Tech: Shambles can you help?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 02:12 AM

As Voltaire said: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". This was the Fred Voltaire who used to work in my local garage. Although I don't think that he was ever a member here - it is a principle that I had always believed was shared by most contributors………..

Tried this before but only made things worse
Never before have I tried it in verse
Might be a foolish hope I know
Perhaps our forum can be allowed to grow?

Will we never learn from the pain?
Making the same mistakes again and again?
We know the answer is toleration
And abuse is abuse, whatever the justification

The abusive post is of course taboo
Except when it comes from the chosen few
A place where the double standard rules
Where kings are being made of fools

Praise the vision of our creator
Not the bully, clone nor moderator
He created this garden and cannot today
Understand why we just can't go out and play

The dream was a forum for sisters and brothers
Not a freedom for one, being denied to others
Open to all – that was the plan
Not just a few - a clique or a clan

But that still is the plan – guests ARE invited!
If we set the example – we can all be united
I think this welcome is often hollow
The example being set - not one to follow

It is not who is saying it but what is being said
All that is lost – when you close down a thread
Respect every post – as if it were your friend
One you would always be prepared to defend.

Post what you like – ignore what you don't
If you don't abuse- perhaps others won't
Encourage the positive – just ignore what is not
Share out the ration – don't piss in the pot.

Agree, disagree or make no reaction
Just never ask for editing action
Save these requests for your own posts
Don't waste time hunting witches and ghosts.

This thead is probably example enough but the following link is to a thread setting the example of our appointees having fun - undertaking the the 'witchhunt'.
Forums Discussion Groups

This one is where a member was (wrongly) accused by Joe Offer of making anonymous abusive postings.
Guest postings This thread was also closed, when active, by an unknown nominee - for reasons that remain unknown - and later re-opened. Joe will you never inform us who did this and why this action was thought by them to be necessary? What purpose can be served by keeping this information a secret, in the face of many requests for it to be provided?

Was it closed because it was considered by them to be an 'Anti-Mudcat' thread?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Feb 04 - 02:04 AM

I guess the answer the original question in the thread title - is no. I can't help........

Such is the God....

You will find, in the finest of gardens
Some small place, where the wild flowers grow
And you can't train children, like a gardener trains roses
You can't thin out, you just reap what you sow

Inquisitions and witch-hunts and final solutions
Moral pollution, that defeats it's own ends
The obvious answer, is it always the best one?
It's wise to question, both your foe and your friend

The rose and the thorn, fine fruit and the poison
The soldier's warning? Just a young man, afraid
Through the eyes of the uncertain and the cries of believers
Such is the god in whose image we're made
The body of man, the heart of a woman
Songs of bright morning and the cool evening shade
Through the eyes of the poets and lies of deceivers
Such is the God, in whose image we're made

Do you join in the song, that everyone's singing?
Do you follow the path, just because it's well-trod?
Is faith just a way, to avoid hard decisions?
For religions are man-made, not made by God

The rose and the thorn, fine fruit and the poison
The soldier's warning? Just a young man, afraid
Through the eyes of the uncertain and the cries of believers
Such is the god in whose image we're made
The body of man, the heart of a woman
Songs of bright morning and the cool evening shade
Through the eyes of the poets and lies of deceivers
Such is the God, in whose image we're made

Roger Gall 1996

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 04:15 PM

You're right, Jeri.
Good night, Shambles.
Good night, Mrs. Calabash, whoever you are.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 03:15 PM

He portrays a paranoid nightmare vision of a power-crazed, hatred-driven, secret society of administrators, who insidiously work their evil deeds with impunity here at Mudcat, and he challenges you to make him feel better about it.

I do? - Where exactly do I do this?

What I see is cock-up by well-intentioned folk - not conspiracy.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Jeri
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 12:38 PM

Joe, it's my perception that Shambles wants to keep this going, as I can't really see how any of this 'getting Joe to jump through hoops' stuff is going to help. Nobody else is really upset with the way things are in general. Shambles is trying to set himself up as auditing authority or something, and he keeps making demands of you without supplying any information on what he intends to do with what he thinks you should give him. He'll judge it, that's what he'll do, and no matter what it is, no matter what you say or how you say it, he will just come up with further complaints and demands. Nothing will change, with the possible exception of our opinions of the people involved.

