An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max

Subject: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Feb 02 - 08:19 PM

It was nice finally hearing directly from you Max. Thanks for taking the time to share your feelings, and writing especially to us. Made me feel as welcome as I always do here. And I'm sure guests like Arlo Guthrie and Frank Hamilton appreciate your kind words too. It's things like your letter to us that makes Mudcat the special place in the folk music world that it is to so many of us.

Yours in kind,

The Monolithic Guest

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: 53
Date: 10 Feb 02 - 09:02 PM

The next time you see Arlo and Frank, tell them that Bob said hello.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: DougR
Date: 10 Feb 02 - 10:16 PM

-30-

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 10 Feb 02 - 10:22 PM

I enjoy the Mudcat, but I'm not going to type my name, address and phone onto an Internet site run by people I don't know.

If you need money, say so and explain why. I might send a contribution via U.S. Mail.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST,Graffiti Gal
Date: 10 Feb 02 - 11:42 PM

Max needs the money to build a fence like our friend Xenophobe here:

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame48.html

Substitute "guest" for "newbie" and you'll understand why Max needs a lot of money. It is because he needs a really big fence to keep us immigrants outside his borders, and the Mudcat safe from foreigners.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Lane
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 12:20 AM

Peace, all...... please

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: gnu
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 06:44 AM

Keep those comments coming, guests. If you can spew all your shit into one neat and tidy thread, it will make Max's decision to flush it down the drain that much easier.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 07:34 AM

I've already posted to this thread once, so it seems to have been trimmed. I just wanted to say, look on the plus side Max. Just see how many of the current threads are performing a valuable task in diseminating information, keeping people in touch, helping to organise events (just look at the various Stony Stratford threads - to find a success story) and all the other wonderful things that are possible because of your creation. Don't let the small percentage of "Unwanted Guests" spoil all that. If you are forced to close or make drastic changes to "The Cat" then you will have handed a victory to those very people.

Speaking as a web user for many years, it was only after reading threads on "The Cat" that I enquired into the "netiquette" section to find out the definitions of "Trolls" and "Flamers" - they're not regular terms or problems for most of us in the UK. I think that the proliferation of threads on the subject just makes the problem worse -it's very like a virus reproducing itself.

Let's all just get on with ENJOYING "The Cat" and all the benefits that it brings.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 07:37 AM

No Dave, you posted to this thread

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 08:35 AM

Max

I resent some of your comments regarding guests, particularly your statement that we contribute neither "knowledge or Money". I have been visiting mudcat on and off for many years. I have contributed lyrics to the data base, answered questions posted and been a polite contrubutor to discussions. On Several occasions I have been verbally abused by "Members" who do not seem driven to civility by the fact that there names appear here. There is something offensive and heavy handed about your attitude, I am not sure that I have any desire to come here again.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: nutty
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 09:06 AM

GUEST Guest ......the most unfortunate aspect of this problem if that there is no way to distinguish between friendly and unfriendly guests or to moderate the behavior of those "guests" who are determined to make trouble.
If you have been around Mudcat for some time then you will know that the best way to ensure that Mudcat survives is to support Max in every way possible.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST,Catscradle
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 09:19 AM

nutty, as sophocleese said in the other thead, the problem isn't with the member/guest thing--problem posters are merely using that as a guise for stirring up trouble. The problem also isn't with anonymity, as many members enjoy anonymity by using pseudonyms.

The problem in Mudcat is that it has become inundated with flamers and trolls. And I don't mean the Mudcat definition of flamers and trolls (which is usually invoked when a guest states an opinion at odds with the Mudcat majority opinion). I mean the Usenet definition of trolls and flamers.

As sophocleese said, if Max is going to begin moderating the forum, he needs to moderate behavior of anyone (including some problem members) guilty of engaging in really bad behavior.

And I agree with the above guests, that Max's attitude toward us guests is both heavy handed and offensive. And that certainly won't help matters any either. But if that is really his attitude, and he really believes that making guests disappear will solve the problems, I don't think we'll see change for the better with a log-in change eliminating guest posting.

Quite the contrary--you get back what you give in life. Based upon Max's "open letter to guests" and his follow up posts, I'd say Max is getting about as good as he is giving when it comes to the behavior of guests here. With that sort of negative attitude toward guests from the site owner, it only follows that the membership is going mirror those attitudes in their every day dealings with guests in the forum.

