BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)

Subject: links
From: GUEST,cialis
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:29 PM

cialis [url=http://cialiser.blogspot.com]cialis[/url] http://cialiser.blogspot.com

---

This Spam was undeleted and transferred from the previous "Closed and Deleted" thread. Shambles doesn't believe my statement that the previous thread was closed because it had become a Spam target - well, here's his Spam. Hope he likes it.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: links
From: GUEST,payday loans
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:29 PM

payday loans [url=http://paydayloans.blogspot.com]payday loans[/url] http://paydayloans.blogspot.com

Subject: links
From: GUEST,free slots
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:32 PM

free slots [url=http://freeslots.blogspot.com]free slots[/url] http://freeslots.blogspot.com

Subject: links
From: GUEST,diet pills
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:34 PM

diet pills [url=http://dietpills.blogspot.com]diet pills[/url] http://dietpills.blogspot.com

Subject: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 03:09 PM

The following thread has been closed (for a second time) Closed threads & deleted posts for the following reason (or excuse).

Gee, I'm so sorry, but I have to close this thread. It's getting hit with a lot of Spam - four in two minutes. If you need to start another discussion on this topic, post a link to this thread.
Thanks.
-Joe Offer-

Perhaps the discussion will be permitted to continue (spam free) in this thread? For as you can see - that thread had happily lived with all the spam intentionally placed there since August 2006, by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - as you will see from (what is now) its first post.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 03:14 PM

The following was the latest of my posts to the original thread. Although there was an earlier thread called 'Deleted posts & closed threads' - which was also closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

So if I decide to agree with actions and restrictions being imposed on our forum, that I cannot ever be seen to support - will I too become a 'nice' person (like the example that Catspaw sets)?

Will the special restrictions on my posting then be lifted?

And as long as I am not seen to disagree with the 'way 'we' do things here' - like Catspaw and a few other favoured posters - will I too be permitted and encouraged to post only personal judgements, insults and be allowed to call other posters names?

I strongly suspect that should I (or others) be seen to ever post or respond in kind, anything like those that certain 'moderators' choose to do and which certain favoured posters are seen to be permitted to do - that my posts would not remain on our forum for very long.........

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 03:21 PM

I'm having flashbacks . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 03:43 PM

Emotional neediness.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 03:45 PM

NO. Flashbacks. It's the strangest damned thing. It's like a daja vu kinda feeling. I'm seeing posts on a new thread that I'm sure I've read before, and it's like going back in time but still being in the present. Man, this is WEIRD!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 03:59 PM

Man, this is WEIRD!

Perhaps not as weird as a thread being closed because of spam posts- by the same person who thought it OK to intentionally insert spam posts all over it?

Perhaps there could be another reason for that thread being closed for a second time - just when it looked as if someone could claim the 2000th post?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:08 PM

Perhaps everyone can start ignoring this thread since everything that has to be said was already said in the closed one. Just let Shambles have a good time raving on and on and on. He doesn't really care what anyone else thinks anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:09 PM

I would have expected by now that someone would have corrected the spelling of daja vu.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:15 PM

Perhaps it is time for a complete mental examination.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:15 PM

Shambles - you are so screwed up. They give you your own thread, let you start another thread and then you STILL whine????? Just drop off the face off the internet once and for all. Find something real to complain about - if only you had any idea what "real complaints" are! Must be nice to have a life where this is the best you have to complain about.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:15 PM

never a pedant when you really need one !

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:18 PM

Perhaps everyone can start ignoring this thread since everything that has to be said was already said in the closed one. Just let Shambles have a good time raving on and on and on. He doesn't really care what anyone else thinks anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:28 PM

There's that fuckin' daja vu AGAIN!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:36 PM

deja

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:38 PM

see - I told you there would be a pedant along soon :)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:38 PM

Oh, sweet crap!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Severn
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:43 PM

Closed closed post-postthread threads?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:44 PM

Perhaps everyone can start ignoring this thread since everything that has to be said was already said in the closed one. Just let Shambles have a good time raving on and on and on. He doesn't really care what anyone else thinks anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:46 PM

"I got that old feeling".................

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:49 PM

"Shambles: I just don't care anymore. You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell."

According to Max "Trust me, this matter will be dealt with in time. Trust me, we working as hard as we can to make this happen as soon as we can." That's about you leaving.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Emma B
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:51 PM

now THAT is déja vu !

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 04:52 PM

I was last to post in the other thread.

I killed it!

I paid Shambles a compliment and reality turned on its ear and a quantum singularity formed and the thread was closed.

It was all down to ME!

I will accept your gifts of thanks.

Line forms on the left...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 05:27 PM

Thanks ever so much. Now have you devised a way of ridding us of Shambles for good?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,GUEST
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 05:37 PM

Shambles posted three times. Someone else posted six times. Who's got the problem?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 08:27 PM

Thanks for the compliment Cluin - it did seem to be the compliment that did for the last thread.

However, I suspect that the reason was that with all the discussion confined in one thread (as requested) - it was too easy for posters to read the whole sorry tale.

You do have the dubious honour of having the last post to it - even if there was a editing comment inserted into it.

It is amazing how when I request that editing comments be limited to always being provided where some form of editing action has taken place - this is deemed by our 'moderators' to be too much trouble for them.

But when I am trying to stop them being inserted into posts (and not refreshing the thread) when no editing action has been imposed - inserting editing comments into posts - seems not to be too much trouble for them at all.

Other than the spam that was intentionally inserted inserted into that thread by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team (i.e the good spam), did anyone - other than the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - see any evidence of this alleged and rather convienient new spam (i.e. the bad spam)?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 08:49 PM

I most certainly did.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 08:58 PM

Yes I did - anything written by some schmuck named The Shambles.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 09:13 PM

I most certainly did.

Well as you did, perhaps you could explain to our forum, the so-called logic of closing that thread in particular (or of deleting any spam from it)?

For spam was intentionally placed in that thread by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team (and still remains there) - supposedly so that we could see what spam looked like and how much spam there was being silently deleted in order to protect us from seeing it?

It will be difficult to explain this as there really is no logic or consistency in any of these actions.

We do all know what spam is and our forum had suffered no lasting effects from this spam being in that thread since August 2006 - so it is difficult to see what harm - even a 'barrage' of new spam would have done - had the thread remained open.

But it will be interesting to read any attempts posted here to explain our 'moderator's' 'logic'...............

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 09:29 PM

To the narisch tipesch who called Shambles a bad name: behave.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,Only the Lonely
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 10:17 PM

It's not deja vu!

It's Dejah Thoris!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: number 6
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 10:25 PM

So Shambles ... I'm not quite clear on what your beef is all about .. can you please clarify on what the complaint is all about.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 10:28 PM

And Jack misses her, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 06:33 AM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it - and the spam that was said to be the reason for imposing closure on the first thread (for the second time) - was inserted to the start of this thread, and said to be for the following reason.

This Spam was undeleted and transferred from the previous "Closed and Deleted" thread. Shambles doesn't believe my statement that the previous thread was closed because it had become a Spam target - well, here's his Spam. Hope he likes it.
-Joe Offer-

As these spam posts are judged OK to be placed here by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team - perhaps they could just safely have been left in the original thread (along with the other spam posts placed earlier in that thread by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team)?

It was judged that the earier thread was a safe dumping ground for spam posts - so where is the logic in closing that one - and then placing the new spam posts deleted from that one into this thread as well?

Perhaps they can be removed by the person who placed them there?

Spam posts are either all equally good or equally bad - I suggest that seeing them abused by our 'moderators' for use in their own personal disputes with individual posters in public - is not setting a very positive example to posters or other 'moderators'.

There may be a few fools posting on our forum - but very few posters are as foolish as the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team obviously judges our forum to be - in seriously expecting posters to accept the justification he provides for these unecessary and personally motivated actions.

Or perhaps our 'moderators' could just delete any spam posts that appear in any thread - as our forum is told and what most of them seem to consider is is what they are supposed to do with spam posts? For we do all know what spam is - and no matter how irritating this may be - we do manage quite well to simply ignore what few posts slip past our automatic filters.

By all means delete spam posts - but please don't close or delete any more perfectly acceptable threads along with all their posts. This is throwing the baby out with the bathwater and it is simply NOT proportionate to the problem.

Following this logic - should all threads be subjected to such spam postings - then will the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team judge it to be a proportionate response - to close the entire forum?

I fear the answer would probably be yes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following thread has been closed (for a second time) http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=93659&messages=1827&page=1&desc=yes for the following reason.

Gee, I'm so sorry, but I have to close this thread. It's getting hit with a lot of Spam - four in two minutes. If you need to start another discussion on this topic, post a link to this thread.
Thanks.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:30 AM

Mr Gall, I am delighted to see you starting a new edition of "Closed threads & deleted posts". Your ability to consistantly introduce such humour into what at first might appear to be a dull topic is to be admired. Your creation of "The Shambles" is inspired.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 09:45 AM

Mr Gall, I am delighted to see you starting a new edition of "Closed threads & deleted posts".

I am glad to see that someone is pleased.

I am sorry there has to be a new one started - as there was no good reason to close the first one. http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=93659&messages=1827&page=1&desc=yes

But the main regret is that while posts and entire threads continue to be closed and deleted - for no good reason - that discussion of these actions and the justifications given for them will have to (try) and continue too.

When reason and some form of consistent logic is finally seen to be openly applied on our forum by our 'moderators' - when all posters are seen to be given equal treatment - when our forum can see them all and judge if these imposed editing actions are proportionate and when a better example of posting conduct is seen to be set by them - there will be no need for such threads as these.

If as much effort was spent by our 'moderators' in addressing these problems as is seen to be spent by some of them - in judging, complaining about and generally interfering with these threads - I feel that this would prove to be of great benefit to all posters.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 10:06 AM

I am pleased Mr Gall.