Why? Because he doesn't want answers. He wants to continue provoking you and anyone else he can view as an adversary.

He portrays a paranoid nightmare vision of a power-crazed, hatred-driven, secret society of administrators, who insidiously work their evil deeds with impunity here at Mudcat, and he challenges you to make him feel better about it. You think there's a snowball's chance in hell that might happen?

I suspect he won't stop, but I am very, very tired of people responding to him.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 12:19 PM

Wake-up Joe.

The concept of 'enemies' is your concept not mine. I only see people whose views I may not agree with and this does not make them enemies in my eyes.

However, it would appear that anyone who should not agree that the 'system' set up to censor our contributions on our forum is a sensitive area that could not possibly be improved - does become an enemy in some people's eyes. Threads with any of these comments or questions in are referred to as 'anti- Mudcat threads'. Holding a minority view and reasonably if firmly expressing it does not make a poster 'anti- Mudcat' or indeed anti anything.   

Unless you have recently placed it your FAQ - the answer to my question is not there.

I admit that I may well have placed some 'spin' on my question - this in in reply to the 'spin' contained in the few answers that I have received. It does not hurt to call a spade a spade - 'censorship' (of other people's contributions without their permission) - is the word we are talking about.

Your 'what's not allowed' section of your FAQ does refer to 'reserving the right' - but that is rather a different thing to exercising that right - on a routine basis - judged in an arbitary fashion based on the personal tastes of whichever nominee may be around at the time.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 11:41 AM

Hoping he will give me some rest.

And because he usually posts at times when I should be sleeping.
Good night, Jeri.
Good night, Chet.
Good night, David.
Good night, John-boy.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Jeri
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 11:35 AM

Joe, why do you keep saying 'Good night, Roger'?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 11:09 AM

Your wording in your question is misleading and unfair, Roger. Your intention is to put "spin" on information and quote out of context, to destroy your perceived enemies. Nobody has been "appointed to censor the contributions of fellow posters to our forum." Joe and Jeff handle problems when they arise, using helpers called JoeClones when they see fit. If you have a problem, contact Joe or Jeff.
Please refer to the FAQ. The answers are there.
Good night, Roger.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 06:02 AM

OK Joe - One at a time then - for I must have missed the answer to this one?

Who exactly is the 'we' that you refer to who are appointed to censor the contributions of fellow posters to our forum - or is this a secret that we have to guess the answer to?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 02:30 AM

Roger, the answers are more-or-less the same as the last time you asked and I answered - and I don't see anybody else asking but you. I find it's boring to have to repeat myself. Maybe you should have paid attention the first time.

The earth is still flat. It hasn't changed.
Good night, Roger.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Feb 04 - 02:14 AM

So, Roger, when have your words been censored?

Not that my posts being censored is the issue - but perhaps Joe you would care to explain to us all - when and why - as you should be able to provide the good reason that made this step necessary?

The reason why there are more and more questions - is because obtaining answers is like 'pulling teeth'. If or when they are eventually provided - there remains more questions than answers.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 10:06 PM

Ayup. The world is flat. Live with it.
Good night, Shambles.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 04:55 PM

Wolfgang I seem to be surrounded by people here who are convinced despite the evidence that I have provided and what is in this thread -that the world IS flat. If I am supplied with the answers and evidence that I have requested - I may even be prepared to go along with this madness and accept the majority Mudcat view that the world IS indeed flat.

But mearly having to keep asking for (and not receiving) this evidence appears to be crime enough?

Perhaps then the answers and evidence will clearly demonstrate to everyone - that the world is NOT flat?

Joe says - We delete messages rarely, and only if we have good reason to.

Censorship here is of course more than just deletions and even if the term 'rarely' meant anything we could measure and I knew who 'we' are and what the 'good reasons' were - the evidence that I have provided would demonstrate that this censorship is not under the controls that I have been told that it is and that for this reason - this censorship threatens to increase.

