lose too many Bruces before we were left with just the crap. I think Sorcha paid a fair price for sending such an aggressive note, and to be honest, she took Bruce's intemperate reaction in better spirit than one or two who leapt to her defence.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: IvanB
Date: 04 May 01 - 10:12 PM

No, Fionn, you obviously know nothing of me. It's an inviolate rule with me that personal messages and/or private e-mail are just that - personal and private. I'm not so naive as to think something I sent to someone else might not be posted for all to see, but that doesn't mean I'd like it. And you will never see anything sent to me in private posted publicly unless I have the sender's permission. That, to me, is part of good manners and living within a community - whether it be real or virtual. And I still believe Bruce acted reprehensively, his standing in this 'community' notwithstanding.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:36 PM

Let's take a good look at this useless Forum which is totally clogged by useless BS and stupid political crap. At this moment, we have threads such as: "Has anyone heard this song?" (a sincere request for the source and meaning of a traditional Irish lullaby); "Belfast Graves" (request for information on a song about Irish Republican heroes); "Spanish Cavalier" (another request for info about a old favorite song); "Who wrote music for 'The Hazel Wood?"; "Hawaiian Song" (answer to a query and a brief discussion of slack-key guitar by somebody who lives in Hawaii); information about Richard Dyer-Bennett, who researched and popularized many old traditional ballads; a request for lyrics to a rare Irish ballad (answered); a request for an old Scots song, High Jeannie High (answered); a request for singalongs to be sung at a nursing home (answered with a wealth of info); request for music to "Bonnie Susy Cleland"; "Long Time Traveling" (fascinating discussion of a shape note tune and its transmogrifications); "In the Jailhouse Now" (discussion of several different versions); "Mary Ellen at the Church Turned Up" (about an old music hall song); "Trench Songs of WWI"; "Hornpipe query" (answered, more or less); "Last Farewell" (4 replies in 26 minutes); "Need a song about war/soldier/pacifism" (lots and lots of good replies); "Ora Wa Shinzimatta Da" (request for lyrics of a Japanese popular song --

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:38 PM

oops, hit the send button before I was even close to being finished. Get the message?

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: gnu
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:46 PM

Got back from the BBQ, in good spirits, only to find out that the 'Cats are still hissing. I repeat...

A related thread is underway, titled, "BS: or not BS? a suugestion", with some ideas that may appease Bruce... hopefully. I certainly don't wish to see him leave.

Why is this such a big problem with you guys ? Why can't the Mudcat be a wonderful place for all ? Just a little common sense and courtesey ? No ? NO ?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: katlaughing
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:52 PM

Fionn, someone posted an entire thread using my name, which was what prompted Max to come up with the Guest moniker; totally different situation, not to be measured against what Guest#1 has been trying to do which is "divide and conquer." If the majority of us are wrong and he isn't Guest#1, let him come forward and say so. Besides his signing, it is still his style which shines through...it is difficult for almost anyone to hide behind another name, once they've consistently posted in their usual fashion.

Thanks, Mark. I remember one time a few of us compared the numbers. I just didn't feel like counting through all of them today to point out the majority were, as always, about music!

kat

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: GUEST,#1
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:18 AM

Sorry to do this kat but the situation for those who choose to posts as guests is pretty much the same as the situation you're describing...

For the record, I did a print shortly after your last post and did a count: Allowing for my interpretation of BS (I counted gatherings, FYI, NON-IRRITATING, A sincere thankyou, etc in regardless of prefix) I made a count of 165 threads, 52 or which are BS or a 31.5%BS content. Make of it what you will, it is not an issue to me.

Jon Freeman

(or am I guest #1 or someone else impersonating Jon Freeman...)

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:21 AM

It was me BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: marty D
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:32 AM

I sure wish people here would stop messing with a good thing. As a lurker and guest I've still only been around for about a year, but the good things far outweigh the bad. One angry folklorist who can't keep his aliases straight, some insensitive joke tellers and a few people who keep stupid threads going endlessly are a small price to pay for what else we get. I've literally learned how to play the guitar pretty well from Mudcat. I didn't know anything about my instrument til I came here. Why can't people just ignore the ones with too much time on their hands?

marty

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:43 AM

That's great, Jon, why not demonstrate the stupidity a little more? BTW, the comma gave you away. If you want to pick a bone with me, from now on, why don't you do it by PM?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: catspaw49
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:52 AM

Hey marty......Glad you're doing well, pickin' wise. Don't run off and don't let this bother you.....It happens every few months on one subject or another and we all stand around beating ourselves up for a week or so. The end comes eventually and you'll find a period of pretty smooth sailing and good feelings for awhile before the next time. We were a bit overdue for this one so it may take a few extra days to pass.......Plenty of other good threads running right now so enjoy.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Justa Picker
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:03 AM

It's like the Mob wars, Marty. Happens every 5 years or so. Time to hit the matresses, clean out the bad blood. We hit them. They hit us back, and then....it's business as usual.