I wonder if I may make one suggestion. I believe that it Joe Offer's occasional venture into comedy weaken an otherwise excellent plot and that it is The Shambles' reaction to a reasonable man that produces the best laughs. Could that be considered for our next episode?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 10:13 AM

Shambles - direct your wasted energy to the real problems of the world. You would probably accomplish quite a bit of good.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 10:54 AM

Who needs a spambot when we've got you, Joe? The forum be damned...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 11:56 AM

Perhaps everyone can start ignoring this thread since everything that has to be said was already said in the closed one. Just let Shambles have a good time raving on and on and on. He doesn't really care what anyone else thinks anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wolfgang
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 03:36 PM

Yeah, 09 Dec 06 - 11:56 AM, I know,
but he's so fun to watch, his blown-up pompousness, his inability to forge the flow of incoherent thoughts into a normal sentence, his fearless fight to save the the Occident and the Enlightenment from the onslaught of the forces of Evil, his involuntary humour,...

But mayby you're right, there's no real need to write letters to the editor about the jokes' page. One can just laugh.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 04:40 PM

OK, so maybe anger was part of the reason why I moved those Spam messages to the top of this thread. Shambles doubted the existence of the Spam that was the reason for the closure of the previous thread, so I moved those messages here as proof. And yes, I was angry. I think I had a right to be. Nobody likes to be called a liar.

I've always prided myself for my honesty, and I've always been honest here at Mudcat. If I say I closed a thread for thus-and-such a reason, that's why I closed it. For over five years, Mr. Shambles has posted messages almost every day that attempt to "prove" that I'm a liar. Usually, I'm able to ignore those messages - but it does hurt a lot. When it appears that other people are starting to believe his allegations, that's when it hurts the most.

So, if my anger got the best of me, I'm sorry.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: jacqui.c
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 04:43 PM

Joe - those who know you will know that you do not lie and that your Mudcat dealings are straight down the middle.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 04:52 PM

Don't let him get to you Joe, that's what he's trying to do!
He's just an underhand little shit!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 05:16 PM

Shambles gets called a schmuck and an underhand little shit. And so we score two for the anti-Shambles side.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 05:25 PM

SCORE CARD



Shambles                  Management

0                         2

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 05:29 PM

And now I'm off this thread, too. Someone else can keep score. It has turned to shit in which good people get slagged and other good people get sucked in. The bullshit of allowing Shambles to slag Joe and then clones leaving personal insults about Shambles on the thread is beneath the dignity of the site.

Have a nice fuckin' day!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 05:30 PM

Score card:

Shambles 5000 Management 100

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 06:23 PM

Just ban him or delete every single complaint posting like other web sites do and there won't be any problems. I belong to other web sites that have moderators that aren't a tenth as lenient as Joe and there aren't any problems. Stick to the theme or away you go. Post an insult to the site owner or moderators and you get a warning. Keep it up and you're out of here. It works most of the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 07:39 PM

Shambles is the little kid who whines and nags in the back seat until Mom stops the car and whacks him in an overreaction, then complains and whines louder because he got whacked..."..and I didn't hardly do NOTHIN'!"


Joe admits he sometimes overreacts...Shambles admits nothing.

Remember the lesson in "Moose Turd Pie"

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:01 PM

OK, so maybe anger was part of the reason why I moved those Spam messages to the top of this thread. Shambles doubted the existence of the Spam that was the reason for the closure of the previous thread, so I moved those messages here as proof. And yes, I was angry. I think I had a right to be. Nobody likes to be called a liar.

If you volunteer to work in the kitchen - the fact that you may get hot and bothered does not entitle anyone to throw pots and pans at the customers.

Some tasks in life are truly thankless and if you really expect universal thanks for undertaking them - perhaps you are being unrealistic?

No one is forcing anyone to work in the kitchen and if they feel their best efforts are not appreciated - perhaps after all this time it is time to come out of the kitchen?   

Especially as it has already been admitted that these best efforts are ineffective.

As for me calling any poster any names - the record will show that unlike the example set by some of our 'moderators' - I do not post such things (for my detractors could be relied on and would have provided evidence for this).

And the record will also show that I will stick to the discussion and do not respond to provocation or respond in kind to the names that I am called by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, some of the 'moderators and the certain favoured posters.

Those noisy few who unlike me - are not only seen to be free from any posting restrictions if they do post such things - but who are now actively encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, to set the example of posting only such things to our forum.

All the evidence is here - posters can judge for themselves if the assurances given to our forum by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team are in fact seen to be honoured.

Or if any apolgy is issued to our forum when an assurance is seen not to be honoured.

The point about any of the 'silent deletion's of posters contributions - be they posts that meet the ever-increasing critria you assure our forum that they must - or when entire threads are deleted when they are seen not to meet the required criteria - is that our forum does not know what the true nature and current level of this 'silent deletion' is - but are expected to support it.

If anyone has any blank cheques like this - they can send them to me.

If all such actions were recorded by editing comments and all editing comments were limited to where action by our 'moderators' had actually been judged necessary - poster to our forum would be able to judge if these actions - imposed on their behalf, in their name and in order to protect them - were proportionate.

Currently our forum is expected to take this on trust - from fellow posters/'moderators' who do not trust our forum enough to operate under their names. I suggest this is too much to reasonably expect.

Perhaps if our 'moderators' were to be seen to operate more fairly, openly, and consistently, to honour all assurances given to our forum and to show more trust and respect for poster's invited contributions - they may then reasonably expect to be trusted more and to shown more respect in return?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:07 PM

You're gonna give Sisyphus a bad name.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:11 PM

Cluin-LOLOL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:41 PM

http://stripe.colorado.edu/~morristo/sisyphus.html

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Dec 06 - 08:43 PM

That's a scene from "Raiders of the Lost Ark."

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 12:11 AM

Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles. Shutup Shambles.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 12:23 AM

U2h1dHVwIEd1ZXN0DQo=

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 11:45 AM

Guest "Only the lonely"

Please do not mention Dejah Thoris again in relation to a Shambles thread. Her name is still greatly revered!

Yours
JC

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 01:35 PM

If the Martians were oviparous (egg-laying), how come Dejah Thoris had such great tits?

(yeah, I read Burrough's "John Carter of Mars" series when I was a kid too)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 03:33 PM

Even Martians have a better grasp of grammar and syntax than widdle Shamby Pamby. If understandable communication were required for a fuck, this guy would still be a virgin. Hmmmm........Can someone please check on the Shammy homefront and let us know?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Big Mick
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 03:53 PM

Dejah Thoris CLICKY

. I remember when I was a kid, reading about her and touchi....... STOP, Mick. TMI.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 04:30 PM

It is unwise to go into battle wearing virtually no protective armour or clothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 04:50 PM

They got it half right, LH.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 04:59 PM

Amazing how different the experience and the interests of the male and female persuasions. I had never heard of Dejah Thoris. And I see that 'assembly and painting' are required. Be still, my heart!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:10 PM

Frazetta did the best paintings IMO. Example here.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:12 PM

'nother

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:13 PM

Last.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: bobad
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:48 PM

I guess it's warm where she is.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 05:49 PM

Look more closely . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 06:02 PM

Edgar Rice Burroughs? Hmmmmm

When I was a kid, parents bemoaned the reading of comic books. Maybe they had seen a few of these depictions?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:11 PM

Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote for the young male audience, Ebbie. Tarzan, John Carter of Mars, and various other spectacular tales of derring-do. They're great adventure books to read when you're about 14 or 15. I don't think he envisioned Dejah Thoris being quite as skimpily clad as she is now depicted...although fairly close to that, perhaps. I doubt he would have illustrated her bare-breasted. Barsoomian (Martian) women tended to dress in a combination of jewelery and fetching garments, revealing a fair bit, but not looking like an act at the local strip club, I don't think. And Dejah was a princess. Royalty has to come up to a certain mark of dignity and public respect.

The books were marvelously imaginative, but they are badly dated now. They reflect social attitudes from a bygone era, when the great British Empire was still the premier power in the world, and beautiful women swooned at the least excuse, and lay panting and disheveled on the decks of pirate ships and in the dank courtyards of lost cities, waiting, hoping against hope, for their bronzed, tall, dark hero to leap over the rail and slaughter the vile despicable criminally insane wretches who were at that very moment closing in on them, grinning evily, licking their lips, and contemplating forcing their unspeakable intentions upon the fair white palpitating skin of...

(you get the idea...?)

Dejah was pretty feisty, though. She was Barsoomian after all, and Barsoomian princesses can use a sword.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:15 PM

Weren't the stories originally serials in pulp mags. They seemed pretty disposeable.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:20 PM

And of course the lower gravity on Mars ensured Dejah Thoris's fun bags would stay (in the words of Bob Seger) "way up, firm and high" longer than on ponderous old Terra.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:24 PM

Yeah, they were serials in pulp magazines, and they followed the pattern of the time. But E.R.B.'s sheer sense of imagination was not easy to match. He created a marvelous idea with the Tarzan stories, one that has far outlived its creator, and his Martian world was equally memorable.

It's true about Martian gravity. Very good for maintaining perky uplift, I should think. Nevertheless, it is my opinion that Ms. Thoris normally kept her breasts covered in public.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 07:45 PM

It wasn't her breasts that took me aback.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 08:39 PM

Geeziz Ebbie, if your breasts are on the back, you really are gettin' old. I assume that's in the prone position? I mean upright I would think it's more to the knees.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 09:48 PM

hhahahha On the other hand (side?) I remember when I was a kid that there was a woman in church whose breasts did rest on the belt at her waist. She had had many children, breastfed them all and I think it is safe to say that she did NOT wear a bra. (Her belt would have had to have pockets. Big pockets.)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 10:13 PM

Shambles.

Read "Moby Dick".

What will your epitaph say when you die?

"He tirelessly fought for his rights on an obscure folk website and would not give up till his last breath."

What will your CV say

...

Employment history

2006-2007 - fought long and bitter battle over dispute concerning what constituted acceptable practice on an internet chat forum.


You may be psychologically sound now, but if you carry on with this one much longer you will begin to damage yourself.