I am just doing the little I can to try and highlight the issue and ensure that controls are set up to ensure that it does not increase. And that lessons are learned from the mistakes currently being made - so they are just not repeated.

Is it really too much to ask and be expected to be told things like - who is appointed as my judge and what remit they are under and what protection there is from them?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 03:48 PM

Alfred R. Wallace (of evolution theory fame) once took on what he thought was an easy bet (500 Lb was a lot of money then). John Hampden, a flat-earther, challenged anyone to prove to him that the earth was not flat. He won the bet easily (for nearly everybody present at the Bedford canal experiment) but didn't get the 500 Lb on a technicality.

The looser pestered Wallece for 15 years to come with letters, letters to Wallace's wife (defaming Wallace's character), letters to editors of scientific journals (defaming Wallace's research).

These people are called 'paradoxers' in science. What to everyone else looked like an easy and convincing proof, Hampden just commented as being no proof to him. Wallace later commented that he should never have tried to win that bet, for if someone doesn't acknowledge or share some basic understandings in ways of argumentation, you can argue til kingdom comes. You'll win nothing but a new set of questions.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Big Mick
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 11:56 AM

Gentlemen, Ladies, Fellow Mudcatters, ....... the pathology of this is very apparent. As long as you acknowledge this mans posts, he will keep this interminable bullshit up. If you will quit debating with him, quit feeding him, he and the others will go on, but it will be with themselves. Roger has problems. My suggestion is that we leave this thread open for him and the others, and we quit responding. This is only because Joe has answered the questions enough, the majority of folks here understand how it is and approve. Let this man have his delusions. I am out of any further contact with Shambles. I suggest you do the same. You only feed his needs by responding.

Mick

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Amos
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 11:43 AM

When you supply the answer to my questions I and others will be able to judge your 'work' far better. Who knows we may even agree with you but when you get sensitive and secretive it does tend to look is if you have something to hide. This sensitivity provides all the ammunition your so-called troublemakers require.





I think Joe Offer has been extraordinarily patient with the most extended harassment -- harassment which is both unkind and harmful in intent, and thinly papered over with florid language and cheaply disguised as some sort of discussion.

Shambles, that's enough of your bullshit. You are not actually doing what you are pretending to do, and you've pretended long enough. Quit it.

A

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 11:30 AM

So, Roger, when have your words been censored?

If the widespread censorship you describe actually happened, that would be a cause for concern. That's not the case. We delete messages rarely, and only if we have good reason to.

Good night, Roger.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 07:03 AM

I probably shouldn't have brought up donations. My point is that I pay my share, and I am not your servant or subordinate. Your questioning sounds like a "kangaroo court," like you're watching me and all the Clones to see if you can nail us in a misstep or misstatement. It isn't pleasant, and I don't think we deserve it.
Good night, Roger.
-Joe Offer-

The words are the ones you use.

You may just be geting the message that the contributors to this forum are not subordinate or servant to you or your appointees and it certainly is not pleasant for them to feel as you are being watched to see if they can be nailed, and judged and they certainly do not deserve such treatment either. If this is a shop - then the contents of this shop belong to the contributors and perhaps should be given a little more respect?

But however you may feel that I judge the actions of you and your appointees - the fact remains that is ALL the action that I can take. I cannot censor you but you can take action to censor me and any other contibution that may not to be to your personal taste.

As for charges of a 'kangaroo court' remember that it was you who introduced this term. My little dictionary gives this as an - illegal court held by stikers etc. Probably because there are no rules to protect those accused, sentenced and punished by this 'court'.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 03:08 AM

I probably shouldn't have brought up donations. My point is that I pay my share, and I am not your servant or subordinate. Your questioning sounds like a "kangaroo court," like you're watching me and all the Clones to see if you can nail us in a misstep or misstatement. It isn't pleasant, and I don't think we deserve it.
Good night, Roger.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Feb 04 - 02:44 AM

I pay $400 a year toward the operation of Mudcat. How much money do you donate to Mudcat every year? Is there any reason on earth why I should feel bound to give any sort of accounting to you, of all people?

