BS: Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 01:17 PM

yes..perhaps you should..*grin*...I saw 199 and thought.."go for it"..but the minute I saw Leadfingers name, I knew I was too late...

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 01:37 PM

HI! Greetings from London

bobert, I figure you are referring to me. Oh well. so what. I've never hesitated to say I thought you were a fool with your bushite obsessions. Everyone who doesn't agree with you on anything is a bushite. That makes you a bulshttite.

You were so easily identifiable as this so early on.

And big Mick, I see no reason at all for you to say Shambles should be censored. For what? Stating an opinion you don't like or agree with? that's been the case pretty much with me. Oooooooooooooohh, he used some colorful language that attacked my senses! If you had any sensability, you wouldn't feel so offended or attacked.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Janie
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 01:47 PM

Bobert, what I observe in a lot of threads, especially but not only those about politics, is a tendency for people to come across as "My way is the right way and if you disagree with me you must be a wanker or an idiot." And I note that in posts from people from all parts of the politcal spectrum. It is very easy to convey that attitude whether one uses clearly insulting, personal terms, or is more subtle, sarcastic and/or passive-aggressive.

    Emotional reasoning takes over, people become disrespectful of one another, fail to acknowledge those parts of another's argument that are valid, and in doing so, undermine their own ability to convey the validity of their own viewpoint. Many if not most involved in the thread become defensive, and everybody feels like everybody else is attacking them, when in fact, many of the posters are indeed attacking each other. "Hey--it ain't me that's the problem, it's you!" Egos and ids start bouncing all over the place, and very little that is useful to anyone comes from the thread. It just turns into a big brawl. As Bill D. observed in another thread. If you enter the arena in a combative fashion, some one will do combat with you. Most of the political threads become combative as all get-out. And those on the left tend to be just as combative as those on the right.

Oh well.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 01:51 PM

Exactly right, Janie. That's what happens, and it's pretty standard human behaviour. "Winning" the argument and scoring points on one's detested opponent(s) rapidly becomes the only thing that really matters to most of the participants. It's silly, but very predictable. Dogs behave the same way. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:03 PM

Yes but what else have the romans ever done for us?

The purpose of an amphitheatre is to enable public contests and other entertainments to take plave - often to the death.

The purpose of a forum is simply to enable a discussion to take place.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:13 PM

Hi Bobert. I appreciate you sticking up for me, but please don't worry on my account.

Some people use personal attacks as a way of trying to stifle debate (on certain subjects) but that's never worked on me and it's not likely to.

Hope you're having a wonderful spring where you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: clairerise
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:18 PM

i go on a few like mudcat forums. and they are better managed. but you guys do a great job here. dont get me wrong.

but moderated forums or members only, which still means anyone can join just gets rid of those pesty guests starting trouble.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,DECISION TIME
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:30 PM

For all the bellyaching both sides.

Perhaps now is the time for moderators to MAKE A DECISION to put an end to all these threads. So....howzaboutit?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:43 PM

The chief moderator HAS made a decision for the time being....to NOT delete most threads unless there are clear personal attacks* and/or excessive bad language.

*attacks does NOT mean teasing, parody or general criticism

Joe has stated over & over that he strives to allow the most freedom that he can justify.....with the disclaimer that there are always borderline cases. A thread can bubble along with only mild sniping until someone escalates it to a nasty level. Then the choice becomes.. delete individual messages, close the thread.....or delete the entire thread, which messes up the flow of thoughts.

Such a job to have!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:47 PM

"which still means anyone can join just gets rid of those pesty guests starting trouble." Clairise

I have no idea of how many or how often Mudcat members log off and come back as Guests but I expect that there are some, for whatever reason or rationale. Should we go to members only on the BS section I assume that would eliminate that capability.

I don't know that that would be a problem. There are times, I can understand, when a member doesn't want to identify her or himself on a delicate subject but there's nothing to keep that person from presenting the subject as being posted for the proverbial friend, is there? (Bobert is very good at it, right? *G*)

I'm for q members only ruling in order to get a handle on gratuitous nastiness. If we are all visible and accountable surely that would cut down on incidents of 'road rage'. (I just had an image of someone on the freeway giving an irate finger to someone and discovering that it was someone he knew and truly did not want to offend. Members only postings would minimize that kind of incident.)

