 sj |
||
|
||
R.I.P. MUDCAT
|
|
|
Subject: RIP MUDCAT From: GUEST Date: 10 Dec 05 - 11:11 AM Jumbled up order of postings, missing posts at the start of threads, it's all a total mess. Good while it lasted, but of no value any longer. Sad, but true. |
|
Subject: RE: RIP MUDCAT From: wysiwyg Date: 10 Dec 05 - 11:13 AM That's odd-- I still find it a very useful and useful resource. Guest, I am sorry you are sad! ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: RIP MUDCAT From: George Papavgeris Date: 10 Dec 05 - 11:15 AM Bye then, GUEST |
|
Subject: RE: RIP MUDCAT From: Georgiansilver Date: 10 Dec 05 - 11:21 AM So Guest, what are you still doing here. Great source of music/lyrics...good place to find out non-music things...good place to air ones views....I enjoy coming here. Go if you are unhappy with it friend....or can you just not go?....if you go will you still come back?....mmmmm...I guess we won't know anyway as you don't have a real identity do you. Agh well, just come or go as you please. Best wishes and hope you find your 'bag' elsewhere. Mike |
|
Subject: RE: RIP MUDCAT From: Dave Earl Date: 10 Dec 05 - 11:34 AM Did you ever sign up Guest? As others have said many of us find it very useful and often a bit of fun. There was a major crash some time ago but that has been mostly sorted out. Sorry you are peeved. Goodbye. Dave Earl |
|
Subject: RE: RIP MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 10 Dec 05 - 12:37 PM When I saw the thread title, I thought you were gonna rip Mudcat but then I find constructive criticism. I am sure the volunteers who give great effort to the Café appreciate same and will address your concerns post haste, pun intended. Don't go away sad. Rejoice in the fact that you have done your good deed for the day and go away. Sigh. I remember the good old days... when anonymous trolls were more inventive with their crap, er, craft. Ah, Freudian stoop. Sorry, couldn't resist. |
|
Subject: RE: RIP MUDCAT From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Dec 05 - 01:25 PM Well, the jumbled up order of postings and missing posts at the start of threads are the same issue. The first messages aren't missing - they're just out of order. You can find the first post of a pre-crash thread by looking for the message that doesn't have RE: in the subject line. If you want to view the messages in order, click the "printer-friendly" link at the top of the thread. We have intentionally avoided making efforts to reorganize threads into their proper order because we're working on a way to put them ALL in order and also give us more stability. If we were to unscramble some thread, a complete repair would then rescramble them. So, I ask for patience. We still have some hurdles to cross that are beyond our control. But yeah, I'm frustrated by the threadscrambling, too. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: open mike Date: 10 Dec 05 - 01:27 PM well, all the posts in this thread are in chronological order, so that problem is not happening any longer..it did happen once, but that was yesterday and yesterday's gone. good bye--we will miss you. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Donuel Date: 10 Dec 05 - 01:28 PM I guest that this site would present problems for the anal retentives of the world. MUDCAT IT ain't flashy but it does run deep. |
|
Subject: RE: RIP MUDCAT From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Dec 05 - 01:44 PM The thread scrambling was a one-time thing that happened during our Big Crash in the summer. Messages posted after the Crash will be in chronological order. I can't really figure out the logic in the scrambling - some threads appear to have been unharmed, and the scrambled order of the others doesn't really seem to have taken a sensible pattern. Did they scramble in random order, or is there a Deeper Wisdom in the scrambling? Enquiring Minds want to know. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: DMcG Date: 10 Dec 05 - 01:55 PM Of course there is a Deeper Meaning: it's a larger-scale version of the Thread Game that been running for years. The idea is to find two posts together that not directly related to each other but make some amusing partnership. Of course, it takes much longer to play than the 'quicky' Thread Game.... |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 10 Dec 05 - 01:56 PM Guest's granny better watch out if she ever forgets where she's left her glasses! Granny: "But, GUESTkins, dear, I don't want to get into that hole. I'm not dead!" GUEST: "Stop complaining, Gran - I've already had the Obit printed." |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: greg stephens Date: 10 Dec 05 - 02:21 PM Trolls are not what they were in the old days, are they? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Mo the caller Date: 10 Dec 05 - 02:58 PM why didn't you tell us how to unscramble the threads in a separarte thread (well maybe you did somewhen). It might make a party game "guess who said what first" |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 10 Dec 05 - 02:58 PM Yes, They're exactly WHAT they were. They're just not as good at it. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: katlaughing Date: 10 Dec 05 - 03:08 PM This thread should be closed. I wish no one had risen to the bait. May it be scrambled, baked, shaken, and fried! |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 10 Dec 05 - 03:26 PM Goodbye, GUEST. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Joe Offer Date: 10 Dec 05 - 03:27 PM Aw, it's OK, Kat. The scambling of threads IS frustrating. Much of life is frustrating, and maybe it's a reasonable idea to express that frustration once in a while. Trouble is, then people want to dump blame on the apparent source of the frustration. The answer to the blame, of course, is found in aphorisms. "Shit happens" might be a good one. The nuns in grade school used to make it sound nicer: "Offer it up for the Poor Souls in Purgatory." But basically, the answer is that we'll get it fixed when we're able to get it fixed, and we're not able to do it yet in the way we want to do it - and if that's unacceptable, offer it up for the Poor Souls... (I think the nuns were really telling us to fuck off, but they had such a nice way of saying it). -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Once Famous Date: 10 Dec 05 - 03:33 PM Guest, Mudcat has some value. For me, it's the ability to call you a douche bag because you think it is dead. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 10 Dec 05 - 03:33 PM LOL |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 10 Dec 05 - 03:35 PM kat... closed? Nay... this is the kind of thread which Spaw would love. A chance for the ultimate 'Cat to play with the ultimate mouse... the troll. Remember the eminem thread? A bunch of 'Cats just having a laugh.... all incited by a meaningless troll. Either you don't respond, or you laugh. Either way, it's all great. Sometimes, late at night, I wonder if He created trolls just to test our sense of humour. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,Nancy King at work Date: 10 Dec 05 - 03:52 PM Well, this thread certainly has been useful to me, at least, because it told me how to see threads unscrambled (never occurred to me to click on "printer-friendly" for that purpose), and led me to the useful "Little-Known Features" thread, which I hadn't seen before. Thanks! Nancy |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 10 Dec 05 - 04:52 PM I will try that in future, Nancy. Didn't know until you mentioned that. I have just been looking at the dates of the posts--until now, that is. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 Dec 05 - 04:58 PM You never seem to get to the end of the Mudcat's little surprises. I like that. I even like the time-warp effect when you read an old thread and find the answers coming in in advance of the questions. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,Wesley S Date: 10 Dec 05 - 05:23 PM Guest - When you get your better website started please let us know so we can come for a visit and check it out. Thanks |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Gurney Date: 10 Dec 05 - 09:58 PM As Wesley said, except don't bother to start one, just find a better one and tell us. Mudcat will post a link, I'm sure. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 10 Dec 05 - 10:15 PM Don't ask GUEST to do the impossible. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Liz the Squeak Date: 11 Dec 05 - 05:35 AM Oh Joe - we used to have a fanatically non swearing, non drinking (non anything fun really) member of our church.... in her worst moments of frustration she would just draw her breath in for a few seconds and then say "Well Bless You" in the tone of voice that you KNOW means she was saying a bad word.... I think your 'offer it up to the Poor Souls' was an early version of 'talk to the hand'..... and it's one I shall steal and offer up to the arrogant little sh!t in the office who sits opposite me and witters on about nothing work related all day. LTS |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,Jon Date: 11 Dec 05 - 05:36 AM There was one thing about the big crash. As far as I know going by the first restore, MC had not been backed up in 6 months, hence the need to work on a corrupted disk. I do confess to losing data myself at the annexe but I was asking my ISP to restore ftp to enable me to back up so it was not lack of effort on my part. Folkinfo is backed up not just by me but my someone else. We lost nothing there when my ISP did a runner. LEsson I guess is always back up. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Mooh Date: 11 Dec 05 - 06:06 AM Sure are lots of folks named Guest around here. Are they all related? Inbred? Are THEY all in order? Just curious. Peace, Mooh. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Mooh Date: 11 Dec 05 - 08:25 AM My last comment was directed at Guest who started this thread, not Jon, to whom I apologize. But my point remains, "the value of Mudcat" threads get tiresome after a while, even and especially when started by a troll. Feeding them, as I've just done, doesn't help either I suppose, but what the hell. Stop crapping in our nest! Peace, Mooh. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 11 Dec 05 - 08:34 AM ... or, at least, stop nesting in our crap! |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Leadfingers Date: 11 Dec 05 - 08:40 AM There is a VAST difference between GUEST who remains anonymous and GUEST who does add a name ! The only problem is that ANYONE can add whatever name they like to GUEST , and so cause someone else to get the blame for THEIR Claptrap ! |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 11 Dec 05 - 09:04 AM Mooh, there have also been an awful lot of good and caring, if overly sensitive, over-protective, knee-jerking, offense-taking, can't-get-past-it, can't-let-it-go and just-HAVE-to-say-something souls who generously share their thoughts with all the other nice people who may or may not see through the thin layer of 'concern' to the 'I'm better than you, nyah, nyah' stuff that fuels their posting. People sometimes post out of anger because they feel personally hurt that Mudcat isn't way they think it should. Ask me whether I'm talking about the 'R.I.P.' thread starter or those having a react-o-fest to him/her. The answer would be 'yes'. It's a losing battle if I thought I or anyone else could influence people to be compassionate and considerate of those who read what they write. The community feel of the place has been gone for a while now, gone the way of the random acts of kindness that happened once in a while, the gatherings in people's homes, the song challenges, the good feelings. Now we've got debates and argument, protestations by the offended, one-upmanship and one-line-at-a-time chat-like droppings where writers once offered works of beauty that perhaps took longer than seconds to create. Most of the writers have gone off to more inspirational places, or they've just gone before they started hanging around in threads like this one. Every once in a while though, they blow back in like a pilgrim wind, wearing threadbare trenchcoats or hand-knit sweaters, and they flash us a bit of the naked soul beneath. For now, that's worth it for me. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: number 6 Date: 11 Dec 05 - 09:08 AM ""the value of Mudcat" threads get tiresome after a while, even and especially when started by a troll. Feeding them, as I've just done, doesn't help either I suppose, but what the hell. Stop crapping in our nest!" Very well said Mooh ... and what you said here pretty well sums up this thread. sIx |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 11 Dec 05 - 09:38 AM Spirit of community is long since gone? Were you at a different Getaway than I was? Geez, if the spirit of warmth and friendship is gone, who were these people in my house? Mudcat isn't dead or even ill. It has changed, to be sure. But there are far too many people wanting to get together, come to Getaway, making friends, for it to be dead. Hell, even the ones that I argue heatedly with, are people I want to meet. I can travel almost anywhere in the world and have folks that I have long "known" to make friends with and stay with. If that isn't community, I don't know what is. Don't confuse a software glitch with the death of the spirit. It is here, battered a bit, but here none the less. Don't believe it? Read the current support thread for our own Catspaw. You naysayers are wrong. Some of you surprise and disappoint me. The troll that started this is just someone with a sick agenda. All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: John MacKenzie Date: 11 Dec 05 - 10:26 AM It is difficult to know where to draw the line, as Joe Offer says what do we do? I would be tempted to delete all negative non folk-related threads like this one, but I'm sure certain people would be up in arms if that happened. Moderating any site is a difficult set of 'will I?', 'won't I?' decisions, and we have all seen threads deleted and then re-instated, which unless it was deleted accidentally is hard to understand sometimes. It's a bit like digging a murdered body up, just so's we can shot it dead all over again. We do keep picking at this particular scab and making it bleed again, and I suspect we always will. Go pick your guitars and your banjos, and leave the Cat to heal. Giok |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: NH Dave Date: 11 Dec 05 - 12:39 PM I have been on and off Mudcat for a number of years and find it to be a labor of love for the people who make it available to us, and post learned answers to our questions almost before the electrons have dried on our question. It has been an invaluable source of musical knowledge and interesting postings, and I treasure it, warts and all. Guest, as others have posted, why don't you set up your own web site and let US criticize YOUR work! Dave |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 11 Dec 05 - 12:55 PM Mudcat's intentionally nameless Guests? They are always out of order. That's not a bad namne for them actually - "Mings" |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Al Whittle Date: 11 Dec 05 - 02:23 PM You know that Les Barker poem where the polar bear goes up to the shipping office after The Titanic, and says "have you got any news of the iceberg, me family were all on there and they meant the whole world to me........" well it very funny, and some of you won't have heard of it. and while theres still nice things to be discovered in the world of folksingers and singer songwriters and writers.....well Mudcat's future is safe. the informed media journalists are really bloody useless to a man. their finger is only on the pulse of the rubbish that gets into the mainstream.. so guest can sod off and bugger up someones else's christmas party. I hear the Macbeths' are giving a do.... |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 11 Dec 05 - 02:28 PM There are still threads for the folks who wish to write. There's an Erudition thread, MOAB thread--there are threads for those who wish to write. There are also thread for those who wish to comment, however briefly. That's as it should be, IMO. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: JohnInKansas Date: 11 Dec 05 - 02:32 PM I guest that this site would present problems for the anal retentives of the world. No, Donuel. I still find it helpful, interesting, and of very great value. John |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: wysiwyg Date: 11 Dec 05 - 03:20 PM And even if the old posts ARE out of order, people are always free to make a request in a new thread. If the answer lies in an old thread, chances are one of us devotees will be able to find it using our various and sundry magical powers. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 11 Dec 05 - 07:04 PM Peace, thanks. I never would have thought to look in the MOAB. Or maybe I did consider it, and was petrified I'd accidentally try to open the whole thread and my computer would launch itself sideways into another dimension. The reactions to the initial complaint are a bit out of proportion, but so are the reactions to the cookieless nature of the person. Mudcat dead? A quick "Oh no it's not" would have sufficed, I think. JohnInKansas, THAT was funny! |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 11 Dec 05 - 07:09 PM I don't look in the MOAB. Because it takes forever to load. But every now an then, even on threads like this, someone writes something beautiful--just as you did above. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 11 Dec 05 - 07:27 PM Peace, click on the little 'd', and you'll get the last page of 50 posts, backwards. And: aw, shucks. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,Ice man Date: 11 Dec 05 - 07:42 PM I love polar bears anyway! |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: pdq Date: 11 Dec 05 - 08:41 PM ...in Frisco they're usually bi-polar... |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST Date: 11 Dec 05 - 09:04 PM If you say that too loud they'll be shot. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Elmer Fudd Date: 11 Dec 05 - 09:56 PM Especially if they hear you call San Francisco "Frisco." |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 12 Dec 05 - 08:37 AM Yeah... it's SanFran. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 12 Dec 05 - 08:51 AM Jeri... re clicking the "d" for the last fifty posts. I just timed the load times for three threads : 14 post thread - 4 seconds. clicked "d" on a 130 post thread - twenty seconds clicked "d" on the MOAB - two minutes, one second Try it for yourself. The MOAB is a pig and should be considered for closure, if it would lighten the load. HEY - I said "considered" and "if". Don't all youse git yer knickers in a twist. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: wysiwyg Date: 12 Dec 05 - 09:19 AM It has been posted before that loading by 50's is actually a longer job of retrieval for the server than loading the whole thing. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Roger in Baltimore Date: 12 Dec 05 - 09:49 AM I think anyone who has been on the Mudcat for years would say it has changed. It was a smaller community then. As it has become a larger community, I think there are more postings and some are good and some are bad. There are fewer requests for material I know anything about. Again, I think that is due to the size of the community. There was a time early in Mudcat when I would open every thread that came along. I no longer have that kind of time. So I'm sure I miss some good stuff. I still love this place just as I still love the geographical place where I grew up. But that place is no longer the same either. Change is inevitable. Roger in Baltimore |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 12 Dec 05 - 09:57 AM 14-post thread: 5 seconds 'd' on 130-post thread: 21 seconds 'd' on MOAB: 28 seconds Second time: 14-post thread: 3 seconds 'd' on 'd' on MOAB: 50 seconds Third time: 14-post thread: 3 minutes 35 seconds ...forget the rest I think time to load isn't a good indication of server load. A lot of the time a thread takes to load is because it takes a while for electrons to vibrate on down the wire until they get to you. The query for the thread isn't any more complicated for a bazillion-post thread than it is for a 3-post thread. The search itself takes longer, but I still don't know that the time = more of a load on the server. The server does need work, and we do post a lot of ephemeral, throw-away, silly stuff. I just think if the amount were causing problems, Max would ask for people to conserve bytes. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 12 Dec 05 - 10:22 AM Jeri.... Third time: 14-post thread: 3 minutes 35 seconds Could be because I was loading the MOAB... I quit at twelve minutes as it wasn't even halfway loaded. Hmmm... I ain't no puter guy, but, doesn't response time depend on server demand. I recall Jeff explaining a few years ago the "exponential slowing" of response time with each new demand, but can't recall the details. I wonder if, when a large thread is requested, the load on the server is raised over a longer period of time? Thus slowing response time over a longer period? Anyone? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: John MacKenzie Date: 12 Dec 05 - 10:28 AM I was under the impression that what would help would be a larger router, but those Mothers are expensive to run. Max is already subsidising us, and is understandably reluctant to get in deeper. That's how I understand it anyway. Giok |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Mooh Date: 12 Dec 05 - 10:41 AM Hi Jeri, "People sometimes post out of anger because they feel personally hurt that Mudcat isn't way they think it should. Ask me whether I'm talking about the 'R.I.P.' thread starter or those having a react-o-fest to him/her. The answer would be 'yes'. " Jeri. I generally agree with your post, except of course if you lump me in with the "react-o-festers". I don't see myself that way at all. I also don't often get involved in these sort of discussions either, as it's hard to write compassionate vocal inflections into moment-by-moment postings...at least at my skill level. But, it's hard work to suffer fools gladly, whether it's the troll who started this thread, or myself in reacting. Thanks for your comments. Peace, Mike Crocker (Mooh). |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 12 Dec 05 - 10:42 AM Yes, G. There is an old engineering saying: "Given enough time and money, we can do anything." Max and the clones have neither the time nor the money to satisfy some people. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 12 Dec 05 - 11:34 AM Mooh, I suppose it might be a better place if we all quit reacting to our favorite irritants, whether they're anonymous guests or people slagging anonymous guests, whether they're Mudcat's problems or people commenting on Mudcat's problems, or somebody who's just commenting on All of the Above, as I'm wont to do on occasion. It's just that the threads that seem to inspire the most passion and the greatest number of posts are ones that piss us off. Me too, and I really don't like it when I get caught up in that game. Maybe it was always this way and I never paid much attention to it. I think RiB is right in saying Mudcat's changed. I wouldn't expect it not to. I miss some of what got lost in the process, and I could do without some of what got added, but it is what it is. It's nice though, the Mudcat seems to have gotten out of the morgue and back into the hospital. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: open mike Date: 12 Dec 05 - 12:56 PM not morgue...but I.C.U. maybe.... |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Lonesome EJ Date: 12 Dec 05 - 06:55 PM It certainly is frustrating looking back at some of the threads, in particular the Mudcat Fiction pieces, and finding the posts scrambled. The "printer friendly" idea is good, but I look forward to the day when Max, Joe, and the elves will be able to sequentialize the posts again. As has been said above, rumors of Mudcat's demise are pretty premature. LEJ |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: autolycus Date: 12 Dec 05 - 07:48 PM I've discovered Mudcat only v.recently and it's rewarding, tho' i don't some of it, and there are other things in life. The thread about the 3-minute egg is what got me in - it was the funniest thing I'd read in years - brilliant. If someone posts something anal, antagonistic, drivellish, nasty or not nourishing, I'd say the best move is to ignore it; failing that, to demolish the argument/drivel without naming names. Mudcat is a fine community that will continue 'cos mudcatters have life and creativity and imagination and experience. I'm off to burn the soapbox and get some sleep - 'night all. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST Date: 12 Dec 05 - 08:41 PM
This is probably one of the most used, under-supported, privately owned, free resources on the internet today. Rather than buying that extra CD this week from CAMSCO.
