BS: Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 08:44 PM

That's why I'm so grateful that Jack the Sailor has now been unmasked as the TROLL that he is.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 09:19 PM

LOL, Guest, 13 Apr 06 - 08:44 PM. Yes, he's the problem here. Even when he hasn't been near the Mudcat in weeks (as is often the case), even then, he's still the cause of all of the stupid fighting and back stabbing that goes on here.

People like you (and a few others) are just looking for scapegoats. For one, so you won't have to take responsibility for your own behavior, and secondly, because you just like the taste of BLOOD.

That's why The Shambles' threads always last so interminably long. You guys just love the taste of blood and the feel of gristle and veins between your teeth.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 09:37 PM

"You guys just love the taste of blood and the feel of gristle and veins between your teeth."

That's dead right, Carol. Sheer sadism and glee in hurting other people is what keeps certain individuals (either Guests or members) coming back here and posting on certain threads. If you call them on it or object to it in any way they are delighted, because they get the chance to insult you some more, call you a "whiner" or some such term, and to have more fun abusing you further. Our mutual pal Clinton is classic of the type. He enjoys hurting people he thinks are weak. It's a self-perpetuating problem that feeds on itself most greedily, and it will continue as long as the forum remains very loosely moderated as it is now....just as bullying continues among children until adult authority is brought to bear on the problem.

Every bully instinctively feels he has a right to do what he's doing, because he has convinced himself that the people he is bullying deserve it...because they're nerds, they're whiners, they're not as tough as he is, they have it coming. I'm sure that from his point of view it all seems to make perfect sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 09:40 PM

Nicely put, LH.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 10:29 PM

No, I don't need to be tonsured. Mother Nature has done a very nice job of self-tonsuring my noggin if it's all the same to you.

What?

Yeah, I know it's "censor", not "tonsure". But I figured that if I started a dreaded copycat thread called "Do you need to be tonsured?" a certain "clone" would come along and close or delete it. He'll probably find this post and delete it instead. That's okay. I've got a copy and I know how to post it again.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Alba
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 10:34 PM

Bee-dubya-ell you temptress you..*big grin* (what is the male version of a Temptress?)
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 10:36 PM

Tempura?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 10:38 PM

Smokey Robinson?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Chip2447
Date: 13 Apr 06 - 11:49 PM

WAAAAA FUCKING WAAAAA.

Good goddamn thing I'm not a moderator here...I'd take a fucking flame thrower to the whole shit pile. Why don't you all grab a favorite beverage, fall back to neutral corners and either deal with it like adults, or piss and moan about how unfair the Mudcat is. If you don't like it here, don't let the door knob hit you in the ass when you leave.

Now, before I get singled out for not caring about your plight, let me say that I don't give a tinker's damn about your side, or his, or hers. Who wronged whom, or who deserved it...

Chip2447 (willing to loan his flamethrower to any one willing to put it to good use)

Tolerance modulator to high,
Rave switch to standby,
Rant switch to the O-F-F position.
.
.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 01:14 AM

Well Chip,

Interesting point of view, But it seems as though the moderator (Joe) wants this "discussion" such as it is or he wouldn't keep reopening it. He made it a public discussion when he threatened Carol and me publically and he has brought it back into the public eye after the threads were closed and again reopened this thread.

Maybe he needs to vent. Maybe he wants Max to the see the discussion. Maybe he wants to educate us by showing us the an example of how he wants us NOT to behave. Any way you look at it. This one is Joe's doing so when you give this advice here,

If you don't like it here, don't let the door knob hit you in the ass when you leave.

You are giving it to Joe Offer.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 01:33 AM

This one's for you Janie!

Don't shit in Camp!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 02:54 AM

Well, can I have my cup of coffee and get away from all this shit?

I guess I don't understand all these people and all their combat and offended honor and all that.

All I want is my cup of coffee, and maybe a little music discussion. Too many of you people are just plain crazy, and there's no way to deal with you and make you happy. Most of the people here want the same thing I want - conversation and maybe a good, plain cup of coffee. They're here to enjoy the company of others. All the bellyaching comes from a very few high-maintenance people, and it's really bewildering for the rest of us to figure out how to deal with it.

So, give me my coffee and get off my case. Better yet, make it scotch on the rocks.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 02:59 AM

" I was needlessly put in an impossible position"

Can't happen on the internet unless you LET it happen.... And you're happy it did, cause it gave you something to moan about....