What goes around, comes around. You get what you give. It is pretty clear to me and a number of other people that Max isn't near as generous as some of his guests have been to the forum and DT. It is a real slap in the face (again) to hear that none of us ever contribute meaningfully, when we have seen so many guests do just that, despite the abuse heaped on them by problem members and the forum newbies they suck into their sick game of "flame the guest".

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 09:31 AM

Wherever else you posted, Dave, you're on the button in this thread.

Guest guest: I'd much rather a site like this was in some sort of collective/public ownership rather than the plaything of a rich kid. But to be honest it wouldn't have been as good, so I'm content to be patronised by this particular rich kid. Max thought up Mudcat; he's made a vastly better job of it than most forums out there, and if he wants to play God, that's his entitlement. I'd be pretty sure that the remark he made downplaying the knowledge contribution from guests went farther than he meant or intended, but I'm guessing.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 09:36 AM

Content to be patronized ? Excusing someone elses bad manners......I an flattered to be unwelcome here

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 10:07 AM

I'm proud to have been one of the guests who has cared enough to take the abuse for pointing out Max and his posse's failings and foibles. While I know they can't possibly accept that my motives and intentions behind doing it were for the good of all, to root out the rot destroying this place, that has always been my purpose for posting here since last summer. They are just too close to this thing, I think. Can't see the forest for the trees.

The best thing that could possibly happen here is that the guest log-in be eliminated. That way, Max and the Mudcat Mafia will be forced to wade through their own excrement, and possibly (though I doubt it) become aware that they've no one but themselves to blame for creating and maintaining a forum with such appallingly low standards for behavior.

Nothing any of us says will change their minds about guests, though. It is just too easy for them to scapegoat guests, and avoid the real problems.

My guess is the forum will just keep getting less and less relevant than it has already become to the on-line folk music community, until one day it just sorta fades away. No guest log-in is bound to cut the foot traffic, though none of us knows by how much. I can't be bothered with the user name/PW thing to post on websites, and I'm sure a lot of the new and occassional user foot traffic will feel the same way. Those regular guests who wish to continue posting will become members, and that will be that.

I don't agree with Fionn and the others, who claim that Max's divine right of ownership gives him the inalienable right to offend and insult the guest users of his website, which IS what he did with his "open letter". It takes a whole lot of arrogance and hatred to post a letter like that, especially in the wake of the Drumcree threads, where anon guests made the thread the thing that it was. Just smacks of sour grapes.

Max has the ability to behave like a jerk, not the right to do it. Private websites aren't democracies, but if you aren't fair in your dealings with the users of your forum, just what kind of forum do you get? Answer: Mudcat today.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 10:25 AM

-unnamed thread

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: annamill
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 10:27 AM

Rich kid!!! What rich kid?? If you're so fond of Mudcat then you won't mind joining and being accountable for your words. NOTE: NOT A GUEST!

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: mack/misophist
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 10:40 AM

Some-one above mentioned privacy, as in surrendering it to become a member. As a recent sign-up, I'm content that my privacy is intact. There's much less privacy on the web that many people imagine. This site is normal. I've checked.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Devilmaster
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 10:50 AM

Ya know, Guest, your right, private websites aren't democracies.

Mudcat is owned by Max. He allows other people to use this website, free of charge, because he has a love of music and wants to share in that.

Now, if members go too far, like I did once, won't mention which thread, I recieved a PM stating that I did wrong, and to cut it out. I have seen some very hateful stuff posted by members AND guests. There are those type of people out there, I'm sure you'd agree.

But if a guest attacks a personal member, how does anyone know which guest it is? Is it billy joe jim bob, who just flames cause he gets off on that? Or is it Arlo Guthrie ( which some unknown Guest claims that he does.... as a guest...... sorta like a double negative? :) )and Arlo contributes, but doesn't like what the member said. How does anyone know who it is?

Max has the right to say whatever he wants on his site. You might not like it, I might not like it, everyone might not like it. But its his own site, and no one is gonna stop him. If Max started to go to far, people would just stop coming to Mudcat. If that happens, the website dies. Everyone will find something else. Life goes on.