Or buying a 20 dollar cigar (go for a 10 instead) and send ten bucks in ANY currency directly to MAX:
PO Box 3006 West Chester, PA 19381
Sincerely, |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,Boab Date: 13 Dec 05 - 06:45 PM Guest, you ARE the weakest link! Bye! |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: robomatic Date: 13 Dec 05 - 06:56 PM This exemplifies some of the best of Mudcat - Some nameless troll initiates a response and then we all learn some useful things about each other and about utilizing this marvelous resource. Joe Offer - Thanks for the positive response on this thread and thanks for going through what you've gone through to enrich a lot of peoples' lives. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 14 Dec 05 - 08:28 AM What Robo said, in spades. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: MMario Date: 15 Dec 05 - 10:44 AM uhmmmm - garg - no offense - but *let* them buy that extra CD from Camsco - or better yet - buy the extra CD they were gonna buy from ELSEWHERE from Camsco...(don't forget, CAMSCO = Dick Greenhaus ≠DT; and the DT is seperate from the Mudcat Cafe) - and both the DT and the Mudcat could use a boost in financial donations. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Stilly River Sage Date: 15 Dec 05 - 01:26 PM Considering all of the little goofy BS threads that are not occuring because it all is being parked on the MOAB, you're simply looking at different ways to use the same amount of space. Or take a different view: MOAB as VIP lounge. Several of the folks who play around at MOAB have have been regular contributors of cash or kind to Mudcat, so it isn't like we're not pulling our own weight. Can the same be said of the lion's share of the visitors or even registered members of Mudcat? SRS |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: MMario Date: 15 Dec 05 - 01:40 PM Do you realize that NOT counting the midis, auxilliary pages, the help forum, the mirror of Bruce Olsen's site, PM, photos,DT, etc "we" have about 1.6 MILLION records here at the 'cat? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: The Shambles Date: 15 Dec 05 - 01:45 PM The right to sing |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 05 - 02:52 PM SRS asked at 15 Dec 05 - 01:26 PM, "Can the same be said of the lion's share of the visitors or even registered members of Mudcat?" Ah... could be. But... what's the diff? The fact is that it might be (IS IT OR NOT?) a pig. Unless youse are goin fer a Guinness World Record entry, why? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,GM55 Date: 15 Dec 05 - 03:00 PM well i have designed upto 30+ forums in the last two years, and this used to be ok, layout bad, but still popular enough, now....shit |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: MMario Date: 15 Dec 05 - 03:01 PM hey - some of us hang around to see if we can be useful - while we are hanging around we *are* gonna talk, chitchat, etc. Gathering as much of that as possible into one thread *does* reduce the server load. we *could* be starting inane 'copycat' threads or duplicate threads - or posting randomly into other threads - or cutting and pasting the same comment into dozens of threads. The NYCFTTS Recovery Center and the Tavern serve the same purpose. The MOAB just has some very regular and talkitive folk. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: stevenrailing Date: 15 Dec 05 - 03:03 PM hmmm want to say it is still great. but not the case. quality has gone down. shit summed it up from poster above |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: MMario Date: 15 Dec 05 - 03:14 PM well - from my viewpoint - it's the best layout I've seen for a forum. All kidding aside - I find it the most usable, most searchable, most convenient forum of many I read. The quality of content comes and goes - but that depends to a great deal on the questions being asked asked. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST Date: 15 Dec 05 - 03:24 PM Agree with layout issue. It is bad. Too prone to crashes too. Probably using a vcm223 server, or dial program causing the issue. basically shoddily run by whoever. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,Peter Date: 15 Dec 05 - 03:40 PM As forums go it is one of the better ones that I have seen although it would be a good idea to make the "from" field mandatory on posts. Other open forums do this. The bottom posting can be a pain if there has been a lot of thread drift and you want to respond to something a couple of dozen posts back. On the other hand long posts with several branches have their own problems. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 05 - 04:39 PM So... when can Max expect your donations of $$$ and time and expertise to help improve this site? Didn't think so. Here's how you can help to improve this site immensely without having to donate any $$$ or time or expertise... fuck off. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: stevenrailing Date: 15 Dec 05 - 06:00 PM So... when can Max expect your donations of $$$ and time and expertise to help improve this site? Didn't think so. Here's how you can help to improve this site immensely without having to donate any $$$ or time or expertise... fuck off. and so my point is made. thank you |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 15 Dec 05 - 06:43 PM Point? You have no point. Maybe a pointed head. But, I didn't see any point. You didn't even have the ability to post anything original... just alluded to an earlier post. However... I note that you are a member. Therefore, I hope that you do stay on and contribute... money, I mean... cause you got nothing useful to add otherwise, it would appear. Do you read your posts before you shit them out? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: stevenrailing Date: 16 Dec 05 - 05:24 AM and so it continues... |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 16 Dec 05 - 06:03 PM The point is a valid one. Folks that have never offered anything but criticism also never contribute to the upkeep of this site in any way. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 16 Dec 05 - 07:48 PM Forgive me Mick, but I don't get that one. Guest just shit on the site, period. As far as me, I have never shit on this site. And, as you are well aware, I have supported this site. Did I miss something? BTW, steven... keep railing. Inane posts are so important to the overall discussion. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,tam the man Date: 16 Dec 05 - 07:54 PM Goodbye Guest I was going to say it was good to know but I don't so goodbye. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 16 Dec 05 - 08:38 PM "The thread about the 3-minute egg is what got me in - it was the funniest thing I'd read in years - brilliant." And that was a slow day. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 16 Dec 05 - 10:45 PM Gnu, I believe the point Mick was saying was valid, clarified in his second sentence, was yours. The one about contributions. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: The Shambles Date: 17 Dec 05 - 01:56 AM If (along with many others) you voluntarily make some financial contribution to the upkeep of a place you were openly invited into - does that then entitle you to publicly call other invited guests names and to spit on the floor? Some members now appear to think so - encourage each other in stting this example and appear to be generally supported in this behavior. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 17 Dec 05 - 05:25 AM Oh... cool. Makes much more sense this morning. Bye. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Irish sergeant Date: 17 Dec 05 - 10:18 AM The site does a great job.Keep up the good work and thank for all. Guest,don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya. Neil |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 17 Dec 05 - 10:42 AM Yeah, gnu, what I meant was that your point, delivered passionately, was the valid one. We have people around here whose only contribution has been to be critical, or nasty. They seem to use up the most bandwidth and contribute the least. They have all the criticisms and none of the answers. You are definitely not one of these. In fact you are just the opposite. All the best, Mick |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 17 Dec 05 - 10:48 AM Contributions aren't a factor in whether someone has the right to express an opinion, and I don't believe Max would ever tell anyone so. It may be frustrating, but people who've donated have not bought the right to express an opinion. That's free. Anyway, we have no way of knowing if someone has donated money. This might have been a troll. It might have been someone in a worm-eating, spiteful mood because something they cared about isn't perfect. A person doesn't usually get that spiteful unless you feel betrayed by something/someone. "You're not what I wanted, what I expected. You were once my love, but now you're worthless, your dead to me! Do you hear? DEAD, and I'm leaving the rotting corpse of our love forever!" [slams door, then realizes s/he left car keys are on the coffee table] [knock, knock] "Er, excuse me?" Yep, I think it was different, and I think 'different', for me PERSONALLY, was 'better' in many respects. It's still a fine place to communicate, if you can weave your way through personal agendas, pet peeves, inane comments, things you've heard a bazillion times, other people's pissing contests, poor socialization skills, lack of comprehension and eagerness to jump on what they don't understand or to jump on others who don't understand, other people's stupid opinions or intolerance to others' opinions[3]... basically other people. Things bother me based on how bad a mood I'm in. My ability to see the good stuff is also based on my mood. Somewhere beyond my moods, there's a decent 'place' with decent people. Many things didn't happen the way I wanted, and 'other people' can get on my nerves, and I really don't feel the community spirit I used to feel.[d] It's not my ideal, it's not the 'place where I always wanted to live', and it's a site I now only cautiously recommend to others, with disclaimers, but there's enough here that I keep coming back. I'm usually the last one standing at the end of a long night's party. Well, not so much anymore, but if I could be... It's because I believe that as long as the party's still going on, there's the possibility of something remarkable happening. I wouldn't want to miss it. [3] Yes, I meant that. It was supposed to be funny, in such a way that indicated I may not be as miserable and grumpy as you may think I am. [d] Good place for people in whatever communities to communicate, for old friends/acquaintances to hang out, to make plans. But seriously, how many folks would feel safe inviting 'everybody who reads this' to their house or even want to, feel safe posting sensitive stuff or doing any number of things involving some risk? It's just too big and there are too many damaged or merely hurtful people here. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 17 Dec 05 - 11:03 AM Contributions, as I have used it, was not meant to solely indicate financial support. I would hope it was evident in my post. Everyone contributes in one way or another. If your only contribution is criticism, a know it all attitude, or personal attacks, you are not worth much here. I know many of our most valuable contributors have never donated a dime. But the place wouldn't be the same without them. I think that is spirit of it. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 17 Dec 05 - 12:03 PM Gnu stated, "Therefore, I hope that you do stay on and contribute... money, I mean... " and then Mick responded "The point is a valid one. Folks that have never offered anything but criticism also never contribute to the upkeep of this site in any way." then, like, gnu went "Forgive me Mick, but I don't get that one. [...] Did I miss something?" then, like Mick went, "Yeah, gnu, what I meant was that your point, delivered passionately, was the valid one. So, like, I thought Mick was, y'know, talkin' about money because, like, he HAD been talkin' about money even if he, y'know, doesn't get that when he agreed with what gnu said about, like, MONEY, he was agreeing about the about money contribution thing. So, anyway, for me to think Mick was talkin' about money contributions just because he sorta had been, isn't totally bogus. But, like, who cares anyway? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: John MacKenzie Date: 17 Dec 05 - 12:37 PM You know the 6th post on this thread from gnu, said that he thought it read RIP Mudcat, and he worried that it might have been about tearing Mudcat apart. I'm beginning to wonder if he may have been right all along! Giok |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 17 Dec 05 - 01:18 PM Giok, I hope you don't see my post as anything but a goofy explanation. I can't take this type of thread seriously. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Amos Date: 17 Dec 05 - 01:30 PM I have relished this site for good conversation, welcome insight into the songs of my tradition, and good friendship, for five or six years now. The intellectual and emotional rewards I find here far outweigh the inconvenience of having to put up with petty minded snips like the Guest at the top of this thread, and a smallhandful of others who believe their merit lies in their disdain for others. IMO such voices are sad reflections of internal ruin, whether temporary or chronic. They must find the world inadequate, given the nature of their lenses. A |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: gnu Date: 17 Dec 05 - 01:38 PM WB here. gnu is watching NFL on Fox Pregame. To paraphrase Jeri, I can't take this type of thread, seriously. Shambles... that's low... even for you. Now, I must join gnu in watching the Pats stomp the Bucs. And... ah... if y'all don't like football, turn the damn channel. Like common sense and good manners would dictate. WB |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: wysiwyg Date: 17 Dec 05 - 02:10 PM I can't take this thread seriously either-- the very idea of Mudcat resting "in peace"-- too, too ridiculous! ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 17 Dec 05 - 02:24 PM How about you stick to explaining what you meant, eh? ***snerk*** |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 17 Dec 05 - 02:33 PM Mick, are you nuts? Like I'm supposed to know EVERYTHING... |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 17 Dec 05 - 02:35 PM This is post 101 in the RIP eulogy for the Mudcat. F##kin' ol' horse still has some life in it, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 17 Dec 05 - 02:36 PM Well, it woulda bin if Jeri hadn't taken post 101. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 17 Dec 05 - 02:43 PM I have often been accused of being a knowitall. But I admit that I don't know everything. There are several things I don't know. But if I don't know it, I call my brother. He knows what I don't. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: The Shambles Date: 17 Dec 05 - 03:43 PM The point is a valid one. Folks that have never offered anything but criticism also never contribute to the upkeep of this site in any way. Mick ---------------------------------------- Contributions, as I have used it, was not meant to solely indicate financial support. I would hope it was evident in my post......... Nope - it wasn't evident. Perhaps it was the use of the word 'upkeep'? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 17 Dec 05 - 03:45 PM Shambles, being told by you that my point wasn't clear, ...... well, given the nature of your posts I would say that I have been told by a pro. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST Date: 17 Dec 05 - 03:50 PM Two words: Drumcree threads. Extraordinary farce. An inspired piece of lunacy. The work of genius(es).... Mudcat's finest hour. If the Great Mudcat Crash scrambled those threads, it wouldn't even matter. The continuity is that good. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 17 Dec 05 - 04:04 PM Agreed Guest, that was one of the finest hours. And there were others just as good. Suggesting the place is dead says more about the faculties of the poster than it does about the place. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: The Shambles Date: 17 Dec 05 - 06:12 PM Shambles, being told by you that my point wasn't clear, ...... On the contrary I think that both of the points you were trying to make were perfectly clear. For you now clearly seem to think and tell us in one post that making a voluntary financial contribution to the upkeep of Mudcat does entitle certain members to judge, bully, call other poster's names, and spit on the floor of our forum. And at the same time you wish to try to pretend to us in a following post that you do not think this financial contribution entitles you and certain other members to do this. All perfectly clear. Our forum may not be quite dead - but this example of double standards or hypocrisy continues to rather badly wound our forum. A double standard or hypocrisy? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Big Mick Date: 17 Dec 05 - 10:34 PM Nice try, but you won't suck me into this one. Get your pitiful need for argument somewhere else. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 17 Dec 05 - 10:38 PM Hi, Shambles. Still bein' censored? |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: The Shambles Date: 18 Dec 05 - 03:53 AM Peace |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST Date: 18 Dec 05 - 12:36 PM Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST,GM55 Date: 15 Dec 05 - 03:00 PM well i have designed upto 30+ forums in the last two years, and this used to be ok, layout bad, but still popular enough, now....shit I know who guest GM55 is, the clue is in the name, and it refers to a mudcatter member who has confirmed it in PM. Anyone feel free to make the link. You will be suprised |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: PoppaGator Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:11 PM I've been away for a while, and I may soon be absent again, since I hope to soon take up residence back home in New Orleans, where my neighborhood is likely to remain a no-internet zone for a few more months. Nevertheless, I certainly recognize that Mudcat deserves to survive, whether or not I'm currently reading and writing. I learned one interesting thing as I perused that first 20-30 posts above, before I got sick of the whole discussion and skipped to the end: Martin Gibson didn't leave forever after all! Proof positive that Mudcat lives! |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:32 PM I know who guest GM55 is whooptee doo for you, no one else cares |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: John MacKenzie Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:36 PM It's Yishka Badishka G. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:36 PM Anyway, do you know who Harry Lee Wigley is? No? Didn't think so. Too bad for you. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: alanabit Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:42 PM 118 posts is a bloody long obituary for something which is still well alive! |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:48 PM Rumors of the Mudcat's death have been greatly exaggerated. 119 |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:55 PM But not by Shatner. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:56 PM Heaven forfend. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:57 PM Oo...trolls these days ain't wot they used to be, with sorry attempts of "it used to be ok" and "I know who that was" messages. Nowadays, ye get all riled up at trolls like this 'un, and shift yer weight to the other arse cheek. Maybe yawn. When I were a young lad, previous life or even previouser, we 'ad proper trolls. They'd make yer eyes bug out and steam come out yer ears, ye'd be so mad. They'd write insultin' things with a whole string of them hymen things wot link words together, and they'd get a thousand replies before their '!' key even cooled off. You'd want to thrash 'em good, I tell ya. Best trolls in the whole cyberworld, they wuz, but them days is gone forever... |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Jeri Date: 18 Dec 05 - 01:59 PM OH! Welcome home, PoppaGator! I hope things were much better than you expected. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 18 Dec 05 - 02:17 PM When trolls was trolls and folks was nervus! Have a safe trip, PG. Best wishes to you on the relocation and reconstruction. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 18 Dec 05 - 02:22 PM Very nervus. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Amos Date: 18 Dec 05 - 06:34 PM Harry Lee Wigley was a Confederate Officer who joined the 5th Virginia after a brief career as a school-teacher at a boys' school. He got into a lot of trouble at said school because he kept grabbing the boys' fannies and making improper suggestions to them. He was about to be run out of town on a rail when the War Between the States strated and he instead marched off to join Massa Lee as a local hero, except to the boys themselves who were very glad to see his backside. He rose to the rank of Lieutenant but could not overcome his pernicious appetites and was about to be court-martialed over a matter involving a young drummer boy from South Carolina; but Appomattox intervened and the 5th Virginia was disbanded. Leading the surrender procession to the Courthouse at Appomatox was General Gorgon followed by the Stonewall Brigade included the remnants of the 5th Va., including Harry Lee Wigley, who commented in his diaries he was fascinated by the back ends of Lee's horse that day for reasons he could not explain. He disappeared into the West in search of some sort of fortune, and to escape his reputation as a buggerer. He was last heard of somewhere in the vicinity of Vancouver, where he offended various local tribes while pitching some sort of snake oil from the back of a buckboard. A |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: Peace Date: 18 Dec 05 - 06:43 PM No doubt the snake oil was something he'd used in his past. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: GUEST Date: 19 Dec 05 - 02:08 AM Amos
Many was night that I curled up with Uncle Wiggley and fell asleep. |
|
Subject: RE: R.I.P. MUDCAT From: wysiwyg Date: 19 Dec 05 - 09:14 AM ... fascinated by the back ends of Lee's horse that day for reasons he could not explain ... Hoss musta been what I've heard called, "Stump-Broke." ~S~ |
| Share Thread: |