If you don't like it here, don't let the door knob hit ya where the good lord split ya

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 03:16 AM

"Well, can I have my cup of coffee and get away from all this shit?"

You said the shit was over and started it up again. :)

" I guess I don't understand all these people and all their combat and offended honor and all that." Figure out why you do it then maybe you'll understand the others.

Or

Maybe you simply enjoy complaints with your coffee.

You can end the discussion whenever you want. Close the thread just like you opened it.

---

No, we can't just arbitrarily close threads. We have to have a reason I can defend. That's why I reopened the thread - because I could think of no defensible reason to close it, even though a Clone had considered it worthy of closure.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 03:22 AM

I'm not going anywhere, Clinton. I don't need to go anywhere.

I had only one purpose in starting those "Joe Offer" threads. My one purpose was to try to get Joe to stop trying to use me as a lever against my husband any more. I hope I have succeeded in my objective. Time will tell.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 03:46 AM

Joe could have handled quietly Clinton. He chose not to for his own reason. We all know Carol isn't going anywhere. So are you helping anything or just stirring the pot?

How are the gigs going? Are you looking forward to the Playoffs? Detroit could be playing til June.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 05:33 AM

I know I shouldn't jump in but why, Joe, did you not settle this by PM instead of making it public in the first place?

I think thats the real problem because it has happened with others as well? Whats with the public humiliation, Joe? Is this your feeble attempt at some kind of control? I can't help but notice your reluctance to expose Martin, in any way, for far more disturbing actions than either Peace, or Carol or even myself. Shambles is much older than myself so I have no comment. I have also noticed the C.H. seems particulary obsessed with L.H. Yet you say nothing to C.H.

You're probably a really nice guy, Joe, but I do think you have a very different sense of right and wrong than I do.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 06:59 AM

Why don't you all grab a favorite beverage, fall back to neutral corners and either deal with it like adults, or piss and moan about how unfair the Mudcat is. If you don't like it here, don't let the door knob hit you in the ass when you leave.

............................................................

I really do believe you should be able to have your say, but when you copy-paste things so they're visible in half-a-dozen messages, that's not fair.
Joe Offer

As you can see - it is the pissers and moaners - led by the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Staff who do not seem to have ever liked our forum on the terms that Max has presented to us. They seem to consider that what others may choose to post is somehow unfair but what they choose to impose on others in the attempt to shape our forum the their tastes is not. Which is why they now wish the next move to exclude the public.

Examples of them publicly referring to their fellow postes as assholes or worse are not uncommon. Because of this - changes are imposed by them to suit their personal tastes and still they are not satisfied........

Moaning about and using terms like "combat" when it is you who holds up the standard and expecting others to flock to this - whilst encouraging them to publicy pass judgement and abuse on the worth of those who do not flock to the standard - is combat and it only ever going to result in more division and combat on our forum.

Which has never been never JUST a discussion forum. Those who would describe it it such terms show that they have never understood the realities of what Max had in mind for our forum. And I hope still does.   

It is clear that Joe Offer will not rest until he has finally excluded the public from freely contributing to our forum.

It seems to be clear (from his few public statements and until he decides to comment on this issue) that Max does not wish to exclude the public.

So the answer would appear to be that those few who wish to have a private members club go and form one of their own where they can pass judgement on each other's worth as much as they wish.

Incidently - do you need to be censored?

I think I have counted one poster so far who considers they need to be censored.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 07:10 AM

You may have missed the following - as they were editing comments inserted into existing posts which did not refresh the thread.

Nope. Never censored or edited or refused delivery. We have discussed allowing people to block personal messages from objectionable people, but we haven't decided to do it.
-Joe Offer-

--------------------------------------

I said that two anonymous personal attack Martin Gibson threads came from either Carol or her husband Jack the Sailor - Jack later more-or-less admitted he's the one who started it. That resulted in about eight related threads, all of which were deleted. Both Carol and Jack agreed that the matter should be dropped, so I do not think I should discuss it further. There's a fairly complete outline of the issue in the first message of this thread. What was deleted, was related squabbling.
'Nuff said.
-Joe Offer

-----------------------------------------

No, we can't just arbitrarily close threads. We have to have a reason I can defend. That's why I reopened the thread - because I could think of no defensible reason to close it, even though a Clone had considered it worthy of closure.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 07:15 AM

Well guys you've certainly got Roger's hopes up with all this too public discussion of things that should have been private in most cases. He's been trying for a long time to discredit Joe, and to drive a wedge between him and the rest of us.
I suggest that grievances are sorted out in a less public fashion!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 07:18 AM

"Well, can I have my cup of coffee and get away from all this shit?"