I am not sure that I understand this - why me of all people?

Is it that you do not wish to answers perfectly reasonable questions or that you do not (for some reason) wish to provide them to me?

Perhaps you could explain why you and your appointees - none of whom have ever met me - think that is OK to presume to know me and my motivations and that it is OK to post publicly making all sorts of hostile personal comments and judgements about me - even when Big Mick - for example - is thinking of some other poster entirely!

Joe says - Shambles, if you walk into a store and buy a piece of penny candy, are the merchant and his employees required to open their books to you? If you conduct yourself in stores like you conduct yourself here, you may be likely to starve.

Joe perhaps you could explain to those reading this what exactly you mean by "how I conduct myself here?" Joe this is OUR forum - not a shop that belongs to you and your appointees - whose conduct would appear to be far more questionable than mine.

If this were a shop and you turned customers away smply because their views may mot conform to yours or they were not to your personal tastes (or the varied personal views of your staff) - your shop would not be in business for very long. But it is not a shop.

I have been a contributor to our forum here since 1998. If you finally provide me with the answers that I politely request - I and others can decide if the forum remains a place where we wish to continue to contribute to, or if it has already bee 'taken - over'.

If one can now buy an 'indulgence' that entitles posters to freely pass judgement, insult and censor other people's contributions - it may not be the open forum that it was intended to be and that many posters are still under the impression that it is?

If you can buy the 'indulgence' - can you put me down for one? Joe if I pay The Mudcat $500 per year - can I then insult, judge and censor your contributions? That would appear to be the advice I have received (Big Mick may or may not be referring to me in the following).

Subject: RE: Why are my threads been deleted?
From: Big Mick
Date: 29-Dec-03 - 09:46 PM
Roger, I have the answer. You simply need to contribute financially to the Mudcat in a substantial enough way to have your say. You don't contribute your time, you don't contribute money..... but since I have been here, you do contribute an awful lot of whiny bullshit. You are so full of discontent, yet you stick around. I suspect there are deep psych reasons for this.

Big Mick was responding there to these ('whiny bullshit') comments of mine.

I don't see any 'what's wrong with Mudcat' threads and unlike the clones and their 'snitches' who are encouraged by the clones to the scrutinsing for them - who would appear to have a rather low opinion of other posters - I don't see very much to complain about The Mudcat forum.

Not everything there is to my taste but as the forum is the sum of all of its contributors - why would I expect it to be and why would I expect it to be changed so that it was all to my taste?
That is rather my point for if there is nothing wrong - there is nothing that requires putting right by editing, moving posts or encouraging posters to complain and make requests to edit or move other people's posts as if that had now become the sole purpose of the forum.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 12:27 PM

Shambles, if you walk into a store and buy a piece of penny candy, are the merchant and his employees required to open their books to you? If you conduct yourself in stores like you conduct yourself here, you may be likely to starve.

Sorry, Shambles. It's not a matter of being secretive. It's just that I have no desire or obligation to explain my every judgment and action to you. You are not my mother.

'Bye for now, Mom.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 02:59 AM

Matthew 7:1, "Judge not that ye be not judged.". ...

You're talking like some sort of auditor now. Do you have some sort of right to scrutinize my work, and that of the JoeClones? Frankly, I see no reason why I should respond to that sort of scrutiny.

Joe if you do not like being judged when you consider there is no good reason - why would you think anyone else would like you scutinizing them, passing judgement based on your personal taste and censoring their contributions to their forum? as you may know understand - this censorship is a very sensitive issue.

When you supply the answer to my questions I and others will be able to judge your 'work' far better. Who knows we may even agree with you but when you get sensitive and secretive it does tend to look is if you have something to hide. This sensitivity provides all the ammunition your so-called troublemakers require.

We all make mistake and you have admitted this so what exactly is being done to tighten-up, learn from these mistakes and ensure that these mistakes are not repeated? If the aswer is that you have done nothing - then perhaps you do have something to hide?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Jan 04 - 01:18 AM

Well, Shambles, I think you're going around in circles now. Basically, the fact of the matter is that I don't see things your way, and I have no wish to have a set of rules to govern my work and the work of the JoeClones. We do quite well with our common sense, thank you very much.