So if Mudcat has become less relevant, and Max feels that he needs to change things, so be it. That is something for Max to deal with. Tain't none of my business. Nor anyone else's. I have offered congrats and moral support to him, but it doesn't matter. At the end of the day, its his site, and his to do with as he chooses.

As long as Mudcat is still up, and garners hits from people, and some of those people offer money to help him out, it doesn't matter what you, I or anyone says or does. This change in policy is directed to try and solve a problem Max doesn't like. If he changes it and Mudcat goes to hell in a handbasket, that will be for him to deal with.

Steve

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 11:12 AM

No disagreement from me, Steve--except this one point: the divine right of ownership of the site gives Max the power and authority to do as he damn well pleases. Which is what he has always done. So if the place is fucked up, he has no one but himself to blame. Yet, that hasn't stopped him from blaming others anyway.

Most days Max is a benevolent dictator. The rest of the days he is a malevolent one. As the old adage goes, absolute power corrupts absolutely--even when it corrupts nice guys. I think Max has abused his power with this forum, and we are all living and dealing with it as best we can. I just happen to be one of the very few people here who is willing to say I see the emperor has no clothes. Most everyone else believes the emperor looks absolutely stunning.

Peoples' mileage always varies with these sorts of personal behavior issues. But some folks who've gone without the tune-up for awhile get a lot worse mileage than they have to.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: gnu
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 11:31 AM

Guest said... I don't agree with Fionn and the others, who claim that Max's divine right of ownership gives him the inalienable right to offend and insult the guest users of his website, which IS what he did with his "open letter". It takes a whole lot of arrogance and hatred to post a letter like that, especially in the wake of the Drumcree threads, where anon guests made the thread the thing that it was. Just smacks of sour grapes.

You sir, are one fucked-up individual. Talk about an arrogant, ignorant no-mind. Apparently, your mother never taught you any manners, which is what this is all about. I'm no saint, not by a long shot, but you take the proverbial cake ! Crawl back under your rock.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Devilmaster
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 11:51 AM

Ya know, this kinda reminds of what Dale Earnhardt once said......"It doesn't matter if they cheer you or boo you. Once they stop doing both, then you've got a problem."

Mudcat is alot of things, to alot of different people. It is a music forum, it is a chat forum, it is a place where a few people come to flame and troll.

Members and Guests can come here, free of charge to hobknob. Famous musicians, not so famous musicians, pub players, and people who love folk and blues music can all show up and offer ideas, thoughts, flames, whatever. The fact that all these people come, day in and day out, can call this website a success. I definitely would.

Max is going to install something that solves a problem that he sees. If Mudcat, as some have stated, is swirling the drain right now, i'm going to bring my rubber duckie, loofa sponge and back scratcher. I commend Max for doing this.

It won't stop the flame postings completely. But it forces flamers and trollers, whether they are members or guests, to be held accountable for their membership. I know what your thinking. If you lose your logon, you just get another. I agree. But now a level or complexity is added, by people having to readd information to recieve a new logon name. It won't stop some i agree, but it might stop one or two, as it becomes tedious to do.

The IP logging won't do much right away, but there are sites that have the same IP constantly, perhaps users use an online coffee shop to surf, some users might leave their computers and connections on all the time. Cable is like that I think. I believe perhaps a few troublemakers will be figured out this way.

All of these things will only work if Max and the Joe's constantly monitor posters.

On the point of what Max can and cannot do, I guess we'll have to just disagree. I honestly believe Max really can do whatever he wants. If he is constantly rude to all users, whether they are members or guests, Mudcat would die. Period. If Max were constantly bashing me, I would leave. But he doesn't. So I don't.

I believe that Max truly believes in free speech, as I do. I feel it is a right to say what you want when. But if you do, you have to realize that you can be held accountable for what you said. IMO, I know he believes in free speech because he has allowed ALOT of messages to stay in threads, from members and guests, which are just insults. They far and away are alot more than the ones that have been deleted.

I don't think he changing our use to deny people of free speech. I think he's trying to get people to be somewhat more accountable for what they write. By deleting an account of someone who just flames, they now are held accountable for what they said, and at the same time, a large amount of people will not be painted with the same brush stroke of 'troller' as that one person. Its not a perfect system. Nothing is. But I support this idea because I believe the pros outweigh the cons. More power to ya Max.

Steve

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: wysiwyg
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 12:06 PM

People forget sometimes that free speech does not mean speech without consequences.