Joe, the Good Lord said you should use a shovel and not a cup of coffee... Isn't coffee an emetic anyway? :-P

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 07:27 AM

DELETE THIS THREAD

Not deleted - but it as been subject to imposed closure for no explained reason and by persons unknown.

It was obviously started by someone who does feel they need to be censored...........

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 07:32 AM

Explain the BS rules - 26 Oct 99

Since you are with us, you get to help us make the rules. Of late it seems that it is used for non-music related questions, comments, thoughts and stories. It may be like just a light conversation piece, or just killing time, or getting through a bad day, or anything non-academic (if you will). Or, just don't use it. It is what you make it. Don't sweat the rules, cause there aint none.
Max

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,G
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 08:10 AM

Are a bunch of rules required or simply some common sense and a minimal amount of consideration.

What I have noticed here are some who can not stand their point of view to be objected to. Their response is to trash the poster's integrity and more or less ignore the content of the post. There is a phrase for that behavior but it would not help the cause here.

There are many here who can take a hit and still continue on a sane and sensible approach to debate.

When in Rome, do as............or move.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Alba
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 08:25 AM

Over to you MR Dylan:

Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't speak too soon
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'.
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin'.

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside
And it is ragin'.
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'.

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don't criticize
What you can't understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'.

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is
Rapidly fadin'.
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin'.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 09:14 AM

No, we can't just arbitrarily close threads. We have to have a reason I can defend. That's why I reopened the thread - because I could think of no defensible reason to close it, even though a Clone had considered it worthy of closure.
-Joe Offer-

Seems to me tha Clone had a point and that Shambles just wanted to continue the discussion you had closed. But you are the man.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 09:26 AM

I suggest that all 'invasive posts' i.e. posts which have nothing to do with the subject of the thread be deleted automatically.
Too many times I have seen people post into threads which they have made no contribution to in any other way, just to spread their crusade, or to claim a centenarian thread.
Fair enough I have seen posts that were accidentally posted in the wrong place, but those are the exception rather than the rule.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 09:41 AM

John that sounds like a heck of a lot of work and It would take exquisite judgement. Maybe above the line it might work, but not down here in crazy land.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,G
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 09:44 AM

"Giok", sounds like a fair idea and it would certaily cut down on band width, way down.

See you good folks next week, hope Martin G. enjoys his trip.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 09:53 AM

ABOLISH THREAD DRIFT!




We now return you to the regular thread!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 10:16 AM

Naw; thread drift can be fun, curbing thread sabotage is more what I had in mind Robin!
G

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Alba
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 10:23 AM

Indoor voices please Foolestroupe and maybe the colour Green would be a little subtler than the Red. ..ROFL...:>)
Best Wishes
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 10:31 AM

Giok, nice thought, but we'd miss out on a lot of fun thread drift if that were the case. There IS too much of the inane, post-to-stir-the-pot crap, but every once in awhile there comes a gem and I'd hate to miss them.:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 10:31 AM

I suggest that all 'invasive posts' i.e. posts which have nothing to do with the subject of the thread be deleted automatically.

*Smiles*

Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 10:54 AM

Giok, nice thought, but we'd miss out on a lot of fun thread drift if that were the case.

Can it be explained to me the logic behind the concept that there could ever be anything 'NICE' about the suggestion by one poster that the chosen contribution of another poster be automatically deleted?

Our forum has always been shaped but what is contributed to it and an open invitation is still made by our host for the public to do this.

It is telling that the accepted line from some of our fellow guests and usual suspects - is now firmly focused on what can be closed, deleted otherwise prevented and inhibited.

There can be nothing remotely 'NICE' about this. If those who do not like the reality of a forum where they may have to read things they may not like and from contributors they may not like - the answer is for them to go away and start one.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 10:56 AM

Add to the banned post list, posts which are quoted out of context, and without asking the author.
If you are so incensed about your precious prose being tampered with Roger, I suggest you practice what you preach and don't use other people's words without their express permission.
Then again with you it's 'do as I say not as I do' isn't Roger?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 11:10 AM

Do you need to be censored?