You're talking like some sort of auditor now. Do you have some sort of right to scrutinize my work, and that of the JoeClones? Frankly, I see no reason why I should respond to that sort of scrutiny. I was appointed to my job by Max, and I answer to him, not you. I pay $400 a year toward the operation of Mudcat. How much money do you donate to Mudcat every year? Is there any reason on earth why I should feel bound to give any sort of accounting to you, of all people?

Despite that, I think I've tried hard to give a reasonable explanation of what we do. If you don't like it, I guess I can live with that.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 04:41 PM

Would that be a sensible thing to do, Shambles? No, I don't think so. If that were the case, I might as well do the editing myself.

Yes you may as well and maybe you should? Maybe it should be limited to only where a poster asks you to do some editing on their own postings?

- Joe I don't know if it is sensible or not - it is what you told me on the following thread.

Subject: RE: Memorial Thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 13-Nov-03 - 01:46 PM

The JoeClones are supposed to make corrections only in situations where the need is quite obvious. If there's a judgment call to be made, they should refer it to Joe or Jeff. Jeri fills in when Joe and Jeff aren't around.

As stated in the thread, the Veterans' Day thread was split by a JoeClone. I probably wouldn't have split the thread myself, but I can certainly see the reason behind the split. And even though it was split earlier in the day, I refused to move later political comments because they were posted in response to other comments made in the thread.

As everything is a judgement call - what is it? Who can do what and when and are the other appointees really supposed to get your permission first - before they take action?

How many appointees are there - who are they and how does one get appointed?

As we cannot see what hat they may be wearing - when these appointees post to express their own opinion - shouldn't these post carry a disclaimer like - The views expressed in this post are not necesarily those of the management?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 02:57 PM

Thats the last time I use the words exposed and inhibited in the same breath! I only suggested possible reasons. My best guess is that it has to do with technological advances. However...

This thread makes me feel like the damsel who got the boys all at each others throats then jumps upon the table to escape all the fighting.

Stop it or I'll give you all a slap up alongside the head!

Whats the problem? I made a suggestion. I got a funny answer. Thats what I like about conversation in Kerry. Everything has a double meaning.

Obviously, you are not to be intimidated, but exposed? Maybe.

Guest - what part of Kerry are you in? I will be returning and would really like to hear your tunes.

You have to admit there was alot more traditional music in 69 than there was in 84. Hopefully, the quality has not changed.

d

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 11:21 AM

Would that be a sensible thing to do, Shambles? No, I don't think so. If that were the case, I might as well do the editing myself.

That makes as much sense as your earlier suggestion that Max should be the only one doing editing at Mudcat. Why would I ask people to do a job for me, and then not let them do it? Generally, though, the Clones do the editing when Jeff and Max and I are not present.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Jan 04 - 06:58 AM

Big Mick says-

Thanks, Joe. I am glad you enunciated the guidelines we operate under. As a clone, I would only add that when I delete a post, or close a thread, I immediately send an email to Joe and Jeff letting them know I did that.

And I said-

Now I am confused. Joe tells me in the case of the Memorial thread and the Guest Posting thread - that the volunteers concerned should have obtained his consent before taking any action. Which is it please?

Joe perhaps you could prevent my confusion and amswer to following?

Are the volunteers supposed to get your permission BEFORE they take any editing action or just advise you that they have done so - as per the above example?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Jan 04 - 10:24 PM

OK, Shambles. The rules are that Joe and Jeff supervise the Clones, and together they use their judgment to ensure that all hell doesn't break loose. They were selected because of their good judgment, and they are expected to use that judgment. Joe and Jeff review the actions of the Clones, and they also review each other's actions. Jeff and Joe report to Max, who owns Mudcat.

Due to the many and changing ways that hell has broken loose here, no hard-and-fast rules can be set. However, it is expected that editing and control should be more lenient in times of relative calm.