And some people are deliberately mis-casting Max's remarks about GUESTS and to certain GUESTS, as if he meant them to apply to all guests. This isn't working, though. You see, most people, new members as well as old hands, managed to get his drift just fine, without taking unbrage.... because he laid out what he meant before using GUEST as a pronoun in the rest of his letter.

But the dynamos of negativity have repeatedly made clear that their attitudes about Max are so permanently sour that whatever he had said, and however he had said it, they'd have taken that as an opportunity to blame him again for their inability to use a cost-free resource effectively and positively.

~Susan

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 12:16 PM

let's get it straight:

once upon a time, several years ago, there were NO 'members'...then Max worked hard to create new features, like private messages and auctions and link pages, etc...which needed a cookie to work properly. The 'guest' name was added to identify those who could not, had not yet (being new)....and yes, did not wish, to have a cookie. Also, some malicious folk were posting disruptive messages using other's names.

once 'membership' was established, "guest" merely meant someone with no cookie enabled....but some took it as some moral/social designation, and acted as if it were somehow 'rating' people who come here....POOH!...many folk who came here posted as guests regularly, were recognized and treated the same as 'members'...because they used a name!!. They were perhaps posting from work, and could not use the private message system, but their contributions were good, interesting and acknowleged.

Max was NOT insulting or condemning those people, and you know it! He was simply tired, as are many, of those who use "guest" as a way to snipe and harass anonymously....some because the are "drunk & bored", some because they wanted to attack people they didn't like, and some because they wanted to coerce Max to re-design Mudcat to their specifications!

I am totally bemused by the person who posted "I can't be bothered with the user name/PW thing to post on websites"....fine! you deal with that...if you and several others hadn't behaved as you did, it wouldn't be necessary here, either! YOU act like children in a sandbox complaining "he won't do it MY way", and then whine because Mom changes the rules about who can play in the sandbox!

From my standpoint, it looks like about 3-5 malcontents will be inconvenienced by the proposed changes...(but I suspect a couple of THOSE are already members with multiple personalities who will still be here).....as to newbies...well, I suspect Max will figure out how to make the system work to welcome serious, honest new arrivals...LOGINS should allow anyone to BE here, whether or not they accept cookies, if I understand it correctly, and it **may** make it a bit more work for those who want to establish 14 email addresses and post thru 6 proxies to continue their contentious abuse!

If all this does slighty reduce the openness and accessibility of Mudcat (which I doubt), well, that's how it is...to ME, 85% of something wonderful is better than 100% of nothing....and, having met Max, I suspect that "nothing" was a real possibility at times.....would YOU like to sort out all this crap, do the programming, and try to live a life and make a living too?

**slides soapbox to one side with baleful glance at that curtain**

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 01:00 PM

Please don't feed the trolls.

Spaw

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 01:17 PM

Say at his house Max has custodianship of a valuable library (DigiTrad). People drop by his place to browse through the library and look things up. As an adjunct to the library, he generously opens his house as a salon, allowing any friends, acquaintances, and strangers (all guests, remember, whether they wear nametags or not) who want to drop by to make use of his home for songfests, parties, exchanges of information, discussions, and debates about music or pretty much any subject they wish to talk about. That is remarkable generous of Max, especially considering that it costs him time, money, and effort.

Now, if someone Max knows misbehaves, Max can take him or her aside and have a quiet word with them, keeping the disturbance to a minimum. But suppose one or more unidentified guests keep misbehaving: trying to stir up trouble and dissension and frequently shitting in the middle of the floor. Can anyone blame Max for getting a bit upset and taking steps to be more careful about who he lets through the door?

I think not.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: kendall
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 01:35 PM

Right on Don. The way I read Max's post, his remarks were aimed at the ASSHOLES who post crap, not the Guests who know something about being a guest.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: kendall
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 01:43 PM

There are certain "Guests" who insist on their "right" to act like the Ku Klux Klan. Those are the guests Max was aiming at, not the civilized ones.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: wysiwyg
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 01:59 PM

And insisting that the membership option was to protect one individual-- that hers was the only one hijacked-- is RIDICULOUS. Maybe at that point in time, that was so, but she was not the ONLY-- she was the FIRST. The attempted hijacking continued, aimed at lots of others, using the Guest approach. BUT-- because we DO have membership and PMs-- you can contact people and ask, "Did you really SAY this?"