I would honestly describe continuing to put yourself in a position where you are subjecting yourself to some of the more caustic views here as a form of voluntary self abuse.

There are compulsive abusers and compulsive abusees.

And there are issues that really don't matter, but that will affect your self esteem and happiness if you allow them to take over your life.

Take a few weeks out where you don't add to any more of this nonsense and if you find there is a hole in your life and a yearning to get back into the fray, it could be that you are attempting to fulfil some deeper need and that it is worth closing yourself off from it for a while.

You don't need this. It isn't as important as you are treating it.

Let go :')

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Dec 06 - 10:35 PM

Well lox, that one ought to generate an interesting reply. What makes all of this so much fun and so totally ludicrous is that it really doesn't matter for the most part. The only part that does is what Max has put into this place over the past 10+ years and his collaboration with Dick and Susan. Roger has no real interest in the community aspect that Max has promulgated and allowed to grow here.

What makes this sad is that in some respects Roger is very talented but instead of asking Max how he can help, he beats him up and tells him what he thinks has been done poorly. He is a wimp with a computer and without the balls to get really involved in what it would take for him to be a valuable part of this place instead of the common dipshit that he is.

Max and Jeff have many hours and much sweat invested in keeping the place going and trying to perfect some improvements before they redo much more. They have been doing that while trying to lead their real lives outside of the 'Cat which have not always been smooth. Roger has no respect for any of it or anything they do and THAT tends to piss me off. So I take it out for laughs at Pamby's expense. Fuck him! I'm having a good time!!! He shows no respect...he gets none.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 02:24 AM

It is sad to see a few posters, who in other aspects of their lives would challange double standards - hypocrisy - unfairness - secrecy, open displays of bullying - insulting and abusive behaviour - heavy-handed general and petty pendantry - the encouragement minding of everyone elses's business - needless anonymimity and the introduction of any silly restrictions on the right of people to express their views freely etc - being compromised into being seen to be in support of such things being practiced on our forum. And being practiced in their name and on their behalf...........

It is probably just as sad not to see very many posters having the courage to point out that personalising these issues and encouraging witch-hunts against individual posters - who honestly try to express their views despite all of the varous attempts to prevent it - will not make the issues go away.

It is sad that it has come to this. But when people in privileged postions are seen to abuse these privileges and use them to engage publicly in personally motivated disputes whilst claiming not to be - the end result is as inevitable as it is undesirable and distasteful.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 02:38 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

As if it mattered - I am a very nice person - even when shown little respect and even when I see others treated with no little respect.

When I am shown respect and when I see others treated with respect I will be even a nicer person.

But even if I were not a nice person - perhaps I would still have certain rights?

Is it only nice people - like my few noisy detractors - who post insulting personal comments, name-call and encourage others to post such things?   

When the good guys are seen to adopt all of the worst traits of the bad guys - in gets a bit diffcult to tell the difference.

Perhaps now there is no difference and those who would consider themselves to be the good guys on our forum are now the bad guys?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 03:09 AM

"It is probably just as sad not to see very many posters having the courage to point out that personalising these issues and encouraging witch-hunts against individual posters - who honestly try to express their views despite all of the varous attempts to prevent it - will not make the issues go away."

What about witch hunts against moderators?
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 05:22 AM

What about witch hunts against moderators?

What about it?

If such a thing were the case or was even possible for one individual poster - would it be the sensible option for 'moderators' to publicly been seen to use their priviged position to indulge in a long-running counter-attack on individual named posters in return?

And to been seen to openly encourage certain other posters in posting the sort of abusive name-calling posts that our forum has always been informed that our 'moderators' are supposed to be there to protect us from (rather than set the example of indulging in it themselves)?

No - even after being subjected to all of this - there is little persoanal emnity towards any 'moderator' on my part. The so-called 'vendetta' often referred to by my detractors - is only on their part.

I simply and honestly believe that people should always be seen to be treated fairly and I will not be seen to be compromised into supporting anything other than this - just because it may be my 'friend' who is attempting to compromise me by asking me to accept the unacceptable.

A true 'friend' is perhaps someone who will respect you and your principles enough - never to attempt compromise you?

What is being evidenced is that what our 'moderators' assure our forum is happening in regard to closed threads and deleted posts - is not actually the case and that poster are being compromised into supporting double standards of posting behaviour and blatent hypocrisy practiced in their name - in the pretence that this is showing fairness.

This from a poster that has nothing but support and the best opinion of what our forum is supposed to be - not from a poster who wishes anything negative towards the fine opportunity that Max has presented us ALL with. But just think of the ammunition that this show of hypocrisy from our 'moderators' is providing to those few who really do not have our forum or Max's interest at heart.

The thread that was closed will show an asurance given to our forum about the criteria required for one's post to be 'silently deleted.

But that assurance is shown to be worthless as that thread also evidences two threads that did not meet the required criteria but never-the less, these two threads - along with all of the posts - were deleted by persons unknown and for reasons unknown. These were both restored later - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - as he judged these threads did not meet his required criteria.

Also evidenced there - was another thread, that along with an unknown number of other posters - both Wolfgang and I had posted to. This thread has vanished without trace and has not been restored and it is not clear if this thread met the required criteria or not.

That thread will show that another post of over 300 posts was first closed and then entirely deleted. If any of these 300 posts did meet the required criteria - pehaps it would have been proportionate to have just deleted these?

The reasons for the closing of the original 'Closed thread & deleted posts' thread itself has been covered in this one. A thread of nearly 2000 posts is closed because our 'moderators' do not seem able to delete only the offending posts - but the original thread remains closed - even when the spam posts that were claimed to be the reason for its closure - are then posted into this one. A case of our 'modreators' having more use for the bathwater than the baby.

Apart from all that - it is pretty obvously that the personally motivated actions ans special posting restrictions placed on one individual named poster for trying to discuss these issues - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team can be seen not to be doing anyone on our forum any good. And poster being seen to support them, even by saying nothing, can only harm our forum. You may not have the chance if you leave it any later.

You may support them as such - but I suggest this is foolish as it may be your turn to be the next victim.

But can we all just stop the pretence that these actions are anything other than needlessly divisive and the blatent abuse of privilege that they plainly are?

And can our forum just be allowed to freely discuss this?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 07:38 AM

Wow.....Shamby, you're getting even more verbose with major grammatical and spelling errors over posts that you say you ignore. I really like the mix and match game you play with different tenses in the same sentence.

BTW.....Anything you say about "our forum" and having the interests of Max at heart is obviously total bullshit. Even the dimmest of bulbs who has been reading these threads realizes you don't. Poor widdle Pamby can't be any nicer until he's treated nicer.......ahhhhhh.........poor widdle pissant. F**k you.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 10:58 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

If a poster is concerned about unfair treatment being shown by 'moderators' on our forum - the sensible and logical thing to do (for the benefit of us all) would be seen to address any unfairness.

Not here - as the only response - our 'moderators' just continue to plainly demonstrate forum exactly how increasingly unfair this treatment is?

Whilst at the same time giving assurances to our forum that this treatment is not at all personally motivated and unfair......And seemingly expecting posters to accept this as being true.

Our forum deserves better than this.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:10 AM

No, no Pamby......YOU need to do a lot better by Max. YOU need to take all your grievances to Max by PM. YOU need to do what Max has asked. YOU need to apologize to Max for your vendetta against him.

........and I thought you said you weren't bothered?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:12 AM

Max has said before that he will not discuss this sort of issue in the forum or help forum. It needs to be taken to private discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:54 AM

But even if I were not a nice person - perhaps I would still have certain rights?

What is expected is that all aspects of this issue can be seen to be freely discussed.

Like all posters - if Max wishes to join the discussion - perhaps he has that right and if he does not wish to join the discussion no one is forcing him or anyone else to join in.

No one is being forced to even open these threads - especially those who post and refresh them only to pass personal judgements of the participants. But a few favoured posters are now openly encouraged by our 'moderators' to feel they have some right to try and prevent, certain discussions from being freely conducted.

Perhaps if our 'moderators' did not feel they had some right to make public any criticism, and speculation about the possible motives individual named posters and reveal to our forum assumptions and details about them which perhaps they should not reveal in public - calls for what are described by our 'moderators' as 'complaints' to be taken up privately would have more credibilty?

Complaints from posters about what other posters choose to post - in order that action is imposed upon them - are now encouraged on our forum and Snitchers Corner (The Mudcat help and Trouble Forum only seems to cater for such complaints.

But anything that may even look like a complaint about the posts of ours that our 'moderators' choose to 'silently delete' are viewed by our 'moderators' and their few vocal supporters as unacceptable.

As it is - such things simply demonstrate the double standards that our forum is now expected to unquestionably accept (and many posters appear to be prepared to).

For there are no calls for compliments about the conduct of our 'moderators' to be made privately or to be restricted to only one thread - are there?

Until there are - I will continue to try to discuss issues that are of concern to all posters - in public on our forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:57 AM

Shambles? Got a question for you - do you twist and distort the truth in everyday life as much as you do on these thrads?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:00 PM

Shambles? Got a question for you - do you twist and distort the truth in everyday life as much as you do on these thrads?

Are there are calls for compliments about the conduct of our 'moderators' to be made privately or to be restricted to only one thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:06 PM

What do the two statements about have to do with each other?

the owner of the site - by whose permission you post at all, has requested that discussion of the topic so dear to your heart be conducted in private. since you have refused to take anyone elses answer to your questions it seems that is the only polite option left to you - however to expect you to be polite given your conduct ovber the past few years is futile.

g'nite

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:12 PM

the owner of the site - by whose permission you post at all, has requested that discussion of the topic so dear to your heart be conducted in private.

Perhaps you could inform our forum exactly where the owner of the site has made such a request?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:14 PM

check your own posts - you have qouted it several times.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:19 PM

Shambles? Got a question for you - do you twist and distort the truth in everyday life as much as you do on these thrads?