Basically, though, if you post something that you've taken time to think about, and it isn't racist or a personal attack, it is very unlikely that your post will be deleted. That being the case, I see no cause for alarm or for charges of fascism.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Jan 04 - 08:45 PM

I can help! The answer to the thorny problem of not being able to find accurate acrylic hobby colours for Italian World War II aircraft models can be solved easily by looking up "Life Color" paints, based in Genoa, Italy. Yes! Life Color has every color ever seen on interesting Italian planes like the Macchi 202/205 series, the classic S.M. 79 Sparviero, the Fiat C.R.42 and any other you can mention. Everything from the unique Italian interior green to all the subtle shades like verde scuro, grigio mimetico azurro, it just goes on and on! Get over to Google now and check it out!!!

- LH

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Cluin
Date: 29 Jan 04 - 08:32 PM

One good thing came of that other thread that was closed.

I found this site. Too funny!

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 02:10 AM

don't give up easily do you? ;-)
aint that horse dead yet? !

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 02:07 AM

I am asking for - but still not receiving - to see some rules by which our volunteers operate. This to protect contributors from any abuse of this 'system' - on the part of our volunteers and to protect our volunteers - from any charges from our contributors - of operating from any personal bias.

This would seem to me to be a pretty moderate request - especially when the list of what these volunteers can take editing action on seems to be a growing one and censorship of other's contributions - without their knowledge or permission - threatens to become a routine practice.

How this request for some rules - is thought to be a call for "anarchy" from me - is difficult to understand.

Is this not a reasonable request Joe? Does it not deserve a reasonable answer and for these rules to be produced?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 05:04 PM

Acknowledging that oner can err is absolutely at odds witht he fascist way of seeing things.

Even when you have no intention of ensuring that the lessons are learned and same error is not just repeated? Knowing that - if you hreally have to - you can always just say sorry again.........and again.

Amos - that Joe's way, may or may not be a fascist way of seeing things is NOT the point being made - as of course you know full-well. It it that HIS way of seeing things is what it is - not as others who think they know him better - would have us think it is.

Until and unless he chooses to correct his words and actions - all those of us who may not know Joe personally can go on - is his words and actions here.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: GUEST,TTCM
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 04:35 PM

Bit of a hypocrite aren't you, Justapicker?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 04:31 PM

Acknowledging that oner can err is absolutely at odds witht he fascist way of seeing things.

A

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 04:20 PM

Sometimes the semantics are what's making things upsetting, IMO. And maybe someone who knows Joe well can see that sometimes he just writes a little fast-- such as above where he talks about controlling what's obnoxious. The Joe I know is too realistic to try to do THAT-- I THINK what he means is to control the resulting mess and damgages-- which is actually MANAGEMENT, something that any organized effort benefits from.>snip<

This is an example of what is so frustrating. IMHO - Evidence is presented about what IS actually happening NOW and WHY and it appears that because good folk do not wish to believe it - an attempt is made to either ignore the truth or even to have it re-written.

Joe is a good and well-intentioned person but with respect perhaps you don't know Joe as well as you think you do? This IS what Joe said and it is what our volunteers are doing. It seems pretty clear to me what he is saying. Possibly you may have to accept that Joe is not as realistic as you think and would wish us to accept that he is?

so editorial action was taken to prevent a problem before it got out of control. Maybe it wouldn't have gotten out of control - but intervention is useless once the damage is done. We take editorial action to prevent problems, not to clean up the rubble once the damage has already been done. It's a matter of guesswork for us - and sometimes we guess wrong.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 03:45 PM

Not too sure if I follow that Wolfgang - for God only knows what the topic of that thread was except for me to have a whine in it - so yes you could say my posts there have always been on topic. But these are BS threads - hampsters and all! The point of many BS threads is that they do not have a topic to be 'on'. Many 'serious' BS discussions are so until a hampster or similar humourous creature arrives. Is this 'hijacking' when more 'hampsters' join in the fun?

But I cannot take this 'hijacking' concept seriously. I as far as I am concerned - the only way an individual can single-handedly be accused of this - with any justification - is if they have made every post. Didn't we used to call this naturally occuring factor - 'thread drift'?