And Spaw, I think there is a difference between feeding trolls and correcting a skewed record for lurkers who are watching every word. One can address the points raised without descending to the level of flaming them right back.

~Susan

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 02:55 PM

Susan,

As you weren't here at the time of the GUEST implementation, please don't try to rewrite mudcat history by guessing.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: gnu
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 02:55 PM

Spaw... I thought feeding them would be good at this point, no ?

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: wysiwyg
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 03:21 PM

Oh, I have personal knowledge of what I wrote. It was still in full fury when I arrived, I read all there was to read about it, and I saw how it continued despite the change to membership options. I got hijacked, briefly, too.

~Susan

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: kendall
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 05:19 PM

These militant guests refuse to hear the truth. They remind me of my ex wife; she saw/heard what she wanted to see/hear, and screw the truth. "Members, good, guests bad"... BOLLOX, open your eyes, get someone to translate if you cant handle the English language.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 05:31 PM

kendall,

I think everyone, to some extent sees and hears what they want; or at least interprets life as they want to.

I think it's called being human.

Some guests have made reasonable points. What has annoyed me in these threads is the idea that getting rid of GUESTS will somehow magic away the bitterness in this forum.

I don't believe that it will. There is a different prroblem.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: RichM
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 05:32 PM

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST,No One Wins A Flame War
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 05:59 PM

From the wonderful Internet Tips & Secrets website I mentioned in The New Mudcat Order thread here:

http://www.internet-tips.net/Msgboards/moderator.htm

Comes the following sage pieces of advice...

The Role Of A Moderator

What is the job of a moderator?

Some boards require user registration. In very strictly moderated boards, a moderator must approve each person who registers to access the board. This allows some measure of control over who can post. Security levels can further restrict what visitors can do.

Good judgment in allowing people to join the group can obviate the need for extreme policing of postings. In other words, don't allow the bad apples into the barrel in the first place.

Postings are policed. You can have two forms of moderation. In one form, articles are posted automatically. They are reviewed by the moderator after they are posted to the board. Moderators can delete postings which do not measure up to board standards. Personally, I dislike this kind of moderation, since unnecessary postings are available for reading until the moderator reviews them.

In the second form, a moderator must review each posting before it appears on the board. This makes for a cleaner experience, although it demands a lot more work from the moderator.

Ensuring the board remains on-topic. The best message boards stick to one or more specific topics. A major job of a good moderator is to review postings to ensure that they are of the same subject as the board. At the very least, off-topic threads should be discouraged quickly or gently moved to other, more appropriate arenas.

Minimize flaming. Flames are critical or derogatory remarks. A flame war is kind of like a shouting match where insults are hurled between people until they all flee, exhausted and battered. Good moderators gently prod people into posting responsibly by discouraging flaming.

Eject troublemakers and spammers. As moderators read through postings, it can become obvious very quickly that there is a troublemaker in the group. These troublemakers need to be handled - either by gentle persuasion or more harsh measures if necessary. In fact, the moderator must be ready to eject severe troublemakers from the group if these people are continually causing problems.

The best boards are good because they remain on-topic and the communications between individuals is civil and useful. A good moderator works to ensure that this remains true so that everyone can benefit from the community as well as contribute to the discussions in an intelligent manner.

The best moderators work with the board members to create an environment which is enjoyable and beneficial to all. A bad moderator can produce the feeling that one is being watched by the Gestapo or secret police, where every word is watched and postings are often deleted without apparent cause or need.

Members of the board need to feel that their comments are desired and valued. Randomly deleting large numbers of postings for no apparent reason other than the moderator disagrees will certainly cause a board to become useless and empty of life. In fact, one of the things that can make a board truly outstanding is lively (not insulting or demeaning but lively) discussions about various topics.

And that's really the job of a board moderator. To ensure that the board remains viable, active and alive. To promote and ensure that an environment exists where people can post without threat or fear. And to be sure that disagreements do not flare into all-out warfare.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST,No One Wins a Flame War
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 06:02 PM

The Role of the Moderator continued...

Moderator Ethics

A properly moderated message board is one of the true pleasures of the internet. The constant interaction of dozens or even hundreds of people in continuous conversations is a sight to behold and a joy to participate in. I have fond memories of the countless hours I spent "talking" with friends whose faces I have seen about an endless variety of subjects.