Are a few favoured posters now openly encouraged by our 'moderators' to feel they have some right to try and prevent, certain discussions from being freely conducted?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:23 PM

The last time you and I were actually discussing the original topic we had reached the point of your admitting that you understood the following:

1) the site, including the forum, is privately owned by Max.

2) Max has the right to delete, edit, modify, move, etc. any posting or thread.

The next point that needs to be clarified (to ensure everyone is speaking from the same point and concepts) is proxy. Do You understand proxy?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:27 PM

Shambles? Got a question for you - do you twist and distort the truth in everyday life as much as you do on these thrads?

Are complaints from posters about what other posters choose to post - in order that action is imposed upon them - now encouraged on our forum and Snitchers Corner?

MMario - you may not like what the truth is - but it is as well to accept it as being the truth - rather than to try and keep up the pretence that it is something else.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:33 PM

still no desire to discuss the original subject I see. bye.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:42 PM

Do You understand proxy?

Does that mean that when the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team calls another named poster a name like idiot, or buffoon - that they are speaking for Max?

And when he posts that our forum is no longer a place to goof off or have a discussion and calls for memebers only posting - that he is speaking for Max?

That when an anonymous 'moderator' deletes an entire thread - they are speaking for Max?

Or when the current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team restores the same thread as he judges this did not meet the criteria - that he is speaking for Max?

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

MMario you know the issue is NOT the right of this site's owner to 'moderate' our forum or to decide what remains on it but the values behind this and manner in which it is seen to be decided.

I do not know Max personally but from his public statements over many years I have not formed the impression that he is a bully or would condone any bullying and unfair treatment - even when this is claimed to be undertaken in his name.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:46 PM

Shambles says:MMario - you may not like what the truth is - but it is as well to accept it as being the truth - rather than to try and keep up the pretence that it is something else.

Well Shammy

HERE IS THE TRUTH

Subject: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Max - PM
Date: 11 May 06 - 10:43 PM

I've got to tell you, I'm sick and tired of some of the crap that I've seen lately.

Shambles: I just don't care anymore. You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell.

**************************************************************************************************************************

You need to follow your own advice Shamby-Pamby. How can you deny the truth?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 02:40 PM

Are a few favoured posters now openly encouraged by our 'moderators' to feel they have some right to try and prevent, certain discussions from being freely conducted?

Perhaps that is what Max was referring to in the following?

I've got to tell you, I'm sick and tired of some of the crap that I've seen lately.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 02:50 PM

You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 02:51 PM

Perhaps everyone can start ignoring this thread since everything that has to be said was already said in the closed one. Just let Shambles have a good time raving on and on and on. He doesn't really care what anyone else thinks anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 02:51 PM

No Shamby, he was mainly referring to Martin Gibson and YOURSELF! Read the post above yours and explain, if you can, your inability to perceivr THE TRUTH.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 03:33 PM

Ah the truth.

It is intesting what my detractors decide to leave out when they quote Max's public statement - for it was not only me who was addressed by name in this - was it?   

I've got to tell you, I'm sick and tired of some of the crap that I've seen lately.

Martin Gibson: you have to pack up and go. Your knowledge and contributions are valuable, and it's a shame that your sociopathy prevents us from hosting you or taking you seriously anymore.

Shambles: I just don't care anymore. You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell.

Joe: Do I need to separate you two?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 04:23 PM

As to Frasetti's visualization of DeJah Thoris, I think you'd have to say that he absorbs.

His two main fixations are abs and orbs.

And how can you mention Edgar Rice Crispies without mentioning the Pellucidar books?

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 04:25 PM

It is open to interpretation but I read "Joe: Do I need to separate you two?" as "Joe: Would you like me to remove The Shambles?"

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 04:26 PM

You forgot Hairy Arse Truman as well.
G

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 04:31 PM

Pellucidar indeed, Jerry! Neat stuff.

I really, really don't like Frazetta's "art". I think it's ugly.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 04:36 PM

Please feel free to contribute to an entire thread devoted to Dejah Thoris

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 04:39 PM

if the question is not about whether or not the moderators have the right to edit and delete posts - which right they do have, and the issue is your perceived treatment by them:

then **TAKE IT UP WITH MAX PRIVATELY** as has been requested by him, by people acting for him, and by numbers of other posters.

And if you can't remember him asking - it's probably becuase you were too busy crying wolf about other things.

As I have said - you've quoted his request about this type of issue yourself - so you MUST be aware of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wesley S
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 04:50 PM

Hmmm - Little Hawk. You DON'T like Frazetta's art but you DO the the "acting" of William Shatner? Both of them are overblown and exagerated. You don't see the connection?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 04:52 PM

I like Frazetta's art. But then I like big bums.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 05:31 PM

then **TAKE IT UP WITH MAX PRIVATELY** as has been requested by him, by people acting for him, and by numbers of other posters.

I have asked you to provide where Max has requested this - but you have still to provide this information. Nor have you shown where Max has given his permission for our 'moderators' to publicly insult named posters, call other posters names and encourage other favoured posters to follow this example.

Other posters have requested that 'those acting for him' do not continue to conduct their private disputes against named individual posters in public - but little notice is taken of this by our 'moderators'. And as I have said earlier - but you do not seem to have read.......

Perhaps if our 'moderators' did not feel they had some right to make public any criticism, and speculation about the possible motives individual named posters and reveal to our forum assumptions and details about them which perhaps they should not reveal in public - calls for what are described by our 'moderators' as 'complaints' to be taken up privately would have more credibilty?

MMario - under the circumstances - do you not think your request is a double standard?

When all complaints about what posters choose to post are limited to personal messages and comments and explanations amongst themselves about why our 'moderators' have imposed the judgements they have - are not routinely made in public - there may be some credibilty in them asking for any adverse comments concerning their conduct to made privately also.

When public witch-hunts are seen to be mounted and other poster encouraged by our 'moderators' to post only abusive insults, foul language and childish name-calling - what you request is unreasonable.

Especially when my concern is ensuing that all posters on our forum are made aware of the true nature and current level of all types of imposed actions and are able to freely discuss this with informed opinions.

As been pointed out - there is no expectation that any compliments about our 'moderators' should be made privately - is there?   

When the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team sets the example of thinking that anything goes in abusing his privileged position, when making public his personal disputes with individual posters, and asking and expecting support for this - do you not think it a double standard that you honestly expect other posters not to follow this example?

Perhaps you should be thankful that I and others do not follow the example set by our 'moderators' - to the extent of making abusive personal insults and calling childish names - those we may not agree with.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 05:35 PM

There is a thread devoted to Frazetta's art

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 05:40 PM

He's kickin' ass and takin' names now.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 06:28 PM

Shamby-Pamby.....You can add the other stuff or not but YOU HAVE YET TO ANSWER ME. Below is THE TRUTH which you say you value. Max asked you to leave. You didn't. Why not?

I mean, go back and read the whole thing and it still makes no difference. Max said go...you say no.   You are not interested in doing anything here but carrying out your vendetta against Joe and moreover, against Max. You are a liar of the first order. You say you value the truth yet you don't. Once again, here is the truth:


Shambles says:MMario - you may not like what the truth is - but it is as well to accept it as being the truth - rather than to try and keep up the pretence that it is something else.



Well Shammy

HERE IS THE TRUTH

Subject: From Max: State of the Union Address

From: Max - PM

Date: 11 May 06 - 10:43 PM



I've got to tell you, I'm sick and tired of some of the crap that I've seen lately.



Shambles: I just don't care anymore. You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell.

**************************************************************************************************************************



You need to follow your own advice Shamby-Pamby. How can you deny the truth?



Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 06:31 PM

Shambles,

What difference does it make if Max asked for comments to be sent directly to him or not? Isn't it obvious that no one else here supports your position? Why not act like a grown up and just PM Max?
That way you can finally know for certain that he received your message and that he will provide you with a comment. It's better then just pissing in the wind.

Spare us all and send the boss a PM today.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 04:56 AM

After the following posts that you are now seen to be encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to post to our forum - the sort of posting for which other posters would and have been seen to be banned for posting - any answer I may give to you - would not be one I would care to inflict on our forum.

In the same way that spam posts are not seen to be deleted by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team but used to further his personally motivated disputes against individual posters and actually posted on threads by the Current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

Such conduct only perfectly demonstrates the unfair treatment, double standards and hypocrisy on the part of some of our 'moderators', that our forum is expected to support and which I wish our forum to be able to be seen to be free to discuss.

The truth is that unlike a few other posters who are seen to be favoured by the current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - my posting is placed under special restrictions.

Only because I wish our forum to be informed of the true nature and current level of 'silent deletion' and all other form of imposed censorship and be able to discuss what is undertaken in their name is proportionate - from an informed postion.

Not the pretence that so-called 'moderation' our forum is something other than what it plainly is.

By all means support this unfairness, bullying and the public witch-hunts - if you feel you must be seen to - but please not keep up the pretence that this is in any way open, or fair or anything other than counter-productive in the long run.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 25 Aug 06 - 12:53 PM

Sorry Giok, you can't do that. It is quite simply too much. What I mean is that with his head so far up his ass he has to take his hat off to shit, there is no room for anything else!

Spaw ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 26 Aug 06 - 05:33 AM

Dig it Shambolina....We all know that YOU can prolong the life of a thread all by yourself.......and you do. Several times this thread has gone dormant for almost 24 hours, especially lately, and you refresh it with bullshit.

Max asked you to leave. Get the fuck out.

Spaw ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 25 Sep 06 - 11:20 PM

Aw Mick, that ain't right. Lemmee help you out here.

Shambolina you say that you need an explanation "provided to indicate where, why and when such action has been judged necessary?"

Okay Rog.....Here's one you can always refer to should someone zap a post.

One of your flakey posts on some thread or another was zapped the other day because it was another of your sillyass and repetitious rants built around misquotes and out of context, copy and paste, bullshit. If it had any redeeming value it was moved to this thread, otherwise it is gone into the ether and only it's smell remains.