'Hijacking' is just another judgement made on another poster's contribution and just another name to call someone - like flamer, troll, idiot or mad person etc - when you may not agree with what someone is saying, you don't wish to address it or they are asking perfectly valid question that you don't wish to give, or don't wish to see a valid answer to....... Having politely asked - I am still waiting to see the answers. Such as:

Joe how is 'serious discussion' defined and how does it differ from a non-serious one?

How is 'hijacking' defined?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 07:19 AM

Shambles about 'The Shambles Whine About Mudcat Thread': The thread was created for me ( but many people including Kevin have 'hijacked' it).

And, by implication, your posts in that thread have always be closely on-topic??? That's what I'd call a self-flame.

Wolfgang (grin)

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Jan 04 - 02:17 AM

These so-called mistitled threads have the titles their originator chose for them. So no matter what our judgement of the title may be or what we may wish it to - should not the the originators wishes be respected? In the the case of the 'Shambles whine' thread that Kevin wishes to be re-named - this is not a matter for me to request. The thread was created for me ( but many people including Kevin have 'hijacked' it) - however, I was not the originator of it.

I think I see what the problem is. You are not differentiating between the freedoms allocated to Joe's List Mom hat and those allocated to his Member hat. There is no reasdon as a Member he cannot have all the freedoms allocated to any other member.

How would we know which hat a volunteer is wearing? We don't even know who they are so maybe they should tell us when they post - what hat they have got on? What hat were the volunteers wearing in this thread? Forums Discussion Groups

Subject: RE: Tech: A query about a missing post
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 07:07 PM

"...you might have learned 3 or 4 new songs?..."

Or you could have written a few more good songs, for that matter. When you write songs Roger, you know how to round them off, and move on to the next.

The original point query raised by GUEST amused has long been settled. It would have been better if it had been given a better title, but then I suspect that was the idea in the first place.

I suggest that it would make much more sense to carry on this discussion (if it needs to be carried on) in another mistitled thread which I would think would better be called "Is the Mudcat overpoliced?" (But I suppose it can't very well be changed unless Shambles requests it, since that would risk pouring oil on the fire, rather than the water)

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: GUEST,Val Joice
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 06:31 PM

Oh Shambles, I'm sure you're a man of extremely high principles, but I'm really glad you aren't my next door neighbour - wow, but you know had to drag something out like no-one I have ever come across before. Talk about a dog with a bone (and, to be honest, I'm not even sure you really have a bone - by which I mean a point - in this case)

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 04:44 PM

The most important being a post to deny that he had (wrongly) accused a UK contributor of making anonymous abusive postings - which was what this thread was about.

Guest Postings

As a UK contributor I consider Don't you people have anything better to do with your time? to be pretty insulting in the context of what had actually happened. One could be asking if Joe didn't have anything better to do than to wrongly accuse an individual UK contributor of these things and when finding out his mistake - to go on to generalise about All UK contributors - most of whom who would be busy posting on music threads.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 04:07 PM

Sorry -- I meant only one post that could possibly qualify, as Joe made several to the thread.

A

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 03:54 PM

His defence, sirrah, is in his general reputation and his record, which has been prudent and balanced and adhering to the policies which he says he adheres to; anyone investigating the situation would see that such an accuser would be coming from a place of imbalance. You may believe that you are being brave and heroic, but you aren't. You're being a varlet.

As for "Joe insulting all UK Mudcatters", let's consult the facts. Joe madre one post to that thread and in it he said:

"Mudcat is supposed to be a folk music forum, not UK Folkie Gossip Central. I've seen this backstabbing here at Mudcat from all sorts of UK people, and I saw it in person when I was in the UK last year. I met a lot of UK Mudcatters when I was in England last year, and this year at the Getaway, and I like almost every British Mudcatter I've met. You're wonderful people - why don't you like each other?

Don't you people have anything better to do with your time?