:-) It is a well documented and scientifically proven fact that Mudcat compresses time, for those visiting, so I figure any time now we should all be sleeping in our own beds.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:05 AM

kat, assuming you mean the comma after "GUEST", it is tagged on after all GUEST postings - if you don't believe me, look at Bruce O's post at the top or try a forum search for #1...

I'm not quite sure why my "#1" post lead you to believe I was picking bones with you. I was a) trying to illustrate that Fionn was right and b) giving a real count to go with comments made by Mark Cohen and yourself just for interest and my subsequent post was intended to confirm that the #1 one was really me which OK, under the circumstances, I can see could be taken as me having a dig - not intended though - just your interpretation.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:07 AM

to clarify - taken as a dig meaning I was saying saying "#1" was really me when I meant the post above it was my own.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 May 01 - 10:22 AM

I think Bruce O made the right decision. Glad to see him go. I found his knowledge and his website invaluable, but his constant bitching and trying to change this site into something that it is not were tiresome. He spawned more BS by his constant carping, than he curbed. And I will say the same thing to him that I have said before. If you were sincere that you had to leave because you don't like the place, you would have just left. Quietly. But your starting a thread to leave is just another attempt to manipulate. When I balance the good with the bad, .............. it just comes out better for all that you have left. I hope you come back sometime when you work out your need to control the rest of us, because you are an amazing scholar.

With regard to your posting of personal messages, I am with my friend Ivan on this one. It is dishonorable, and you are to be castigated for it. I believe the parties to this whole line of shite need to spend some time on my hill with a Low D whistle examining their motives.

PETER T.......I am never, ever, .....I repeat........ever going to read your posts with liquid in my mouth. (referring to the scatalogical inversion post)

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 05 May 01 - 10:39 AM

Hi Bruce, so that you know before you go I have been here since your first post & ever since have always been awed & impressed & warmed by your dedication & love of sharing your wealth of the music we here all love. Over the years since losing valued members like Elsie (aug 97') to our present loss of you there have been a few others that have disappeared from this site & each time it feels like the cut of a knife. Losing you has the feel of being torn & quartered. I hope someday you'll feel the wish to make your way back, thanks for all you have given & shown me. Barry

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 05 May 01 - 11:07 AM

Thanks for your favoring us with your expertise; there are truly few here who can match your contributions on a purely intellectual level. I have often wondered if the folk tradition was lacking in that area. Be well, and don't let the cyber-door bang you on the cyber-ass on the way out.

Bart

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Art Thieme
Date: 05 May 01 - 11:36 AM

A personal note to Barry and Sandy at the risk of nauseating those opposed to personal messages to the extent that they might be a bit discommoded and even upset:

I agree with you both !

Art

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 May 01 - 11:53 AM

I want to make sure there is no misunderstanding here. I have always found Bruce O's contributions in the area of song/music scholarship to be without compare. And that will be missed. But his need to try and control the rest of the Mudcat was getting intolerable. When he attacks people like Jeri and Peter T, who exemplify the best of this place, because they don't contribute in a purely musical way.......that is intolerable. When he comes INTO threads that aren't about music and complains about them being there..........that is intolerable. When he uses guises to harass others who have a different view of what this place is, .........that is intolerable. There are a great many here who scan and participate in music only threads, and God bless 'em. No one goes on a bender because they don't get into the other threads, and they don't complain. They just use the resource as suits them best. But this need to try and change it because it isn't what you want it to be just doesn't get it with me.

I hate to be in disagreement with my very good friends. Art, Barry and Sandy are personal, and very dear friends of mine. And we will remain so. But when I weigh the positive of Bruce O the scholar, against the negativity spawned by the posts under various guises, it is better that he go where things are more like what he wants.

And I have never understood folks that think that they are so important that they need to start a thread to make sure we all know how much we will miss them. Why not just send a personal message to your friends and save us all this? Or is there the motive of causing more dissension?