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:55 PM

I see a personal attack here. Catter "A" says that he has come under personal attack. Registered member "B" says "you must be talking about me" and uses that pretext to launch a personal attack using fowl language. Returning to the subject, I think it is policy to censor personal attacks and in this case at the very least, I would applaud the censorship of personal attacks.











B.S. Yes, fowl as in chicken.

P.S. Yes B.S. as in most of this post is tongue in cheek. But you may find some insight or wisdom in there if you look for it. Or not. Its not important. This is just a discussion forum and I'm just discussing.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:57 PM

"or members only"

Mudcat doesn't have the technology to be members only....

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,jts
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:59 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,DECISION TIME
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 02:30 PM

For all the bellyaching both sides.

Perhaps now is the time for moderators to MAKE A DECISION to put an end to all these threads. So....howzaboutit?

Guest, did you read the tread. This thread was closed and reopened. Obviously the decision has been made NOT to do away with "these" threads. Which was a good thing for you. because now you have had YOUR chance to bellyache.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 03:43 PM

Tune in again next time to hear Shambles say...........

And watch as Little Hawk responds with.......

Can JTS ever make up with Martin G, and will CarolC stand idly by if he does?

Will Martin G experience a life-changing epiphany whereby he loves everything about Britain and the Brits?

Life goes on here in As The Mudcat Turns...don't touch that dial.


Seamus (your announcer)

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 03:48 PM

I'm not tuning in unless clinton is in the next episode.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 03:51 PM

Seamus, remember this Old Chestnut?? From sitcom to soap, that's about got it!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 04:06 PM

Higgledy Piggledy
Seamus O'Kennedy
Ringside announcer
And match referee

Strumming his guitar so
Elegantistic'ly
He'll work for beers and
That's almost for free

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: artbrooks
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 04:34 PM

As long as you can't see through the beer, CarolC.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 05:56 PM

Seamus, the answer to your question is "who the fuck cares?"

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 06:00 PM

I've re-read Wolfgangs post ..."masochist", "fundamentalist"... (Ake)

Ake, so you say you have read my post twice and still didn't read it correctly as your misquote shows?

I have not written 'fundamentalist'. I have written 'foundamentalist' and have put it in inverted commas to make clear (so I thought, obviously wrongly) that it was not a typo.

Make a page search for 'found...' and you'll find who is repeatedly using expressions like 'founding principles'. Then you know whom I did call 'foundamentalist'. This 'word' does not apply to all of you.

Bobert, sorry, but I'm a bit slow in thinking and typing when I think about how to be creative in English, so your post above mine was not yet there when I penned my post. But I realise how it must have looked at the first glance directly under your post.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,JTS
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 06:03 PM

Seamus Cares. He said so. Any other questions? LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 06:28 PM

The people who keep logging in and going to these threads care, that's who!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:39 PM

I'd recommend that friend Shambles rereads David Copperfield, and has a think about the character Mr Dick.

The point is Mr Dick is a lovely man, with some very sensible suggestions - but he does have a certain tendency to drag the case of the unfortunate King Charles the First into the conversation at every opportunity, and even when there is no opportunity.

Mind, there are worse obsessions...

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 07:52 PM

Do you need to be censored?

If a large proportion of those commenting say yes, then you probably ought to think carefully about what you say, or at least how you say it.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:02 PM

I think the count of those who think they do need to be censored - is currently 3.

Most of the 200+ posts have yet to answer the question.

If the question were - do you think that others need to be censored - I suspect there would be more answers provided.

But censorship does not work like that. At least for most of us it doesn't.

But I suspect that many posters are being very careful about what they are seen to be saying. And that is sad - for all of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:07 PM

For

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:24 PM

The chief moderator HAS made a decision for the time being....to NOT delete most threads unless there are clear personal attacks* and/or excessive bad language.

The Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team has stated that -

This thread is to be kept open, so Roger can say whatever it is that he needs to say.
-Joe Offer-

So until he changes his mind and also closes this thread - in this thread I can make as many personal attacks as I wish and use as much excessive bad language as any of the edit button holders are normally permitted to use.

But as I find it easy not to indulge in personal attacks on my fellow posters and not to respond in kind to the many posts encouraged to be addressed to or about me, containing only this - and I can say whatever I need to say without setting the example of using bad language - there is not a problem.

Luckily for the rest of our forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:33 PM

Of course I'd need to be censored if I said stuff that merits being censored. It hasn't happened yet, but no doubt it could. I've written a few posts that I've thought better of, and scruibbed. If I had posted them I'd be quite glad for them to be blocked or excised.

I think it's a good principle to delay sending anything written in anger, most especially when it's a riposte to someone else's post.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:36 PM

This one has just been subject to imposed closure - but perhaps the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is not aware that one of his team has taken this action?

The need to control other people

And when he does find out - perhaps he will also re-open that thread?

---

Yes, I am aware of it. We have this thread open [and it will remain open while the discussion continues]. It serves as the current place where people can voice their complaints about our editing. One thread at a time on the subject is enough.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:37 PM

Yo, Leadfingers... I'z renamin' you Leadcounter... That was the 200th post, not the 100th... But, heck, I don't care if you can count 'er not, you can still play in my band any time you want...

And, I gotta disagree wid Bunnahabhain... There are times when folks who have no defense will try to over compensate witha strong offense... Well, in a forum such as Mudact, that offense can derail otherwise perfectly good discussions... That is where you have the proverbial bandmate who didn't bother to tune his instrument... It kinda ruins it for those who are in tune... And in tune is not meant to mean in agreement... But, at the very least, on topic...

As fir winning v. not winning??? It really ain't about that... No one wins these things... All that we can hope to do is lay out our arguments and opinions and hope that somewhere someone will be influenced to look at an issue in a different light...

Like do I think I'm going to change Martin Gibson's thinking or values??? Hey, I might be crazy but I ain't friggin' stupid here... No, I realize that Martin and I aren't going to change each other... Nor are DougR and me... But, hey, the eternal optimist in me says "Hey, Bobert, there are may be some other folks out there that are on the fence so don't let these guys have the last word..."

And, yeah, now that Martin has identified himself as the *unidentified* person in my earlier post I will say that Martin has single handedly sabotaged many anti-Bush threads here in the Catbox... And, yeah, I do have a problem with that because in doing that Martin, in essence, was the one doing the censoring, not the moderators... That shouldn't be the case... The inmates shouldn't run the asylum...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:43 PM

Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 08:44 PM

The inmates shouldn't run the asylum...

LOL.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 09:01 PM

THE CONCEPT OF POST COUNTING IS ALWAYS "THE HUNDREDTH POST"

Leadfinger is on target with his math - someone else isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 09:02 PM

NOT ON A CATTLE RANCH!

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 09:08 PM

Sorry, GUEST, I hadn't gotten the updated rulebook... Danged mail been runnin' awfully slow???

But, no matter, no reason to scream... Hate to read in tomorrow's news that you done blowed a cork an' was in ICU...

Yo, Leadfingers... Yer still in this ol' hillbilly's band...

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,sad old **** / ****
Date: 15 Apr 06 - 11:23 PM

we are all a bunch of sad old *****

[clones.. * please feel free to substitute "*****" ]



why else would we come here to burden the world
with our so near to death
bitter grudges..!!!!??


except for me.. i'm quite a happy bloke !



[and guess what ,my post 15 Apr 06 - 10:01 PM was deleted completely;
even though I most cordially invited the clones to just ammend 2 trouublesome words.. [both being ****]


..funny old world !!??

Actually I tried to just ****out the offensive word, but I couldn't change it in your "name". Hence I could get it out of the message, but not the name. I deleted it because the term was offensive to females.

Mudelf

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 03:53 AM

You may have missed the following as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread.

Yes, I am aware of it. We have this thread open [and it will remain open while the discussion continues]. It serves as the current place where people can voice their complaints about our editing. One thread at a time on the subject is enough.
-Joe Offer-

Or else?