As you have failed to address the subject of this thread - should all of your many posts in this thread have been automatically deleted?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: clairerise
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 11:35 AM

perhaps if you all called it something other than censored everyone would like the idea more.

the words you spin are the webs that can entangle you.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 11:38 AM

I don't need to be censored, but I know someone who does matey!
What I mean to say, and do try not to take this as a personal judgement on you Roger, is that I wish you would go away and stop wasting your time and ours in endless and pointless discussions about what is at best a theoretical Mudcat, which doesn't and never will exist.
That's because the MAJORITY like it the way it is Roger, and what's more we dislike your efforts to hijack the site, and how it's run. Plus your efforts to entrap, discredit, and get rid of certain Mudcat people you don't like, and have a grudge against.
I am rapidly developing a grudge against you Roger, and your mealy mouthed posturing, your self seeking disguised as self righteousness, and your all round nit picking behaviour.
You know of course that this makes the Mudcat an unpleasant and unhappy place to visit at times don't you?
Of course you do, that's why you do it!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 01:03 PM

I suggest that grievances are sorted out in a less public fashion!

I tried to do that the last time something like this happened, and it accomplished nothing. My hope is that it will not be an issue in the future.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 01:42 PM

If you don't like it here... leave.

Oddly, that seems to be the attitude of a fair number of people around here. I say "oddly" because the vast majority of Mudcatters probably hold concepts like "My country, right or wrong!" or "America! Love it or leave it!" in high contempt. Yet, "If you don't like it here... leave." expresses the very same attitude. It says that the speaker is comfortable with the status quo and that those who are not comfortable with it should simply disappear instead of trying to change it.

Now, it's been said numerous times that the Mudcat is not a democracy, and that's quite true. The place belongs to Max and he decides how it's run. But Max, Joe and virtually every person who frequents this forum are products of democratic processes. Our modes of thinking have developed within a democratic context. We've been taught that our opinions matter, and we're even encouraged to express those opinions.

It's absurd to expect people to leave fundamental chunks of their world-views at the door when they log on here. It's absurd to establish a forum where vigorous discussion of national and international political and social issues is encouraged, yet say that discussion of similar issues relative to the forum itself is somehow off-limits.

Just my two-cents worth. Have some sort of a day.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 02:19 PM

I have every right, as a moderator of this forum, to judge the worth of the posts. That is exactly what moderators do, in addition to the housekeeping.

Perhaps you currently do have some right but do not all rights come with some responsiblity? Or perhaps what you have also is but a privilige and one that can be taken away should this this privilige be seen to be abused?

For when you are posting only to judge the worth of your fellow posters and threatening them - how would the rest of our forum know when you are setting this example in your role of moderator - and when you are doing exactly the same thing as a poster?

So go ahead and see if you can slip another false premise by. But in the meantime, any attacks, or redundant threads will be closed or deleted.
Mick

Who deletes the abusive personal attacks against fellow posters that you set the prime example of posting and for which sadly there are only too many examples of?

And what exactly would you judge to be one of these redundant threads that you threaten you will now close or delete?

Do you not think that our forum should continue be shaped be the public's contributions, rather than which and how many of these contributions you and your anonymous companions can delete?

And as your Chief has now publicly admitted that these measures have failed to bring the required peace - do you also wish to join him in excluding the public from posting BS?

Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 02:31 PM

Life isn't perfect yet, is it?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 02:41 PM

Healthy discontent is the prelude to progress.

Mohandas Gandhi

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 03:17 PM

Yes, "healthy" being the key factor in that equation...

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: catspaw49
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 03:26 PM

Move on down the line

I got to move on, down the line
What's yours is yours, what's mine is mine
There's nothing left, but the lying
Move on down the line

This train we're riding, has reached the end
And it's no good to pretend
We were walking, hand in hand
Into some Promised Land

So long, I won't forget you
But, I never was 'gonna' let you
Tie me up and settle me down
Nothing's lost, nothing's found

The story ends, it's had it's time
And if you look, I'll think you'll find
The bottle's empty, we drunk it dry
There's no need to cry

This dog is happy, it's had it's day
There's really nothing more to say
No need to cut up, don't howl the moon
We don't sing the same tune

No need to tell me, I'm no good
I just thought, you understood
Just like the wind, needs to blow
I've 'gotta' go

Roger Gall..........http://www.mudcat.org/thread.CFM?threadID=12413#162427


Yep, that was Sham back in July of '99. But since only alison and kat responded, The Sham took another shot with his "Warm Goodbye" thread (http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=12450) where he then said:

"I intend to look in from time to time and will hopefully, return if or when I feel that welcome is again there for all."