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: nutty
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:05 PM

The Bottom Line is this:-
The site belongs to Max

Bruce has his own site - we all know that - just as we should be aware that we are all GUESTS on Max's site.
He invited us all to share in his party

He has put up the money and taken the time and effort to arrange it all

NOW IT FEELS AS IF A GROUP OF "GUESTS(MUDCATTERS)" IS HAVING A SET TOO IN THE FRONT ROOM - AT PRESENT IT'S JUST VERBAL BUT IT LOOKS AS IF IT MIGHT TURN NASTY IF ENOUGH PEOPLE HAVE SCORES TO SETTLE.

A number of non-folkie guests have already put their coats on and left. Others are huddled in the kitchen listening anxiously to the raised voices.

MAX IS WONDERING WHY HE BOTHERED TO ARRANGE ANYTHING IN THE FIRST PLACE

If this were real - Everybody would eventually leave blaming everything on the beer,
The following day Max would receive a load of cards and e-mails - thanking him for a great party and apologising for the bad behaviour - everbody involved would feel very guilty (having been hauled over the coals by their respective spouses) and life would go on.


SO WHY NOT
No one needs to back down or loose face or admit they were wrong
They just need to make their peace with Max

Hazel

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mark Clark
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:19 PM

I'm sure going to miss Bruce around here.

I've been singing and playing traditional and folk material nearly as long as anyone here (40+ years) and one thing that has impressed me over the years is that those who share my interest tend to be an eclectic bunch with a huge variety of interests and a great store of knowledge on many subjects. At 3D world hootenanies and guitar pulls, convrsation has often drifted away from music for a time even though we are all sitting with instruments at the ready. Folk musicians are just that way, they are thinking about a huge variety of things all at the same time and don't see a need to make special rules about what can be discussed in any particular setting. That's always been okay with me because I enjoy the digressions as well. I guess I'm a gregarious sort of person.

I probably don't even open the majority of the threads here. Not because I don't think exchanging nonsense would be fun but, like Sandy, I just don't have the time to spend. There seem to be some music threads on a continuing basis and although I would like to see a few more there are enough to keep me occupied most days. The thing that I hate to see is the bickering and expression of hatred that pops up from time to time. In my experience, that sort of anamosity is rare among the folk crowd. I assume it comes from hangers-on who are only looking to stir up trouble.

I guess until the human species is perfected, I'll continue to hang out here in the hope that others of a like mind will stay too.

Thanks to everyone who, like Bruce, helps to make this an interesting place.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: M.Ted
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:47 PM

For a long time before the appearance of GUEST#1 there had been vicious and unprovoked attacks on BruceO for simply doing what he did best--I remember at least one instance when the postings in the thread became so odious that the thread was removed from the forum--curious to me is that the person who made those attacks never any criticism, outside of the few of us in the thread who defended BruceO's scholarship--

At any rate, for a long time, even in spite of the assaults, Bruce's comments were restricted to occasional remarks about the fact that it was his belief that the forum should only be concerned with traditional music--certainly he was entitled to have and express his opinion, without being labelled "INTOLERABLE"--If the static got to be too much, and he finally fell to the level of his many detractors, he would not be the first here to have done so...

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:05 PM

Point well taken, M. Ted. As I read your post, I realize my language was too strong. Perhaps intolerable is too strong. But it does not take away from the fact that Bruce chose to leave. And he chose to do it in a way that does nothing to fix that which he doesn't care for. In fact, it exacerbates the problem. I have said enough, on to the next thread.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: fat B****rd
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:18 PM

I came to this site looking for Leadbelly information and stayed on never missing a night checking out lyrics, news , humour and general humour and interest. I have received very little in the way of direct replies (apart from the lovely Carol C. who liked my name) but what the hell ! I'm a grown-up now and it does me to simply have a site where people from thousands of miles away communicate with each other on a vast number of subjects. If something doesn't interest me I don't bother with it. As a "British" person I do sometimes find the American attitude a bit heavy going but by no means intolerable. If the Bruce O situation arose in England most people would probably say "Ok mate Tarrah F... Off" it@s a shame if the guy feels that the site is not what he would like but I for one hope the Mudcat carries on for as long as I can read and enjoy it. So there !! Love, happiness and all the best to Bruce O. and 'Catters whoever you are Fat B****rd XXXXXXXXXX

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:53 PM

You're welcome to your welf-imposed rules, IvanB, but they don't apply here. For the record, I don't regard any of the correspondence I receive as confidential, unless it is specifically marked that way. And I'm under no obligation to respect the marking anyway if the message is gratuitous or offensive.