We don't go on witch hunts. We have no axe to grind. We don't allow personal attacks, so we delete them when we see them or when we get complaints about them. We would much rather spend our time on something other than settling personal squabbles and dealing with petty gossip. So, would all you children please grow up?"


The insult that you have extended to all UK Mudcatters is...what, exactly? Anyone who tried to understand what Joe Offer was doing would see clearly enough that it is not intended to be insulting in any way -- it is simply slightly exasperated. Understandably.

Seems to me you have taken a false fact and then made an overarching generalization out of it in a deliberate attempt to stir up discontent, upset and confusion.

Me, I do have something better to do with my time, so, as I said, we're done.

A

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 02:59 PM

The only one way to find out for sure is to carry on until you are sure you have in fact lost. It rather depends on what you may consider to be victory - or defeat. But is there really any choice?

In the words of one of the UK's quizmasters - "I have started so I will finish."

Amos - When for example Joe insults all UK contributors as he did in the Guest Postings thread - it matters little if you think there are different hats. If he later goes on to delete a post from any UK poster - how does he have any defence if he is accused of doing this simply because he dislikes UK contributors?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Justa Picker
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 02:10 PM

Shambles you're like a dog chasing its tail with all this and these other threads.

Do you realize that for the amount of time and energy you've put into all these postings (here and other threads) you might have learned 3 or 4 new songs? (or more ...)

Save your strength my friend.
You're fighting a losing battle.

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 02:04 PM

Sigurd - I am sorry if you think that I am making as case for duplicate postings. I am not.

Thanks, Joe. I am glad you enunciated the guidelines we operate under. As a clone, I would only add that when I delete a post, or close a thread, I immediately send an email to Joe and Jeff letting them know I did that.

Now I am confused. Joe tells me in the case of the Memorial thread and the Guest Posting thread - that the volunteers concerned should have obtained his consent before taking any action. Which is it please?

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 02:01 PM

.S. Why is it wrong for me to express my opinion if I consider a thread (or a person) "tedious"? If everyone else can express their opinion here, why can't I?

Because I can't pass judgement on your opinion and take editing action based only on that - if it may not be to my personal taste.

You and your volunteers can and do

Roger,

I think I see what the problem is. You are not differentiating between the freedoms allocated to Joe's List Mom hat and those allocated to his Member hat. There is no reasdon as a Member he cannot have all the freedoms allocated to any other member. When he changes hats and wears the List Mom identity, he is much more sharply constrained as to what opinions he may act on. It may all look like the same person to you, but it is not, or at least it is a sharply divided way of being.

A

Subject: RE: Tech: Shambles can you help?
From: Bo Vandenberg
Date: 25 Jan 04 - 12:56 PM

Shambles:

Speaking as an average poster, I have to say I really appreciate posts staying on topic. If you have something to say put it under a heading that will help filter\create your audience.

I chose a subject I'm interested in and read the whole thread from the biginning before I comment. The threads can get very long and the last thing I want to see is complaints half way through when my enthusiasm is flagging. A subthread, a joke etc. are not going to kill me but the best posts are on topic.

When I write something in a thread I try and remember that the post is firstly for the readers and not for myself. If you have not found an audience in the thread that first held your post it is cheap to simply copy it to another. In my view you should either:

1. Realize that people may not be interested in that point. This happens to everybody - not every post piques peoples' interest. Make a mental note of well received posts to remember when writing your own. Dont repost.

2. Do the work to reinterpret what you want to say and rewrite it to make it pertinent to a new thread. If it is pertinent it will be appreciated. If it feels like spam in the new thread it is sure to be ignored.

Realize that everyone who posts here has a level of gratitude to Joe & all the mudcatters for the environment they create and the work they do. It's not perfect but its the best dam free lunch on the internet. I tend to think that good judgement and real life keep Joe from being too heavy handed.

Joe is also in the unenviable position of generalizing what he thinks people want here and taking action to help us get along. Most every action will have detractors. Mudcatters tend to fold politely into the woodwork in his silent support after all he can take care of himself. If you have a problem or confusion over his judgements its not really fair to hide them in a random thread and assume he's going to read it anyway.


S

have to run