That ought to cover all of your problems......except for the fact that you haven't left after Max asked you to go.

Have a nice day Twiddles.

Spaw ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 25 Oct 06 - 11:28 AM

LMAO.......Well there ya' go! You really are a mental case Shambolina!

Here's one guy who really tries to work it through and see your points and stand up for you with some solid reasoning............So you aggressively go out of your way to piss HIM off?!?!?!?!

I have a bad case of the giggles and it's hard to type..........The irony and your inability to perceive anything.............geeziz LOLOL ................you're really mental........LOLOL

Spaw ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 29 Oct 06 - 07:45 AM

There ya' go Ebbie. You have received right from the horse's ass a Shambolina Classic. Syntax and logic both are garbled and beyond recognition. The last "policy" Max had towards postings by the Piss&MoanMeister was a request he leave.

Got a mirror Roger? I mean do you have one your wife will allow you to use without fear of breakage? If so, please look into it and say, "Geeziz, I am really an asshole." Repeat this one hundred times and then perhaps you will be able to read what Max has actually said and see that you are not his defender but his antagonist and your ass is about to get the boot as outlined for you previously.

Do yourself a huge favor Roger and go back to your poems and songs and drop the vendetta. Just a suggestion mind you, but it's a good one.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 06:15 AM

Sounds real serious to me Shamby!!! You better complain directly to Max! Tell him all about it and your persecution. Remember that first you will have to explain why you have been on this vendetta against him and his site. You might also want to note why you have done nothing he asked of you.

But go for it soon......Our poor widdle persecuted Shamby-Pamby.(:<))

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 10:17 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

Most posters are sensible enough to recognise just where any 'vendetta' is being waged and where it is not - I am sure that Max is perfectly aware also.

But posters who should know better and certain 'moderators' seem intent on testing and pushing their personal realtionships with Max to the the very limit in public and in the process compromising our forum and Max into being seen to support these public witch-hunts and others.

As this long-running witch-hunt has not the desired effect and is only succeeding making the particpants, our forum and its owner look silly - perhaps it is really time for it to be seen to stop?

If as much energy were devoted to addressing the problems being highlighted as is seen to be given in placing restrictions on and insulting those who simply try to raise and discuss them - I am sure our forum would be a better place and be enternally grateful.

Then perhaps this needless division can end and the word 'we' when used by the current Chief of the Mudact Editing Team will once again apply to all of our forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wolfgang
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 11:53 AM

there is little persoanal emnity towards any 'moderator' on my part (Shambles)

Typo or creative neologism?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 01:05 PM

Poor Shamby......You realize that you are persecuting yourself don't you Shamby? If you had done as you were asked and left, or at least ceased and desisted, none of this would be happening.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 02:01 PM

since copy & paste is the order of the day: my pride & joy....


"But Shambles...don't you realize that posting reasoned responses to your recapitulative exhortations requires us not only to consider the contextual parameters of the indicated isssue, but also to analyze the temporal framework of the argument so as not to introduce irrelevant personal judgements which have already been judged by the majority of the respondents to not focus on the current situational aspects of all the NON-judgemental impositions which may have been earlier, or at least in different threads, already rendered valueless in the minds of those whose concerns regress to the former devalued impositions of judgement by not only anonymous volunteers, but also, rightfully, by other members (who, posting under their own names, might also BE one of the judgemental volunteers) who decide not to enter the debate without knowing whether the subject at hand has, in fact, been imposed, whether in the thread title or merely during non-judgemental editing which I am led to understand that you also disapprove of in most cases where previous permission has not been sought(from the original poster (or originator of the thread) prior to the perviously mentioned discussion, which, by virtue of its temporal priority, ought to supercede ANY subsequent discussion of judgements, whether anonymously imposed or merely parenthetically referred to , either by you, as 'chief inquisitor' of the investigation, or by newer members of the forum, many of whom have not had the experience of BEING improperly edited or their words censored, and thus who might, perhaps, be reluctant to join the majority whose previous experience has been inevitably affected by repetitious reduncancy relating to the incessant verbosity inundating the very foundations of the entire issues of whether, in consideration of the best interests of our forum, the anonymity of the volunteers (most of whom did not actually volunteer, but were, I am given to understand, recruited,)should be compromised due to the unmitigated Gall of one dissatisfied member who evidently has little other hobbies than to compose interminable and self-referential posts which intrinsically relate to one individual concept of discussion and the overriding value system thought to be, by our moderators, not essential to the more central core of the entire point of having an open forum where dissimilar viewpoints could BE discussed without being left vulnerable to extraneous digressions about imposition of personal taste by those who have no interest in the inveterate balderdash which usually accompanies such digressions and causes many entirely incomprehensible paragraphs to be perpetrated on an umwilling readership anyway?

Wouldn't you agree?"

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 02:06 PM

Shambles - you ask if I don't feel there is a double standard.

Show me even one other poster who has copnsistantly, for over six years, criticized the administration of this site.


If you can find one - that would be your peer to whom we would have to compare treatment.

but there is no other like you.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 03:05 PM

On any other site someone who has criticized the administration even 3 or 4 times would be banned from posting. The fact that Shambles has been allowed to stay here for such a long time and is even give a special thread to make any negative criticisms that he wants says something about the leniency of the owner and the moderators. If he is so ungrateful, then perhaps he souldn't be given even this one thread to bitch in. Just delete any neative thread that he posts and keep ones that fit in with the general tendencies of Mudcat...or kick his butt out of here.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 03:49 PM

If you can find one - that would be your peer to whom we would have to compare treatment.

but there is no other like you.

Yes MMario - That is really the point.

There is no one who has recieved the kind of treatment from our 'moderators' that can compare with the special treatment that our forum has had to watch being imposed and attempted to be justified on my postings.

Certainly no one who has supported our forum for so long.

And why is this? Have I posted abusively and called my fellow posters childish names or been seen to respond in kind to the many I am subjected to and not protected from?

All posters will probaly know I have been publicly judged not to be a nice person - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team. Some poster may wonder exactly what terrible things I have done to deserve this. And why no evidence of these terrible things are provided?

My 'crime' is to try and demonstrate the reality of what 'moderation' on our forum has come to be. To enable our forum to discuss if all this is proportionate - and from an informed position - when certain others seem to think that they have some right to prevent this. They also seriously seem to think there will not be a reaction to this.

That is not to say that others posters have not suffered from this unfair treatment (and certain favoured posters benefitted from it) - but my intention is to try and ensure that all posters should have the right to see their words remain as posted (except in the most extreme cases).

You may not agree with my views - but perhaps it can finally be accepted that all posters (even me) have the right to express their views - without their worth being seen to judged, without being called names , without being seen to be generally abused and without 'moderators' abusing their privileged positions and their powers in personally motivated witch-hunts?

What is the point of our 'moderators' making assurances if they are seen not to be honoured? Why pretend that 'moderation' on our forum is something all posters can clearly see that it is not?

Is it really too much for posters to expect that any assurances given to our form by our 'moderators' to always be seen to be honoured and to expect that all posters are seen to receive fair and equal treatment?

For if it really is too much - the result is that no 'moderator' will ever have any credibility when dealing with anyone who demonstrates this reality - rather than the pretence. This pretence compromises us all.

With the encouragement seen in this thread to be given by the current Chief of the Mudact Editing Team for certain favoured posters to contribute only name-calling, offensive language and abusive posts - how can any other offender be censured for the same offence?

And what of those posters who are currently banned for exactly this?

If you do not find this subject or this thread interesting - then please leave it to those who are prepared to tip-toe through the posted spam, assorted recipes and the childish insults that are encouraged to be posted here - to try and sensibly discuss it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 04:34 PM

Hey Shamby-Pamby.....Go twiddle yourself for awhile (much as you always do).....This post isn't about your dumb ass.

HEY THERE BILL D

JUST BEAUTIFUL -- SIMPLY GREAT

THE SHAMBY-PAMBY SEND-UP AWARD

is yours. You are THE MAN. Anyone who can write such a wonderful post as yours above has my undying admiration. I stand in awe of your ability. Generally when I read Shambolina's posts, I stand in deep poopie...they smell that bad!......"Awe" is much better. Were there some kind of award for Grand Mockery I would nominate you above all others. I bow to your complete grasp of all postings Shambolistic.

The truly sorry situation here is that although your post was done in jest, it makes more sense and reads better than anything Shammy has written on these threads. Even though you have grasped the essence of The Shamby-Pamby, the run-on and interminable sentence of mixed thoughts and bad logic, you are still too good to equal his mish-mash of garbled syntax and somewhat lunatic ravings.

It's okay though Bill......You still get the award because I am sure that no one can do it better except the Dipstick himself.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 04:48 PM

Shambles,

You really don't get it. No one is arguing with your right to post your views. The problem is that you post the same thing again and again and again. Say it once and then stop. You are not accomplishing anything by being repititious for 6 year. You keep going on and on even when you have been told that this is the way it is. You wil never ever get what you are asking for. It is just too idealistic to consider. Post what you believe in but listen to what the majority wants. No one, even Max, will make changes to suit one person when everyone else is happy with the way things are here.

Of cours, if you don't like it you can always leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:32 PM

Shambles,

I've written 2 posts that were specifically directed at you which comment on the potential emotional and psychological ramifications of carrying on with this madness.

The first time you disappeared from my screen for a while, this time you appear to have ignored me.

This suggests to me that you are dissociating from the possiblity that you are posting compulsively.

I won't bother you again, I hope you see sense and start looking after yourself a bit better.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:43 PM

I didn't realize it was 6 years ...

Come on mate ...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:44 PM

For six years certain people have be trying to prevent me from posting my views - and as long as this attempt continues and and all the various methods encouraged by our 'moderators' are judged acceptable - I will carry on trying to discuss what others obviously think they have some right to prevent. No one is being forced to read anything I post - are they?

For this is part of the pretence - if it were just that my posts were repetitous, boring or any of the pointless other judgements posted about what other posters choose to post - the best way to deal with this - would be for posters to simply ignore my posts - wouldn't it.

