BS threads not labelled BS

Subject: BS threads not labelled BS
From: radriano
Date: 27 Nov 02 - 02:07 PM

I have requested the BS thread filter. Can we have a Joe Clone go through threads and label them BS where appropriate? What's the use of the BS filter if threads are not labelled properly?

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Joe Offer
Date: 27 Nov 02 - 04:02 PM

Hi, Radriano - have you gone to Membership and clicked the BS filter box? We use invisible tags to control that access now, usually (but nbot always) connected to the visible "BS" that you see. Yes, some threads get missed, but I try to tag most of 'em. No, we're not going to go back and tag old ones.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: radriano
Date: 27 Nov 02 - 04:13 PM

Hi Joe,

Yeah, I have clicked the BS filter box in the Membership section. The point of this thread is that a number of threads are BS but not labelled as such so they don't get filtered out.

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: wysiwyg
Date: 27 Nov 02 - 04:19 PM

Try looking again... I only see one now, so maybe Joe has made his usual periodic pass through the list and straightened them out. Patience, my friend....

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Joe Offer
Date: 27 Nov 02 - 04:22 PM

I dunno, Radriano - I just put the filter on my own membership so I could see what you're talking about. I found two threads that needed BS labels and didn't have them, so I changed 'em. I don't think that's a bad record.
We've decided NOT to have the Clones change thread labels, and they're very limited in what they're allowed to do on thread title changes. If there's a thread title or label that really needs changing, send me a personal message. Generally, though, I catch most of the problem titles sooner or later.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: ciarili
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 12:40 AM

I kinda wonder if it wouldn't be worth having two separate chat areas - one for music, one for everything that isn't. There is/are some moron(s) who think it's titillating to put sexual references in thread titles, for instance. How puerile. I can only assume these are post-pubescent high school brats who still think poop jokes are funny, but this just isn't the forum for it and when it's not labeled bs, it slips by.

Alternatively, maybe prefixes should simply be mandatory, and the appropriate filters would thereby take care of the mess. Perhaps people who intentionally mislabel things to get around filters could be blocked from the list at some point, via ip perhaps. I suspect some people already don't label their garbage in order to circumvent the bs filter.

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Mr Red
Date: 28 Nov 02 - 09:51 AM

I like the idea of an invisible BS tag and soft censorship - it gives us the choice and me too - now I know the wheeze. At the end of the day, talking rubbish is what folk do. And what folk do is FOLK. We have to represent it on a FOLK site if only to show the art has not been lost.
Or am I talking rubbish?

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 12:57 AM

There are also music-related threads to which people inexplicably add the "BS" prefix, to wit:

BS: Folk Scare Film by Christopher Guest
BS: learning the fiddle
MusicalBS: Bagpipes in America
BS: South Yorkshire Carols
BS: Married: Greg Brown and Iris Dement
BS: Unofficial Song Challenge!
BS: Stripped truss rod nut (about guitar repair)

These were all active in the last week.

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 03:32 AM

"I can only assume these are post-pubescent high school brats who still think poop jokes are funny",

I know a lot of elderly, serious, professional people and a peer of the realm, who still think poop jokes are funny.... Poop jokes ARE funny, it's personal attacks and whinging that are not.

The best filter in the world still remains with the individual user. Maybe we should use our own instead of relying on "Nanny" to feed us with the refined, sanitised and de-humanised.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: ciarili
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 01:36 PM

Bummer about the music threads that get labeled bs.

Bummer, too, about the people who want to know that they "made you look!" at their thread titles. Now, I can appreciate some low-brow humour, I thought Kingpin was hilarious, but what I don't appreciate is the kind of mindset that makes someone want to make you look. It's the principal of the thing. This is the type of person who would either be making inappropriate remarks to us in person or slipping porn pictures into our purses when we weren't looking. Now, I got flashed in New York, right there at St. Paul's! I laughed at him. I expect that kind of thing when I'm out in public, and I don't care. However, I don't appreciate people like that on a website ostensibly put out here for lyrics & knowledge, not lyrics & masturbatory topics.

Back to the possibility of new prefixes - I'd like to suggest "sex" & "politics".

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 02:15 PM

I changed the category of most of the threads on Jim's list, although some are borderline. I never know what to do about "song challenge" threads - I usually leave them as they are.
The "Done For Us" threads have caused a lot of consternation - but I find a lot of good information and a lot of cleverness in them. I grouped them all, just in case somebody might actually like ot read them. Still, I wish they'd stop.
If thread titles are overly misleading, I often add something to make them more clear.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: wysiwyg
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 02:26 PM

Joe, considering that you can neither read our minds when we start a thread nor predict where thread creep will take a thread, I think you do an amazing job on what must be a real pain-in-the-patoot task.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: ciarili
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 02:41 PM

I second that, Susan! *raises coffee mug to Joe*

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: wysiwyg
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 03:31 PM

To Joe's Patoot!