Big Mick, is someone trying to control us? That should be quite an entertaining spectacle. A bit like watching someone trying to herd cats. *G*

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Hawker
Date: 06 May 01 - 06:03 PM

Don't want to enter into politics here, sorry you felt this was necessary, I use the site for both info and fun, I always try not to be offensive and not to take offence, after all, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Hope newcomers realise that Mudcat is about MORE than dented egos, I love all of them, rude, offensive or just plain stupid, variety is the spice of life, ENJOY!
Lucy

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Lady McMoo
Date: 06 May 01 - 06:26 PM

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 May 01 - 06:35 PM

When I came here in the early days of the 'Cat, I'd get hammered by people like Elsie for daring to mention pop-folkies like Peter, Paul and Mary and the Kingston Trio. I have Bruce (and others) to thank for their helpfulness, and for tolerance of my lack of knowledge of the really traditional stuff. Bruce has exposed me to some delightful music.

As time went on, I found myself complaining about the "BS" threads and the lack of serious music discussion. I think things are at a pretty good balance now - the "BS" threads are usually marked, and people seem to honor the music threads by not putting much in them that's frivolous. It's nice that I can now change thread names - when appropriate, I will add or delete the "BS" label, or add a few words to clarify the subject of a thread.

Although I spend as little time as possible in the "BS" threads, I've come to have a grudging respect for them - they keep people here, and that means they're available to participate in the music discussions that come up. If the forum were strictly music, I don't think our music threads would be as lively and interesting as they are.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Lady McMoo
Date: 06 May 01 - 06:36 PM

Whoops..sorry. Was just reading the thread and hit the wrong key. Hadn't meant to post at all. I've nothing really to add as I don't know the background to the problems nor do I know the personalities involved or any things that might have been said but it's always sad to see a knowledgeable person who's contributed a lot leave. I've enjoyed some of your scientific threads Bruce (but only as a mere and humble biologist myself!).

Best wishes for whatever you do in the future Bruce.

mcmoo

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 06 May 01 - 07:57 PM

Joe Offer,

Thanks for what you said in your last post (06-May-01 - 06:35 PM).

I would like to add one thing to what you said. This place has some of the most literate, intelligent, creative and, (dare I say it?) high-brow frivolity I've come accross in a long, long time.

One of my favorite bits is this little exchange...

Subject: RE: BS - Science Question for Amos or Wolfgang
From: GUEST,Bruce O.
Date: 12-Mar-01 - 11:56 PM

I'm not sure of that Mark. I took some dehydrated water on a camping trip once, and after I'd reconstituted it with H2O, it was just as wet as the regular stuff.

Subject: RE: BS - Science Question for Amos or Wolfgang
From: CarolC
Date: 13-Mar-01 - 12:40 AM

Is it April 1st already?

Subject: RE: BS - Science Question for Amos or Wolfgang
From: GUEST,Bruce O.
Date: 13-Mar-01 - 01:08 AM

Of course not. I didn't get started on this month until the third. I started thinking something might be a little off the previous day when my watch calendar gave me Feb. 30. How am I going to get Mar. 1 and 2 back? I need them.

(This place also has some stuff that's just plain silly, but what the hell, eh?)

Not too shabby, in my opinion.

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: harpgirl
Date: 06 May 01 - 08:47 PM

I can't believe Mt Olympus has been aflame all week without me!

For the record, Bruce, I don't think you should give up. Be yourself! Even if it means you were Guest #1. As I look this thread over, and some of the others referred to, I see that the Olympians are mostly being themselves, with the usual predictable responses. It is comforting, the sameness.

BTW, your girlfriend could have gotten a diggerido from The House of Musical Traditions, which I enjoyed immensely along with the rest of my trip to DC last week. Please don't go, or come back soon!

hg

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Bill D
Date: 06 May 01 - 09:29 PM

because only a very few people (like me)have followed ALL this discussion for 3-4 years, and have also met Bruce and some of the people involved face-to-face (and discussed it at length), it is very difficult to cover all the ins & outs about it all......suffice it to say that Bruce will keep busy, as he says....and IF someone has real questions about his field of expertise, it won't be hard to find him....

you know, Bruce made a real effort to cope with Mudcat...for a LONG time...and as Carol showed, he has shown a real sense of humor at times...(there was one thread when Dan Mulligan was being a pain...*grin*)....

I guess if the wading through the BS got to be more than he was able to cope with, then he did the right thing by opting out...and as for saying goodbye---well, if I were gonna leave after 3000+ posts, I'd say why, too!!

Folks...there is no way to say strongly enough...we are all wired differently!!.....what seems SO simple to you, may be unfathomable to me. It IS a wonder that this place works as well as it does...and it ***IS*** a damn shame that there is not a moderated forum similar to this just for moderate to serious music/song discussion....you'd have Bruce O there.....