So why cannot this be the case?

Why is every other method but this being atempted? For this is the distraction and the pretence.

For it must be obvious that despite all the indignant squawking when guest posters indulge in such things - posting abuse and indulging in online group bullying is exactly what the few noisy posters who are seen and encouraged to do this and would consider themselves to be nice - actually enjoy indulging in.

That is the reality of what our forum is being asked to support. It is not what I would judge to be nice nor have much to do with Max's expressed hopes for our forum.

If I am judged to be too idealistic - it should be recognised that these ideals and hopes for our forum - are Max's........

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:47 PM

They've been trying to prevent you?

Jeezus, what would it be like if they gave you free rein?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:47 PM

You really fancy yourself as the guiding spirit of Mudcat don't you Roger?
You're more like Dobby to Max's Harry Potter, and you're patiently waiting for your sock. Well you may get one yet!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:49 PM

If you live till you're 60 (and you might be lucky judging by the stress this is clearly causing) that constitutes one tenth of your life.

Forget "the point" - do you see the point?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:59 PM

Kinda' brings masochism to a new level huh? No one has stopped this fool from posting. As a matter of fact, check out all the PEL threads that Max allowed. Way too many and far too confusing because Roger had to post everything and every passing thought at least 3 times. BUT....With only a little combining by Joe (which Roger bitched at and raised holy hell about) Roger got in everything and if he ever said "Thanks" to Max, I missed it.

Roger thinks every utterance of his is precious. If he acts this way in the 3D world, can you imagine what his family and friends go through?   Yeah.....Do y'all get it now? He's a mental case.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 06:04 PM

I hope I don't hafta attend no 'rubber chicken' dinner to get that award, 'spaw. I don't need no award, anyway. I just thought I'd make a point....which was, approximately, that since direct discussion in reasoned tones **MAKES NO DISCERNABLE DIFFERENCE**, I might as well show off one of the few skills I have...*grin*..(Oh, I have a skill at that reasoning stuff too,....I tried that for a couple years, but any time I thought I had him in a corner, he just changed the subject a bit and either ignored me or repeated some stock phrase about "favored posters" or "imposed judgements" or "encouragement by the current Chief..etc."

He simply does nor SEE that his continued rehashing of these issues only "encourages" even more 'mockery' and insults. The salient point (more big words...sneaky, huh?) is that the moderators are acting FOR Max, under the direction of Jeff & Joe, and that IF Max wanted something changed or no anonymous mods, he'd have it. I cannot imagine why anyone would think that years of useless carping would make management more likely to listen...but then, I don't think that is even the goal anymore.
   Somewhere I once posted about people who, when they perceive any situation they consider 'unfair' or 'biased', rise up in **righteous indignation** and write letters and march in protest until they either 'win' or are prevented from certain aspects of their protest. Shambles has now managed to to get the protest part of his posts limited in a couple ways..(though he continues to 'make a point' in other, borderline, posts.)

I dunno what to say, so I said all that convoluted bit, knowing it merely served as passing entertainment.

It's all a shame, 'cause Roger HAS talents, interests and abilities that could make him a valued member...(and in threads where he has SIMPLY comments on other subjects, he is usually answered normally...even by folks who get on his case in THIS thread!)

I have not posted in this much recently, and I guess I'll follow Roger's advice and not open it much....he asks for 'discussion', but it's gone way beyond any hope for expecting discussion to achieve and compromise.....

so.....thanks for the award. I was amazed myself when I re-read it, as I literally just went 'stream of consciousness' using phrases that seemed to fit. Kinda makes one proud...uhhhh...smug.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Gervase
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 06:11 PM

Bloody Nora!
Six years?
Six f***ing years?!?!
How many tens of thousands of words have been written in posts like this to whinge, whine and bellyache about perceived censorship in that period?
Just think of what James Joyce accomplished in six years - he gave us Ulysses. The Shambles gives us a general feeling of ennui, deja vu and other Dastardly French Things.
Anyway, enough of this tomfoolery - I'll be back in 2012 to see how things are getting on.
Carry on chaps!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 08:00 PM

Now I find it interesting when posters seem to find something strange in trying to post one's honest views for 6 years but seem to find little to comment on all the various attempts in that period to try to prevent it.

Would it not be more sensible for posters to simply ignore threads that are so obviously not to their taste? Why does it bother these few noisy posters as much as it obviously does?

We have a poster with 'potty mouth' who seems to have reverted to the schoolyard - but this passes without comment and no assessment of this poster having any possible mental condition. Why is that?

How many tens of thousands of words have been written in posts like this to whinge, whine and bellyache about what other posters choose to post?

As all of these words and judgements are plainly seen to have had no effect (and they will not) - perhaps it is time for this sillyness and the example set by it - to stop?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 08:07 PM

It's all grist for his mill, grinding exceedingly fine.

Ya gotta admire that.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 09:41 PM

"Would it not be more sensible for posters to simply ignore threads that are so obviously not to their taste?"

No...it would not. Except for the past couple of months when editing & restrictions have been used to limit it to (mostly) this thread, it was likely to discover many, many other threads diverted and hijacked by your attempts to insert your Quixotic crusade! Even today, the occasional newcomer ventures in and become curious why ONE poster has spent this amount of time complaining about the rules, management and supposed 'unfairness' of both.
   Just as Spam is distracting, porn is distracting, and extreme political arguments are distracting, so also incessant complaining is distracting.....and when, several times in the past, EVERYONE avoided arguing, avoided name-calling, avoided explaining and generally avoided responding at all...YOU kept posting, slipping remarks into various threads, working hard to RE-incite the 'debate'.
    That did not go unnoticed, and what you got was what you knew you'd get...more of the same...thus, I suppose, proving your ambiguous point!
    You now have several levels of complaints....those about editing in general, those about who DOES the editing, those about the responses TO your other complaints which you feel are 'personal', and those about the supposed 'favoritism' given to those who DO respond.
   Pretty soon, it all feeds back on itself, and you have a self-reinforcing hypothesis where anything you do gets responses that you can then claim are in one of the categories. "Righteous Indignation" gone berserk!

And NOWHERE do you show any signs of understanding that incessant criticism of the way things are done IS the cause of most of the crap you are dealt. Even if you, personally, never "stoop to name calling", you cast serious aspersions on several members and moderators and question their judgment, fairness and reason. That WILL get remarks!

   99% of all this could stop almost instantly if YOU, Roger, would just shrug, quit complaining, and allow the forum to be managed the way it is intended, without copy & paste of old, off-the-cuff, ambiguous remarks by Max which you twist to suggest that Joe & the mods are NOT doing things like Max wishes!

   This whole thread has become a diversion in itself, like standing on a bridge and watching rush hour traffic and wondering why it is so tedious! You have become a fetish form of entertainment instead of your notion of a 'voice of reason'.
   
   It won't work...it CAN'T work... but you have your soul invested in pretending that it 'might' work, if only **everyone** would come round and follow your 27 part plan.


.............yeah, I did say I was gonna quit this didn't I? Who knows, maybe I really will.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 10:38 PM

Isn't it a bite, Bill D, when you notice after you've submitted a concise but hard hitting post, that there's a dumb typo in there, like forgetting close off an HTML tag like underline? I hate that, myself.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 02:24 AM

How can the same few noisy poster who post to complain that another posters is repeating themselves actually know this?

They can only do this if they insist on opening and studying the very threads they claim to be worthless and which irritate them so.

Why would they keep on doing this - rather than simply ignore threads on subjects that irritate them?

And if the very worst that could be said about my posting is that it may be considered irritating - that is not the case for the many others that are now encoraged to be posted on our forum which are intentional insulting and offensive (and pointless). Theses are posted in clearly titled threads by certain favoured posters, in an attempt to prevent my posting.

Is it really thought that after all this time of being subjected to just about every personal judgement of my worth, every concievable insult, being called every name under the sun and diagnosed of all possible metal conditions - that I am bothered by such things.

I am only bothered to the extent that such posts are posted by and encouraged to be posted by those who have editing buttons in order (so our forum is assured) to protect us from such things. And that our forum is encouraged to be littered with such things.

But the fact that such thngs are seen to be permitted and openly encouraged by our 'moderators' - really only proves that the double standards - that I am subjected to all this - for trying to demonstrate to our forum and to eable our forum to discuss - are very much a fact.

Perhaps posters to this thread would care to address this fact - or just ignore the thread?

The really sad thing about encouraging public witch-hunts against certain individual named posters is that this then becomes the distraction and like all 'mobs' once unleashed - will be seen to become out of control.

When it is generally accepted that posters have a right to express their view (yes even again and again) - and no one else is being forced to read or respond to it - what else is there to say?

In the thousands of words posted here that try to justify these attempts - quite a lot. But should any notice be taken of such words?

It is my view that any 'moderation' should be seen to be enabling this right - and not seen to be eroding this right.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 02:52 AM

I seem to have led sheltered existence as I'd not heard of Dejah Thoris. I found a bit about her at Wikipedia.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 04:10 AM

All alone and sockless :o(

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 04:58 AM

We get used to hearing the same news - at different times of the day.

The more sensible of us would not strain to catch every bullitin - just in order to write in and express their iritation at this repetition.

For it would be generally accepted that this is done to enable anyone not hearing the news earlier to be informed when they can listen. Anyone hearing it before or not being interested in hearing - can simply switch-off.

The same goes for the content. A newsreader may have been reported the same war for 6 years. The more sensible of us would not write to express our irritation at the newsreader as they would only be able to report what is happening.

Rather than writing to express one's irritation and blame the newsreader - -it might be more useful to address any irritations about having to listen to such reports - to those who could take action to stop those wars.

Then the newsreader would not have to report the same old wars and no one would need to write and express their irritation at the newsreader for doing this.

Six years ago I demonstrated to our forum that despite assurances given publicly by the current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - entire threads were being deleted by anonymous fellow posters - when these threads did not meet the required criteria.