~S~

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 03:32 PM

Way to go LTS, I'm with you all the way. The Nanny State is only a concept, but then so is communism. If you can't see the bias in what you're reading, then perhaps it's time you gave up buying books, or newspapers.
There is no such thing as benevolent censorship.....Giok

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 03:42 PM

Well, I hope that most of what I do is not viewed as censorship. I delete very few things from the Forum, and most of those are personal attacks. Most of what I try to do is organize and categorize and index, so that people can find information that has been posted here (or avoid types of information they don't want to see).
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: GUEST,Nick
Date: 30 Nov 02 - 06:24 PM

So why was this thread not properly lablled?
Should it not have been_ BS: BS threads not lablled BS?
I think if you were following the strict protocol the initial post pines for it should have been. Or was this actualy just a sublte ploy?

I dont think he was being quite that clever.I think the first post could be taken at face value, and is a self defeating and inherently hypocritical.

I do enjoy this site but there are quite a number of people who just need to get over themselves.

Nick

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: GUEST,m
Date: 01 Dec 02 - 02:52 AM

m

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Mudlark
Date: 01 Dec 02 - 03:52 AM

I've no complaints. I think Joe does a good job and I really appreciate the ordering, listing of affiliated threads, etc.

And if I should dip into a thread that has been inappropriately labeled, accidently or on purpose, or is not what I expected, it takes but a moment to back out and try another. I never filter BS threads automatically...I like to make the choice moment by moment.

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Dec 02 - 05:14 AM

Ah dear guest Nick, if only we were all as clever as you. Then we could all be self censoring, thus leaving the way clear for erudition such as yours. I would point out though, that it is a physical impossibility for someone to get over themselves as you suggest. At this point another physically impossible request springs to mind.
But I'm too polite
Giok

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: GUEST,Nick
Date: 01 Dec 02 - 12:57 PM

Giok, few things feel quite as good as patting yourself on the back now do they? Thanks for your restraint while at the same time pointing out your finer qualities. They would have gone unnoticed otherwise.

Gold star for politeness.

I don't think it takes much to see the contradiction between the way this thread is labeled and it's content. It would be nice if people would try to be part of the solution to the problem they are complaining about.
Nick

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Dec 02 - 01:06 PM

Yes you're right about the original post of this thread, it is po faced in the extreme. You've got to feel sorry for folks who need someone to make their minds up for them.
Giok

Subject: can we have a filter in QUICK LINKS?
From: Alice
Date: 01 Dec 02 - 01:08 PM

Having the BS filter saves time for me when I only have a few minutes to check the forum for music threads. But, after trying the membership choice of the BS filter and then having to go back and turn it off to see all the threads, I think it would be VERY helpful for those who need to access non-BS quickly to have a QUICK LINKS link to the forum with BS filter. Have others requested this? Could it be added to the QUICK LINKS menu? It would sure save me some time and I think it would be helpful for people who come to the Mudcat for the first time to be able to access the filter through QUICK LINKS.

Thanks Joe, Jeff, Max and all for your work.

Alice Flynn

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Jeri
Date: 01 Dec 02 - 02:39 PM

Alice, you can type "BS:" into the filter on the main threads page, click the box that says "Filter out" and hit refresh.

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: radriano
Date: 02 Dec 02 - 11:51 AM

For Pete's sake, I had no agenda with the title of this thread. Yeah, yeah, technically I should have used the BS label but, as the saying goes, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

The reaction to this thread is exactly why my presence on Mudcat is scarce these days. Joe Offer is a friend of mine and he's doing a fine job. Did I mention his name in the first posting? No. And to all the Nicks out there, xxxx you, okay?

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 03 Dec 02 - 10:16 PM

Threads that should have the BS prefix but don't:

Something to ponder for 2001
Apple Cup 3:03 left in fourth
Vocab question for UK people
Setting up a blue link

Threads that shouldn't have the BS prefix but do:

BS: Tom Topping Band (UK) - Any Info ?
BS: What You Cats Play
BS: Odd percussion indtruments (sic)
BS: buying a bouzouki - dilemma

I know I could probably just PM this list to Joe and he'd fix them, but I want people to be aware of what a big chore this is.

Subject: RE: BS threads not labelled BS
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Dec 02 - 02:05 AM

Well, I added "BS" to two of the threads on Jim's list, and removed it from all four that had the tag erroneously. The "blue link" thread properly has a "tech" tag. The vocab thing has an impact on music, so I left it alone - there are many non-music topics that have to do with folklore and culture, things that are very important to musicians. I don't want to exclude any information that might be of use to music research, so I prefer to add on the side of including some non-music stuff that has musical value.

I see no need for us editors to work too hard on this. As long as most of the BS threads are tagged correctly, it won't be the end of the world if a music researcher sees a few non-music threads.

I crosslinked all the bouzouki threads - you'll be amazed how many there are. I was going to make one crosslink group for percussion, but I had to make a separate group for bodhrans.

-Joe Offer-


And no, this thread doesn't get a BS tag - this falls under the category of general housekeeping, not chit-chat/BS