So Roger........You seem to have changed your mind about things since those days. Since you're so fond of quoting Max's offhand throwaway line about "no rules," don't you think he may have had some other thoughts on the matter since then?   He certainly has added some rules around here. But if you must hold all of us to our previous statements, then start with your own.......I mean you're the one who is so big about leading by example and all. Go for it Pard!!!

LMAO.......I just really do love this joint sometimes. Where else can you find a fucker so tenacious about diddly-shit as Roger? Or what about Joe going bats and trying to appease one and all when it can't be done? I mean like, I like Father Joebro and all but his efforts to keep things in line while trying to be fair are kinda' humorous if you stand back and look at the whole place.

Ya' know it's funny too that for several years back in '98 to say about 2000, we could get a real fight going over "What is Folk?" but it was more of a "fun fight." Today it's a lot easier to get a fight brewing over "What is Censorship." Speaks volumes about what has happened here. The BS was simply a fun adjunct to the music but some didn't like it so it moved below the line. Since then and since 9-11 it seems that threads which were few and far between on contentious issues have become the norm in BS. Now it is time for moderation on a different level and "censorship" is a part of that moderation. Of course what needs to be understood here is that any posting done here or anywhere on the 'net is done as a privilege from the site owner and most offer no right of "free speech."

I am a Mod at one of the larger website message boards. They have 18 active forums and the smallest one is much larger than the 'Cat. There are over 70 Mods and Admins and simple rule which says that if your post is not suitable in any way it can and will be deleted. Threads are under the same guideline and Mods are not asked to explain any thread or post deletion to the member. Only members can post and any complaints go straight to the site administrators. If you complain in another thread or post it gets zapped. I try to give a few warnings but most of the Mods just pull the trigger and that's it. We use "Mod names" different from our membership names and are unknown to the membership. The place runs very smoothly.

The 'Cat is a far different place and I would not like to see it go that route but there are a few things that can be learned from the other sites. Poor Joe could take one lesson for sure and that is not to even try to explain. I have yet to see anyplace he has done that where his answers were suitable to all and generally they just tended to add grist ti "The Great Shambles Cut and Paste Mill."

Anyways........So Rog, what's it to be? Gonna' stick with your words from seven or so years back or are you gonna' hold only Max to his? Or are you going to admit that maybe the times have changed a tad?

I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU but this is the internet and the concept of rights here is a far different one and YES, in this place and this medium and this context, we all sometimes need to censored.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 03:46 PM

Dunno, Roger. As I see it, I sometimes disagree with people, but I'm not combative. It's the combative stuff that causes trouble at Mudcat. and I do believe that needs to be controlled.
Joe Offer,

Joe I know that you do not consider that such posts as the following past examples are combative.

I know that you do not consider that such posts are setting an example that other posters will think acceptable and follow.

However, I do suggest that the evidence speaks for itself.


Shambles, go whine somewhere else, or maybe we should start threads about you and the sheep or something.
Joe Offer
-----
But Shambles believes in this sort of thing, so I think that maybe this would be a good opportunity to smear his reputation. Shambles, I'm sick of you and your shit
Joe Offer.
------
Ah, Shambles - we make an exception for you, since you seem to think it's a good thing to have personal attacks. We want to keep you happy, after all. Your whining is so annoying.
Joe Offer
------
Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted.
Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 04:03 PM

Well said Joe!
G

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 04:05 PM

Yes, "healthy" being the key factor in that equation...

Perhaps in that equation Ghandi would consider an 'unhealthy discontent' - to be contentment?


Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Apr 06 - 04:32 PM

Censorship? Heaven forfend!! If posts such as those from the two or three (ok, maybe it's five or six) not-particularly-anonymous-but-excessively-frequent posters were to be censored, those of us who tend to read much more than we write would be deprived of the opportunity to laugh at these people.