On the other hand, an unethical moderator creates friction, annoys people and causes an incredibly large number of problems. These message boards tend to consist of flame wars, derogatory comments and massive posts about the moderator (justifications and vilifications). Oftentimes, the moderator will desperately attempt to control the board by deleting posts and banning members (with virtually no success), and occasionally they may shut down the board in disgust (leaving with a vile comment or two back to the members).

An ethical moderator should be a friendly presence, someone who is always present, yet is virtually invisible in many ways. Their job is to make the conversations flow smoothly, keep them on topic and keep people interested.

Some of the tasks performed by an ethical moderator include:

Promoting the board to obtain new blood - all boards need a constant flow of new members to survive and prosper. Without new people lurking and posting, the board tends to become stale and useless.

Gently keeping the subjects reasonably on topic - There is usually no need to bring out the sledgehammer. A simple note here and there is all that is necessary in most cases.

Keeping the old guard happy and making new people feel welcome - This is a very critical function of any moderator. The board must be useful to both groups to thrive.

In extreme cases, removing hostile entities - some people just want to cause trouble. A good moderator knows the difference between a trouble maker (constantly flaming everyone, for example) and someone who is upset or does not have the best social skills.

Actively contributes - This is a must for all good moderators. They must contribute constantly to their own boards to keep the conversations going.

A very important fact that must be remembered by all ethical moderators is they don't need to agree with a post - they just need to keep things more-or-less on topic and civil. Boards with moderators which attempt to crush all opposing views quickly degenerate to hell holes of deleted posts, banned members, flame wars and constant disruption and aggitation.

Some examples of ethically run message boards include:

Webmaster world (http://www.webmasterworld.com/index.htm) - This board has a number of topics of interest to all webmasters. I like this board because it makes both old hands and newbies alike feel at home. You can tell other people like it as well because of the massive number of posts.

Ring Manager (http://www.topica.com/lists/ringmgr) - Want to learn about webrings from a group of great, caring, intelligent people? Join this message board and you will feel like you are part of a friendly group.

The best example of unethical moderators that I have ever witnessed was during a three or four month period starting in roughly August 2000 with a Yahoo Club known as WebRingNews. I found this club (a club is a kind of enhanced message board) and immediately thought I had found a great group of people. There were quite a few people posting their views about webrings, which was a topic in which I had an interest. The community was closely knit and virtually everyone enjoyed themselves.

At that time there was a rumor going around that Yahoo was going to change webring into a new and wonderful place. There were some vague letters supporting this - which naturally led to many discussions about the ramifications and possibilities.

In September 2000 Yahoo destroyed webring, which caused the Webringnews group to get very active. Everyone was extremely unhappy, because the Yahoo implementation was, well, severely lacking (this is an understatement if I ever heard one). The conversations grew heated and the anti-yahoo sentiment got high.

The moderators did not like this kind of behavior and began deleting posts without warning. They banned people who refused to bow to their demands to cease discussing alternatives to webring, and even went through ALL of the old posts going back months, deleting each and every one. These moderators became shrill and totally desperate, until the group finally fell apart.

This is the perfect example of completely unethical behavior on the part of message board moderators. Yes, on occasion a moderator may need to delete a post or two (especially in regards to spam), but it is completely wrong for mass deletions to occur. When moderators start banning people right and left, perhaps they should step down and let someone else hold the reigns.

In fact, a good indicator of a moderator who is out ethics is a vast number of posts from the moderator attempting to explain his actions, and a large number of posts from others (sometimes on other message boards) who have things to say against the moderator. Note that sometimes this is not bad - a good moderator may have to ban or annoy someone once in a while.

The key indication is that the topic of the message board changes to protecting the message board. In addition if the moderators seem to be spending most of their time keeping out individuals and deleting posts, then perhaps they need to take a hard look at their ethics.

It's as simple as that. Good message boards almost run themselves, and the effort required by the moderator to keep it going smoothly and on-topic is minimal. Bad message boards require huge amounts of effort by the moderators and become barren wastelands in short order. There are few things on the internet that are more sad than a once-proud message board reduced to rubble by an incompetent or malicious moderator.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: kendall
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 07:16 PM

Guest, your point is well taken. No one wants to eject the guests just because they are guests. Therefore that "Guest bad, members good "shite is a red herring.