Do you need to be censored?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 03:58 AM

Do we need to curb the troublemakers   seems to have escaped being subject to imposed closure?

So far..........

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 10:48 AM

The two guests in a row were not the same.

Guest #2, were you referring to fence 'posts'?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST,C. Ham
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 11:18 AM

Some people use personal attacks as a way of trying to stifle debate (on certain subjects) but that's never worked on me and it's not likely to.

I've run into personal attacks like that myself. I have been called "troll" and "Martin Gibson" by CarolC because I voiced support for a respected Muslim commentator, Irshad Manji, whose opinions run contrary to CarolC's orthodoxy.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 11:40 AM

That is what I see as the 'problem' that shortens good discourse, C.Ham

Often one comes up with a viewpoint that is in opposition to and is then accused of being a racist, war monger, non-recipient of the correct news information (as the other discerns it), or things like "you must be on drugs". I enjoy when I read the defense from some who are unaware of what or who they sound like during their regular posting escapades.

One must learn ro completely disregard the tirades from those who think they know it all and cannot even for a minute, contemplate let alone understand, an alternative point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 11:49 AM

Yes I was.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 12:41 PM

Do you consider someone mistaking you for Martin Gibson to be a personal attack, GUEST,C. Ham?

And a troll is someone who posts specifically for the purpose of trying to elicit an emotional response from someone else. Are you doing that?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 12:42 PM

By the way, I'm pretty sure I know who you are, GUEST,C. Ham.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 01:04 PM

Here is the "personal attack" that you have been harping on in threads lately, GUEST,C. Ham...

Subject: RE: BS: Irshad Manji on the wall
From: CarolC - PM
Date: 22 Mar 06 - 03:23 PM

Guest,C Ham (aka: Martin Gibson), could you please post some links to Manji speaking out against the Israeli occupation? I'd like to see that.

And by the way, Martin, we don't live in a trailer out in the middle of nowhere any more. We live in a house... in a city.


This is the post of yours I was responding to...

Subject: RE: BS: Irshad Manji on the wall
From: GUEST,C. Ham - PM
Date: 22 Mar 06 - 02:45 PM

Irhad Mani doesn't sit in some tin trailer in the middle of nowhere typing out lies for a small band of followers on a webchat forum. She is out there, putting herself at risk, all over North America, Europe and the Middle East day after day. She is a hero.


I'll leave it to others to decide for themselves who was trying to stifle debate.

BTW, have I just responded to a troll or not? What would the moderators have to say about this? It's a tricky question, isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Peace
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 01:18 PM

No one's a troll until a 'moderator' says that person is a troll. It seems not to be the first remark by a 'troll' that is wrong--it is the response to the troll that is wrong. Go figger.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 01:25 PM

(lest I be accused of not including all of the parts of GUEST,C. Ham's post that I was responding to, this is the other part:

She is hardly a "tool" of the Israeli government. She has spoken out, in Israel, against the occupation and she regularly speaks out against the Israeli occupation to mainstream Jewish audiences in North America and Europe.)

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 01:27 PM

"A troll is someone who posts specifically for the purpose of trying to elicit an emotional response from someone else."

Right. That being the case, I think we are almost all trolls from time to time. The nameless troll is a bit more annoying to most people than the troll who posts under a known identity.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Peace
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 01:45 PM

That may be so, LH, BUT: There is a world of difference when you pose as Shane and say outrageous shit because the folks who read your posts KNOW it's you and that you are a good man. Some shithead who makes remarks as a GUEST doing the same thing just gets lotsa folks pissed off for no reason because there is no context to put the remarks in.

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: katlaughing
Date: 16 Apr 06 - 02:18 PM

It is wrong to respond to trolls. If the volunteers see a troll post asap, they can take care of it. If several well-meaning, or not, people respond before they can take care of it, then it becomes more of a problem than the initial post. Best thing for everyone to do; if you see a troll report it on the Help or by PM to Joe or another volunteer whom you may know. Do not respond in the troll thread; leave it alone. Of course, saying this is like pissing in the wind...Mudcat is notorious for NOT taking that lesson to heart. One can only hope, though.