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 06 May 01 - 09:35 PM

Carol, you didn't include my line, and it was a lot funnier than Bruce's. Now I'm going to take my little red Italian accordian and go home.

Alohavederci,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 06 May 01 - 09:53 PM

No, Mark! Please come back with your little red Italian accordion! Here's your post...

Subject: RE: BS - Science Question for Amos or Wolfgang
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 12-Mar-01 - 10:30 PM

Banjer, don't let these Mr. Science guys fool you with all their doubletalk. Water won't burn because it's wet. Dry it out, it'll burn like a house afire. Of course, there ain't no ash will burn....but that's another song.

Mark, what kind of accordion to you have? What make and how many basses, etc? What do you play on it?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 May 01 - 10:01 PM

Same as you Carol......He plays "Lady of Spain" and one other song that isn't.

"Gawd I love the smell of napalmed accordions in the morning."

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 06 May 01 - 10:10 PM

Same as you Carol......He plays "Lady of Spain" and one other song that isn't.

"Gawd I love the smell of napalmed accordions in the morning."

--Spaw

...and there you have it, folks. Need I say more?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 06 May 01 - 10:51 PM

"...and it ***IS*** a damn shame that there is not a moderated forum similar to this just for moderate to serious music/song discussion..."

Funny Bill, I was thinking the same, not because I could add to that type of discussion but because I do see problems here. This is just my perception but I seem to be seeing:

No effort to at least make it easy for us all to live together on the BS/non-BS debate. As we are all here (I hope) becuase of some interest in music, I'd have thought that more effort could go into the "how can we help each other approach". I guess Peter T saying "They seem to be unable to digest the fact that even in serious music threads folk musicians and listeners are eclectic, chatty, and prone to take the mickey out of each other. We could try a grand experiment: get Max to set up a site where only serious folk music could be talked about, and all frivolity edited out. It would be really exciting -- for the 10 people who showed up" in answer to a suggestion made to help say's a lot... Sort of like "sod them, they're weirdo's"...

My worries run beyond the BS argument as I am pro other conversation but I don't feel easy when I see calls for censorship when people want things open - I mean, there are times, it seems to me the underlying rule is "you can say what you like as long as I approve of it..."

I've said my piece about Bruce O here...

I guess things will settle down again but I think that there is something seriously wrong here that maybe should be faced rather that buried to rise again.

As for other forums, anyone with sufficient web space with cgi/perl scripting could do it but a lot of the strengths of Mudcat would be lost and I don't know the cost of the package.

I spent the time Mudcat was down, looking at ASP with a view to setting up a non BS forum and it seems feasible at first glance - at least the package looks capable, and web hosts providing this seem to be plenty...

Now for the down side...

Let's look at what Max gives...

A LOT of time and effort and I believe LOVE.

He hosts the thing on his own servers and his own lines. Apart from the cost of doing this being FAR greater than using a 3rd party host, there are other less obvious implications - take copyright - a 3rd party host is likely just to cut you off with a challenge from HFA..., bandwith usage could become a problem, etc.

The legacy of information and threads here.

The wealth of knowledge of what people have to shere here.

I guess there would be lots of other things to consider and it is probably a bit of a kick in the teeth for Max that talk of alternatives have cropped up but with what seems to me to be an "if you don't like it f*** off" attitude from some here, perhaps the time will come when it does happen and there is somewhere else to go to even though there would be no reall winners.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jeri
Date: 06 May 01 - 11:34 PM

For some reason, people who disagree with others sometimes get labeled as worthless, or just plain evil. I don't think it's always been like that here, but it sure seems like the norm these days. Frankly, I'm sickened by the ease with which people can justify being cruel. No one tries to understand people anymore. No one even thinks about the results of their words here - they just say or do whatever they feel like.

A general impression of the Forum: it's compassion that's lacking. Oh, people who agree have it for each other - it's just the the folks who disagree who are fair game. They get called names, told to go find something better, told to just "drop it," and then people look for all sorts of other reasons to treat them like crap. People get on other people's nerves. Instead of trying to understand how the other person feels, they're quickly labeled as "enemy" so it's justifiable to behave badly.

The flaming and general irritability seem to be cyclical, but each time it happens, the compassion level seems to drop. It's the compassion that once made this place special. It's petty squabbles, personality conflicts and a "get the flamers" attitude that characterise Mudcat these days.

I hope I'm just going through a cynical phase...

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 07 May 01 - 12:35 AM

Hey, 'Spaw, did you hear about the new house band in Hell? It's called "Nine Bodhrans and an Accordion".