Now given the the general unacceptble nature of such abuses - you would have thought that in that long period this issue would have been addressed and corrected.

Not on our forum.

The original thread on this subject will demonstrate that exactly the same abuse is sadly, still occuring and most probably being undertaken by the same individual(s).

All the action that is seen to be taken place as a result of this clear abuse being highlighted and demonstated to our forum - are posting restrictions and abusive posting being encouraged against the individual poster who wishes this to be freely discussed and addressed on our forum - like any other subject.

Perhaps it can be accepted that all that can be reported is what is continuing to happen on our forum - when their is some new news - this can be reported.

Until these and other abuses are seen to no longer happen - is perhaps more positive to establish why such abuses are still happening on our forum - rather than writing only to express one's irritation at this same old abuse having to be reported on our forum?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Gervase
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 05:35 AM

I opened this thread out of interest (!) to see if anything had changed. I opened it in descending order (clicking on the little 'd' next to the number of posts) and read at most two pages of text. If anyone thinks I have the slightest interest in reading what must surely be themost tedious and repetitious screed since the Jones and Evans pages of the Cardiff phone book they've got another thing coming.
From my curosry dip, it was pretty clear that the debate hadn't moved on an inch since it began, and that in essence it was the same person making the same complaint about the earth being flat, meat being murder and the end being nigh.
And, in six years' time, should fate allow, I'm sure I'll be able to click on to the latest version of this thread and see that nothing has changed....
Now, back to sleep everyone - and keep posting Roger; we expect nothing less!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:23 AM

These threads would die if those who are so critical of them didn't post. Yes the same old same old merry band are eagerly posting away to berate shambles for posting. Irony doesn't travel, as can be seen by 99% of posters being non English.

But it obviously fulfills some kind of need for them. Funny really.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:27 AM

That is not true 6:2AM. These threads have continued with The Shambles as the sole conributer.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:30 AM

If anyone thinks I have the slightest interest in reading what must surely be themost tedious and repetitious screed since the Jones and Evans pages of the Cardiff phone book they've got another thing coming.

Smiles.

Subject: RE: BS: Washing snotty handkerchifs
from JennyO
Date: 23 Sep 06 - 03:17 AM

It always amazes me, the people who come onto threads where the subject can be very clearly seen without opening them, just to read them and criticise us poor little plebs for wasting our lives on them. Obviously they don't mind wasting THEIR lives to do that.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wolfgang
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:43 AM

Now I find it interesting when posters seem to find something strange in trying to post one's honest views for 6 years (Shambles)

Honest? That's about the last word that comes to my mind about your posts to this theme. You have never been honest to us about the motives for your campaign. Too many of your posts in particular those about the motives are obvious lies. You do not call people names openly, but you do everything you can to give the impression that they deserve to be called so. Someone who honestly posts a differing opinion even with using strong words would be much easier to tolerate. I fear that you are not only dishonest to us but but also to yourself.

Could we make a deal, Shambles? You promise that you'll never post anything about this vendetta in other threads than this one (or its sequel). In turn, I promise that I'll never again open this thread (hard to control by you) and never more post to this thread (easy to control).

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 07:00 AM

Shambles-you are a big trubble maker, and a big ungratefull basterd, (i explain)=max made mudcat, and you keep saying Qoite, "our forum, etc, blar , blar, blar etc",, anyway its not ours, its max;s site, so shut up saying its ours, anyway-did you ever pay any money to use it?
if you did, 9but i bet you didnt)!, you could moan a bit,ie give some suggestions etc, or did you ever do any voulonteer jobs, ie fix stuff etc? and joe works loads of hours each week fixing stuff and helping etc, so we can use it, (i know loads of others help as well), but you always pick on joe, "joe delted my thread, its not fair, joe is picking on me, etc blar, blar, blar"

anyway=i bet you dont even like folk music, and another anyway=
why not fuck off and make trubble somewehere else?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 07:18 AM

No one else would have his trubble. Contary to what a number of others have said, some other places would have tried to discuss the trubble with him but even they would have conculded there was no possibilty of reasonable discussion a long while ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 07:23 AM

oh.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 07:45 AM

You may have thought that if a poster was pointing out what they considered to be unfair treatment by our 'moderators' their response would be to try their best to demonstrate to our forum that this was not the case.

Not the 'moderators' on our forum.

The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team just publicly confrims this unfair treatment as a fact - as in the following post - then goes on to attempt to justify this unfair treatment.....

Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

This then compromises everyone on our forum. Especially those who are honestly supporting the 'moderation' as being fair - as they are assured by our 'moderators' that it is fair and are currently prepared to take this on trust. And incredibly would still seem to.

Special restriction are seen to be placed on certain posters for simply trying to post whilst another favoured poster is openly encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to post obscene and abusive posts quite intentionally, in an attempt to prevent others from posting.

The sort of posts that other posters would be censured for and indeed which one has been entirely banned from our forum for.

I see nothing nice in such open displays of hypocrisy and nothing nice in posters being seen to support it - even if it is just by saying nothing.

More importantly it makes our forum look bad and reveals its so-called 'moderation' to be nothing more than online group bullying and provides nothing but ammunition for this forum's few real detractors.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 08:24 AM

How many times have you pasted that post of Joe's now Roger?
What a futile life you lead!
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 08:46 AM

How many times have you pasted that post of Joe's now Roger?

Had it not been posted publicly in the first place - I would not be able to paste it at all.

But there is little point now our forum trying its hardest to pretend - as you appear to to - that it wasn't posted at all.

Strange that you find criticsm for me posting it but have none for it being posted in the first place.

Perhaps even you should question your uncritical support at this point?

Or do you judge it acceptable for the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to be seen to be openly encouraging the posting of abusive persoanal attacks and name-calling?

This on top of him intentionally being seen to be 'spamming' both this thread and the original one and then closing it - claiming this was because it was targeted by spammers!

Perhaps even you must be questioning if the plot has been lost - assuming of course that - as far as 'moderation' on our forum goes- there ever was a plot to be lost.........

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 08:52 AM

Well if there was ever a sound and absolutely justifiable reason to exclude Shambles from this site, it would be to protect him from himself.

If you can extricate yourself long enough from your "point" shambles, you will hopefully see that you have a problem.

It's like detoxing an alcoholic for a while. It gives them time to get a fresh sense of perspective.

If you can't answer me without referring in some way to the points raised in your campaign, which are not relevant to my genuine and clear concerns about your well being, then perhaps you need to ask yourself why.

Do you think this argument is worth the last 6 years of your life and do you think it is worth, potentially, another 6 years of your life?

Really?


Stand back for a second and look at the guy you are becoming - locked to a computer screen for 6 years typing messages on a chat forum about your rights to ... um ... well ... type messages onto a chat forum. Inexhaustively and tenaciously typing about your freedom to type with no end in site and no clear goal.


Of course in your mind it is so much more significant than that and your image of it is much more complex than the one I have described above, but I am afraid I must inform you that your imagination is misleading you, or rather, your compulsion to believe your imagination is misleading you.

Do you see my point?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 09:18 AM

"Perhaps even you should question your uncritical support at this point?"

Did I ever say I did support it?
NO!!!
You are past the point of objectivity Roger, and you now work on the principle that those who don't agree with you 100% are against you 100%.
What Joe said is right in one respect, you have made yourself such a nuisance on this site as to merit being given 'special treatment'
You make more demands on the time and patience of the 'Mudcat editing Team' than all the others put together.
No he shouldn't have posted that criticism of you on the threads, but you in turn should have been a bigger man, and replied via PM, thus inhabiting the higher moral ground.
Instead you have embarked upon a pointless crusade, which you cannot win.
Wake up and smell the coffee as they say Roger.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 11:22 AM

Stand back for a second and look at the guy you are becoming - locked to a computer screen for 6 years typing messages on a chat forum about your rights to ... um ... well ... type messages onto a chat forum. Inexhaustively and tenaciously typing about your freedom to type with no end in site and no clear goal.

Lox what is the differene between shambles posting his point and the merry band who have spent six years replying to it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 11:34 AM

1. They only post in response to what has been said here.
2. I can't think of any poster other than Shambles who has kept going daily for 6 years.

The weirdest ones by far are the ones who regularly post to complain about the ones who respond to shambles.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 12:34 PM

1. They only post in response to what has been said here.
2. I can't think of any poster other than Shambles who has kept going daily for 6 years.

The weirdest ones by far are the ones who regularly post to complain about the ones who respond to shambles.


Priceless! He hit me first, no he didn't ,yes he did. And that just about sums up the mentality of those of you who can't resist opening a thread you don't think should exist. Peretuating it's very existence. But like I said it fulfills a need for you.

I don't see any regularity in people doing what you describe at the end of your very mature response.

Keep it up chaps.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: jeffp
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 01:03 PM

You too.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 01:09 PM

And it gets weirder. There is one here who adopts different names (including anon) and takes different stances.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 01:13 PM

Why wouldn't I? I open these threads every few weeks for a grin. If they annoyed me I would not do so.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 03:01 PM

The following from Snitchers Corner.

Subject: RE: Another striange thing....
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12-Dec-06 - 07:49 PM

Yeah, this Spam stuff is getting to be a real problem. I whish Max would hurry up and do something about it. members-only seems to be the solution, but maybe he has another idea.
-Joe Offer-

Despite all this pushing - maybe he does have another idea?

Whether Max has another idea or not - after the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team's - for the record statement and all this public speculation - I am sure that many posters would greatly appreciate our forum being informed one way or the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 03:53 PM

GUEST

You have a point, but so do I and I don't think I'm going to get a response.

It's called maladaptive denial.

Good luck Shambles I hope it works out for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 04:45 PM

Well, Shambles, why don't you end the suspense and just e-mail Max to find out what his ideas really are. I'll be that he will answer you.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 05:14 PM

Do you think this argument is worth the last 6 years of your life and do you think it is worth, potentially, another 6 years of your life?