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 07:33 PM

Bill D, thanks for setting out the history, but the most disruptive & damaging episode I remember involved the antics of one Michael K (who eventually apologised). As far as I remember, he was not posting as a guest but somehow masqueraded as other members. Would such deceits still be possible under the new regime that Max is now proposing?

(I'm following this thread rather than the one Max started because the one Max started has gone past 200 posts. In my view anything past 100 is inconsiderate to people with lower-spec PCs.)

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: wysiwyg
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 07:35 PM

Glad Max is an originator, not a copycat. Those guidelines don't sound much like Max's approach, thank God.

~S~

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Gareth
Date: 11 Feb 02 - 07:40 PM

Dear Max, and MudElves,

A number of European based Catters had a very good meet/sing along/instrument session/ p*** *p at Stoney Stratford this week end.

Some practicle decisions were made as to how we could channel support into the Mudcat to ensure its continued succes and continueation.

If you want the rough minutes of what was decided, and how, please PM me with your E Mail address, as there are still a few rough corners to smooth out before we go fully public

We were not aware of the threads starting with Max's open letter - and I doubt that they would have made any difference to the decisions, or consensus.

Firstly the overall consensus was that if we wanted the Mudcat to continue it was up to Catters to put something back. It was not just that Max and a handful of others continue to subsidise the research, information, and (speaking personally) the hours of entertainment that the Mudcat has given us.

Secondly. that any fundraising activities were to be open and accountable, and audited. Why was this a key factor ? Simple, there are enough flamers, trolls and lurkers out there who would have great pleasure, as "Anon Guest", in accusiung anybody handeling cash, in fiddelling, self importance etc. Whilst years, wearing other political hats, have inured me to such accusations, others may not be so thick skined, and I have no intention of exposing others to such hurts or accusations, without a means of defence.

Thirdly there was no mention of any attempt to equate financial contribution with control, and speaking again personally I will not be a party to that.

It's Max's site, his forum, and he has a right to demand certain minimum standards. It is a pity that some guests, and members have abused that. Perhaps I am sometimes guilty of breaches of politness and netiquete. If so I deserve any PM's I receive, or more public, but polite admonitions.

I do not know what Max has in mind, I wonder if at this specific moment wether his own mind is confident on which route to take ?

But it's simple - If Max gets it right the 'Cat and the Dt will survive and grow - If he gets it wrong then the 'Cat will follow the Dodo. But I am afraid that the present situation can not continue - Guest status, and I suspect that part of this is Members logging out and reposting as "Anon Guest" - is being abused.

And speaking "ethnically" if theres one thing that units 'Catters, or us Welsh, its an attack on one - Try this song, and think about it.

Humbly

Gareth ( Yes I Know a double post is a breach - So !)

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: Blackcatter
Date: 12 Feb 02 - 01:51 AM

I once likened my discussions with GUEST like a cat playing with a mouse. The past few days, I've gotten the feeling that it's more like a janitor cleaning out a stopped up toilet. Hence it's no fun for me anymore. I'd rather look forward to Valentine's Day and a special dinner with my sweetie.

I could then insult the GUEST, but others have. I could reiterate everything else, but why. Frankly, I'm not even sure why I'm posting this.

I feel sorry for GUEST - no check that - I feel pity for GUEST. The one thing is that I still don't see how GUEST is really damaging the Mudcat - sure things like funding may hurt, but GUEST will eventually move on (or someone will kill GUEST - they have to be an asshole in a car as well).

Things will eventually get back to normal - actually, there's plenty of normalcy around here still. There's a bunch of music threads as I write this as well as some interesting BS threads. pax yall

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 02 - 02:09 AM

Jeri said: Of course, it would have been better if we'd all just learned to ignore the silly trolls instead of needing to be protected from them. Too much to ask for, though.

Is it really?.........

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Feb 02 - 02:11 AM

-unnamed thread

Subject: RE: An Open Letter from GUESTS to Max
From: GUEST,Just Amy
Date: 12 Feb 02 - 09:02 PM

You know, I think that this is a valuable service. Please continue and if we need a sign in page first, so be it. I am willing to let you know who I am (but not all the mean spirited obscene mouthed perverts who don't know that children sometimes read these threads). Keep up the good work.