Carol, I hope your "Need I say more?" was in the vein of appreciating highbrow frivolity, not complaining about 'Spaw's lack of, er, shall we say, sensitivity. I think he's one of the treasures of the Mudcat, even though at times he can be a real putz. But that's true of most of us. Well, the men, anyway. (Check a Yiddish dictionary.)

I'll check the nameplate on my box when I get home and let you know. I said it was 48-bass on another thread, but there may not be that many. There are 4 rows of bass buttons: single note, major, minor, and 7th (see? I figured that much out already!)

And sorry, 'Spaw, I don't play anything on it just yet. I'm trying to work out "Under Paris Skies," which will give you a hint on where I'd like to go with it. Yes, I know where some of you would like me to go with it.....as my young patients would say, tough noogies.

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 07 May 01 - 12:52 AM

Actually, Mark, it was simply an attempt to draw attention to a phenomenon that does actually happen. Earlier in this thread, Earl and I had a little discussion about it.

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: alison
Date: 07 May 01 - 04:19 AM

sorry to see you go Bruce.... I'll miss your knowledge....

slainte

alison

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 May 01 - 07:15 AM

G.A.S.P. wasn't me, but it well could have been.

At the top of the page is The Mudcat Cafe - a magazine dedicated to blues and folk music. That used to be the case, but not so any more, and it's become too time consuming to find anything related to that subject here. Goodbye Mudcat.

was posted by Bruce on the 'More music less BS' thread in 1999. I hope like last time Bruce will reconsider his decision after a couple of weeks, for his knowledge is invaluable. With the 62 songs in the DT that carry his initials he has contributed more than many other who now are glad he's leaving.

Kat, you have claimed that a couple of GUEST,#1 postings have been signed with Bruce's real name. While I have hardly any doubt remaining that the majority of #1's postings come from Bruce (one exception for instance: Please accept thread which started some Mudcatters using guesses about s

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 May 01 - 07:17 AM

...sexual preference as a kind of arguments) I doubt that you are able to back up that claim by fact.

Wolfgang (sorry for the interruption)

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 07 May 01 - 09:57 AM

Carol C. - My grandfather played the concertina. My uncle played the accordion. My mother actually gave accordion lessons. My father played the trombone. My sister plays the banjo and her daughter the bodran. I myself am a singer-songwriter.

I'm relieved to know that it's genetic; I always feared it was a hygiene problem. . .

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Snuffy
Date: 07 May 01 - 01:35 PM

Apologies for introducing music into this thread AND for posting lyrics that are already in the DT, but why not?

Cease your quarreling and fighting,
Evil thinking and backbiting.
All these things take no delight in,
While we are together.

CHORUS:
Let union be in all our hearts,
Let all our hearts be joined as one.
We'll end the day as we begun,
We'll end it all in pleasure.
Right-folla-rolla-rye, too-ra-lie-do (3x)
While we are together.

Wassail! V

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: mousethief
Date: 07 May 01 - 01:47 PM

No effort to at least make it easy for us all to live together on the BS/non-BS debate.

Golly, guess we'll have to grow up and handle it ourselves, like big boys and girls.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: GUEST,Momentarily Nameless Member
Date: 07 May 01 - 03:25 PM

If you have never found yourself in a situation you felt strongly required that you leave Mudcat for good, you can't accurately understand why people feel they must.

If you have never been in that position, you cannot accurately understand why it makes sense to post a farewell of come sort.

If you have never been lobbied off-thread by so-called "friends" who desperately want you to "come back," you can't accurately understand how hard it is to keep such a decision or what it is like if you do "come back."

If you have never left and then, by whatever means, found a new viewpoint about Mudcat that allows you to come back in good faith and conscience, you can't accurately understand the transforming experience this can be, and perhaps you can't accurately interact with one who has had it.


You can judge such things if you wish. But it has little to do with actual reality, and does not help much.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: mousethief
Date: 07 May 01 - 03:37 PM

If members leaving don't want people to comment on their leaving, why start a thread about it? This is an invitation to post our comments, whether or not the momentarily nameless police like them or not.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 07 May 01 - 03:38 PM

and if you've never been stalked or cared about one who has or care about trust in relationships on the forum, you don't understand the deception in hiding behind the guest moniker.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Ian HP
Date: 07 May 01 - 03:44 PM

Bruce, I left Mudcat some years ago because I was so very sore and upset about smart-ass and just plain malicious entires on threads I started or contributed to. It took me about three years, but I came back. I've recently considered leaving again after some recent bad taste threads. Either this site should be policed by Max (hate the term, but you all know what I mean) to make those who love the music feel safe, or else people will simply leave. I'm still pondering my decision. Anarchy doesn't work because, sadly, there are always spoilers. Are you there, Max?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Big Mick
Date: 07 May 01 - 03:54 PM

Momentarily, that is the biggest load of shite yet. I have left the Mudcat because it wasn't serving my needs at the moment, or I just had other things to do. I have gotten emails wondering where I was. I have also gotten, since the start of this thread, no fewer than 15 emails from people indicating to me that they felt that this is a bunch of crap, as was the treatment of two of our finest members. And when I decided to not hang out here for a bit in order to refresh myself, I did it without fanfare. So coming back was easy. If one truly understands this place, then they don't try to mold it, rather they just enjoy/or not enjoy it as it is. And if one cares about it, as I and many others do, then they don't take actions that hurt the place. Like some great "leaving" thread, as if that would make any difference.

I will say it again. Bruce's scholarship will be missed. He is a wonderful resource. Fortunately that is still available elsewhere. His obsessive need to change this place into something that it isn't won't be missed at all. And if his past actions are any measure, he will still monitor the place, probably post under an alias, and eventually return. I only hope that in the meantime he re-examines his motives in attacking persons instead of issues.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Frank McGrath
Date: 07 May 01 - 04:52 PM

The Mudcat is a wonderful resource because of the people who created it and the people who contribute to it. Sure there is a lot of "stuff" here that doesn't interest me and it can be a pain at times going through threads looking for the gems of information which are of interest to me. But, to me, it is a small price to pay.

Bruce is an exceptional resource and has enriched the database here with excellent information and I do hope he will return.

Frank McGrath

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: radriano
Date: 08 May 01 - 04:28 PM

I can't blame Bruce one bit for how he feels.

I used to look forward with delight to logging on to Mudcat. Nowadays I often log on and log off without opening one thread. Why? Most of the threads these days are "best of..", "worst of.." and now, of all things, there's an Amway thread. And when did people start logging on as other people just to stir up trouble? I wish those people interested in nothing other than mental masterbation would go elsewhere. Mudcat has a lot of potential but it is being buried in total crap right now.

It seems to me that Bruce O. has contributed much more than many other people to Mudcat. If this keeps up Mudcat will soon be nothing more than a chatroom for all the pissers and moaners out there.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: nutty
Date: 08 May 01 - 05:13 PM

It only will if you let it radriano.
Maybe I am fortunate but I haven't met many pissers or moaners on this site ........ the majority have been warm, caring individuals who are very generous with their help and support ......... some even post to BS threads and I would totally defend their right to do so.

You don't expect a TV channel to only broadcast programmes that you are interested in ..... you have an off switch for the ones you don't like (or you change to another channel) Why should a web site be any different??
Surely the same principles apply.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Justa Picker
Date: 08 May 01 - 05:18 PM

I'm a hardcore music and instrument related poster, but I need a break from musical discussions every so often, just as in 3D life, or it would drive me nuts. I do however try and be selective about what BS threads I contribute to, or start.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: GUEST,Annoyed
Date: 08 May 01 - 05:48 PM

Can you (pl) not just leave if you are so pissed off instead of constantly harping on about being so. Do you like the sound of your own keyboard's rattling?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: radriano
Date: 08 May 01 - 06:18 PM

I know, Nutty, I know. For a long time now I've been calmly not posting and just ignoring threads I'm not interested in. But guidelines about labelling threads are not followed - you often have to open a thread to find out what it's really about. Some posters deliberately try to mislead you so you'll open the thread.

Yes, I'm disappointed. And if this is indeed an open forum then I should be able to say that.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jeri
Date: 08 May 01 - 06:40 PM

If you find too may shows you don't like, eventually you stop turning the TV on. Possibly, you complain to the network or channel first. You'll probably wind up with the TV off, because the folks you complain to don't want to hear anything negative about their scheduling. Not only will they refuse to consider any changes to programming, but they'll probably tell you to quit complaining as well.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: mousethief
Date: 08 May 01 - 06:46 PM

And so you don't watch TV any more. They continue to provide programming for the great unwashed, and you find better things to do. Who loses?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jeri
Date: 08 May 01 - 07:09 PM

The TV station loses a viewer, but at least the ones left won't complain anymore about what's on. The viewers who remain (and in Mudcat's case, the viewers ARE the programmers) lose someone with a different opinion than theirs, and the one who left loses the feeling that anyone cared what he/she had to say.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: marty D
Date: 08 May 01 - 08:05 PM

I can hardly believe the anger that an issue like this stirs up in some, after all I HOPE this is supposed to be our HOBBY and not some kind of basic training before we're sent off to war. It seems though that some people value scholarship, far more than politeness or common courtesy. My own profession has a lot of that, BUT we don't have an internet site that calls itself a CAFE, and unless I'm mistaken, Mudcat has "chat" prominently displayed up top, along with an auction etc. Most of the anger seems to be coming from people who think that the site has become frivolous. Well there wasn't a sign saying "only folklorists welcome." And there certainly wasn't a warning stating "Humor and wit not welcome here". If you want this forum to be more "serious" then you're going to have to put up some signs to keep the rest of us out.

marty

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 08 May 01 - 09:52 PM

radriano,

Would you feel less angry if things were set up like this...

Subject: RE: BS: or not BS? A suggestion
From: CarolC
Date: 08-May-01 - 09:37 PM

In my first post to this thread, I suggested that people who want to start threads that are specifically of a serious musical nature could have a heading that they could use at their descretion.

So far, no one has given any reason why this practice should not be adopted.

It seems to me that it would be just about the only thing that would placate the serious music scholars (short of eliminating all non-music discussion) because it gives them control of the situation. They would then be the ones upon whom it would be incumbant to use the designation or not.

And if they didn't use it, they'd have no one to blame but themselves.

Can anyone give me any good reasons why it shouldn't be done this way?

...And I forgot to mention the idea that the filter could be changed so that rather than filtering out the BS, it would filter in only the threads with the designation for serious musical discussion.

And the scholars could look at only what was allowed into the filter with this designation.

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Malcolm Douglas
Date: 08 May 01 - 11:01 PM

To be fair, the "BS" prefix was established so that people could indicate that a thread was not about music.  To require people to use a special prefix to show that a thread is about music would tend rather to prove the contention that the Mudcat is becoming an ordinary chatroom rather than a place to discuss music.  I can't believe that only "serious scholars", whatever that might mean, want to talk about music, and see no reason to change an established set of labelling conventions which would probably work quite well if people bothered to use them.

After a couple of years here (if I include the initial "lurking" period which used to be considered an appropriate preliminary so that one might get a reasonable idea of the way things were done in a place before intervening in it) I have certainly noticed that a lot of threads nowadays are started by bored people who have nothing much to say or contribute, but who nevertheless insist upon doing it, often at great length.  They also often insist on adding to threads such as this one, in spite of the fact that they have very little idea of what is involved, or of who they are talking about.  Please note that this is a general observation, and should not be taken as a personal comment on anyone in particular.  Most of the posts in this case seem to be intelligent and well-considered.  As in most things, it's a question of balance.  There is room for everybody, but only if certain accommodations are at least tacitly agreed, and acted upon.

I count myself as one of those who will miss Bruce's presence here, and regrets his departure; I hope that he will eventually feel able to come back.  It is worth mentioning that a number of people have felt it necessary, over the last couple of years, to announce their departure in this fashion; very few of them have contributed even a fraction of what Bruce has.  Many of them have come back, sometimes on the same day.  It is in no way unusual.

As to the "Guest #1" business, I can only say that I paid little attention to it, and so do not have much idea what was going on.  I can't imagine that it could possibly have begun to measure up to the kind of nastiness that has occurred here in the past.  Maybe it was a deciding factor for some people, maybe not.  Bruce is about the same age as my father; if you can't be a bit impatient with younger people who think they know it all once in a while when you get into your 70s, when the hell can you?

Perhaps the rest of us, me included, would do well to be a little less self-important and judgemental than we sometimes are.  We are all dispensible.  Very few of us, though, will ever contribute as much to the sum of knowledge available here -and elsewhere- as Bruce has done.  I hope that everybody will remember that.

Malcolm

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 08 May 01 - 11:19 PM

All of what you say may be true, Malcolm. But what if the idea I submitted is the only one that works?

I'm not saying it would or wouldn't. But what if it did? What if it could make the forum less contentious? Would you say no to it because the esthetics of it don't please you?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: mousethief
Date: 08 May 01 - 11:38 PM

When I'm 70 years old, if I do a lot of research into folk music and share my knowledge freely, will all rules of charity and courtesy suddenly stop applying to me, too? Cool. I shall look forward to it.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Bill D
Date: 09 May 01 - 12:08 AM

"all rules of charity and courtesy suddenly stop applying "

whoever suggested that? ..tsk..

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 09 May 01 - 12:09 AM

First do the research, then we'll talk.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Metchosin
Date: 09 May 01 - 02:27 AM

"And they returned to their tea and scandal as was their ancient custom." Congreve 1670-1729