I would much rather actually address the issue in this thread - rather than explain the reasons why, for this is not important and only feeds the incorrect impresssion given - that my posting is the issue - but as you ask politely.

It depends on what the 'it' you refer to is.

To me this simply means trying to continue post my views to our forum - as I have done for many years.

I don't know how much of your life you may spend reading and posting on our forum - but it does not take up very much of mine.

But I think bullying, double standards and hypocrisy should be challenged where ever it is encountered and no matter how long it may take.

Is there another option?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 05:22 PM

My opinion is that you should e-mail Max and put an end to this silliness as soon as possible. Max is the only one who can help you. Mudcat members can't and moderators can't because Max sets the rules. Go to the top.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 02:39 PM

Our forum is constantly informed that it is Max's forum.

Is it being now serously suggested that the world is invited to post here and be able to read what others have posted here - but Max himself is somehow unaware and unable to?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 04:54 PM

*grin*...Max is just too smart to get into a daily debate with you, Roger. It wouldn't matter what he said, you'd twist it.

...and who knows....maybe he is doing a Sociology thesis on all this and doesn't want to skew the data..

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 06:36 PM

The following thread has been closed by persons and reasons unknown John McCusker

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 06:46 PM

oh, good! Someone showed great taste!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: bobad
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 07:15 PM

"The following thread has been closed by persons and reasons unknown"

That's the way things are done here. Some persons are delegated to make these judgements whether we like it or not.

If you don't like it you have several options:

1. You can take it up with the management, let your reasons be known and they will decide on the validity of your argument - that's the way it's done here.

2. You can accept and live with it and maybe try to recognize why that decision was made.

3. You can decide that you can't live with the way things are done here and leave.

4. You can continue to voice your complaints and endure the abuse heaped upon you by those who are fed up or until the management pulls the plug on you.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 04:46 AM

That's probably because the last thread on that subject turned into an exercise in prurient speculation.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 09:11 AM

Shambles, same point different perspective.

This whole issue shouldn't matter to you as much as it does.

Ok, so I've done that one to death (time to move on - one week is quite enough).

instead, let's step outside your frame of reference.

And put ourselves in Max's shoes.

What do you think really matters to him?

My feeling is that bigger priorities than you are going to jump the queue in his life from now till kingdom come, or till he thinks to himself "my computers getting jammed up ... hmmm ... how can I save memory ..." and simply blocks you out.

Alternatively, he might just ask his moderators to go back to deleting everything that you post rather than giving you your own special "shambles and his views are the most important issue on mudcat" thread.

If he cared he'd have come to your aid, or at least answered some of your interminable postulating by now.

He doesn't care.

You don't matter that much to him or the site.

6 bloody years!

<<<<<<<<<<< HE DOESN'T CARE >>>>>>>>>>>>>

You complain of injustice - the cruellest thing this site has done is allow you to stay.

You need help mate.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 09:46 AM

Do you know the story of Don Quixote?

Very sad.

Very Familiar!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 11:16 AM

1. You can take it up with the management, let your reasons be known and they will decide on the validity of your argument - that's the way it's done here.

Tried that.

2. You can accept and live with it and maybe try to recognize why that decision was made.

Tried that.

3. You can decide that you can't live with the way things are done here and leave.

Tried that.

4. You can continue to voice your complaints and endure the abuse heaped upon you by those who are fed up or until the management pulls the plug on you.

OK - I will try that. Thanks for the advice.

It does look as if heaping abuse on posters who post views other posters may not agree with - is now officially encouraged. So I will just have to learn to live with this.

Actually I thought I had clearly demonstrated that I have learned to live with that?

My concern is not over being subject to this abuse - as anyone who feels they have to resort to indulging in or encouraging this personal abuse and name-calling has lost any credibilty and is only demonstrating their worst aspect.

My concern is the example of the double standard of posting behaviour that the encouraging of this personal abuse against certain targets is setting.

Is my view that all posters should feel safe from abuse - to simply post their views (even if these views are judged to boring).

If posters are not now safe to do this and that is way it is now to be done here - I and I suspect many other posters would not wish to be seen as supporting it in any way. Especially as many of support our 'modrators' because they are assured that it is our 'moderators' role to protect posters from abusive personal attacks.


For the issue under discussion in this thread is NOT the right of Max to do as he wishes with his website nor the posting of one individual long-term member.

The issue is that all posters on our forum are asked and expected to support thread closures and 'silently deleted' posts and entire threads - in what is referred to a 'moderation' when this is seen in practice to be something other than what our 'moderators' assure our forum that it is.

Foe example - I am not sure what part in protecting posters from spam posts - the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team intentionally posting it plays? Perhaps this can be explained?

You can support this or not - but all I am trying to do is to enable our forum to be able for the first time to express an informed opinion on the true nature and current level of all the imposed editing actions which are undertaken in their name.

Our forum will only be able to judge if all this undertaken in order to protect their interests - is really proportionate - when all such impositions are recorded in editing comments and all editing comments are limited to only where some form of editing action has been judged to be necessary.   

Our forum may not have the right to question Max's right to decide what remains on our forum and to take measures to remove anything he decides should not remain.

But perhaps simply asking to know the, why and where of the instances when such action has been imposed - is not too much for posters to our forum to expect?

Even if this is only for the practical reason of a poster who knows they have posted by cannot find their posts - will then always know if imposed editing action is the reason for the non-appearance of their invited contribution.


But I was not aware that I or any other poster needed your permission or indeed permission from any other poster to post their views? But that is now the way it appears to be now done here.

I well remember a time when this was not the way it is done here.

Why do posters now feel that they have some right to post only to publicly judge the worth of their fellow posters and to tell them what they should post or not? And feel they have some right to to post personal abuse should they not be in agreement?

The answer is that the such judgment is the posting example set by our 'moderators'.

And until a different example is set - posters will be encouraged to follow this example.

If certain fellow posters wish to and are seen to be encouraged by our 'moderators' to post only name-calling insults of their fellow posters - as far as I am concerned as the target of many of these posts - they can do this as such posts are pretty easy to ignore - but this example will be followed.

So when the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team publicly complains that he judges our forum is not a place to goof off of have a discussion and when champions even more limitations and restrictions to be imposed on posters - perhaps he can take some responsibilty for what he is complaining about?

And accept that perhaps if any more limitations and restrictions were to be be imposed - these should be on the activities of our 'moderators'?

As far as I am concerned Max has always deserved our forum's gratitude for the opportunity he has presented posters with. What we make of our forum - has always been down to all of its posters.

As a start - i suggest that if our forum is expected to be seen to support our 'moderators' and the imposed editing actions undertaken by them in our name - perhaps they could reasonably expect to always be informed of the true nature and current level of these actions?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 11:28 AM

Do you know the story of Don Quixote?

As you say - 6 years.

Do you not think that in all that time - that Don Quixote has not been mentioned by those who are just as deserving of your public judgement and medical diagnosis (but who do not seem to receive it)?

In fact there are few judgements, insults and names that I not been encouraged to be called in that time. You may be able to come up with something novel - but I doubt it?

Why not actually try to address the issue?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:13 PM

Because it's a waste of my time and my life.

On the other hand, attempting to persuade someone with a clear problem to try to extricate himself from a mental and emotional quagmire of unimaginably disproportionate magnitude, before he wakes up one day to realise that he has wasted the best years of his life bitterly typing rhetoric about his virtual civil liberties, when he could have been enriching himself with other discourse if not experience, strikes me (for a limited time) as being worth a shot.

What are you going to do with your time when you are banned?

You are about as opressed as - well - any ordinary English Bloke with a home and a computer free to pursue happiness in whatever manner he chooses.

... "aaah yes but that's the point you see" ...

Stop.

Look around you.

Stretch.

Fuck it!

It doesn't matter!


6 years ...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:17 PM

There is no issue to address except in your mind. Right or wrong, what's done is done, live with it, most others do!
G

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:17 PM

Why should Shambles be banned?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:20 PM

When the stridently don't effect a they tend to make it very for those who do. I can't put it any plainer than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:25 PM

... confident ...

... change ...

... difficult ...

are they the missing words?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:26 PM

Pedant. There ARE no missing words.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:29 PM

Sorry dude, I thought it was a riddle used to make a point.

I don't get it ... (scratching my head in hopeful confusion)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:33 PM

Hi, Lox. As Bobert would say, just funnin' with you.

I posted that because the obsessiveness of the people who follow Roger around just so they can hurl abusive shit at him continues to shine here, and it makes as much sense to me as my post makes to anyone. In essense, none.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 05:51 PM

I understand,

That's one reason for me to be consistent in my point and refusing to get drawn in on "the debate".

Thing is peace, if he was in a hole in the ground in Tibet being tortured by the Chinese, or his family had been wiped out by the secret police in chile and he refused to rest till the truth was told, or he had been arrested by the british police and had a confession beaten out of him for a bombing he didn't do, then fair enough.

It would be an act of great courage to keep fighting for 6 years, while another ordinary mortal soul might have given up and accepted the harsh reality of their life.

The abuse that Shambles gets though is by no means something that he "must" endure. The reasons for enduring it simply aren't important enough (except in his mind) to warrant that kind of "courage".

This confrontation is not good for him. It wouldn't be good for anyone. Why does he keep coming back to it.

Of course that applies to his "abusers" too, but the relationship is symbiotic and ultimately whether it carries on or not is something that he has control over.

In short, he could stop engaging in this ridiculous performance now if he wanted, and ignore cruel posts made about him just as the rest of us ignore trolls and flamers etc.

Truth is though that it's not just the "abusers" that he needs. You and me are talking about him now. He is the centre of attention. This is a thread about shambles.

Yes I'm contributing too, but as I said above "for a limited time"

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 06:39 PM

Just a guess here but I believe more people post more often than shambles. Why not direct the condescending 'how can you waste your life here' speech to them. Ah but then you wouldn't bask in the warm glow of 'belonging.'

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: bobad
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 06:48 PM

THE COASTERS - "Charlie Brown"
        
Fe-fe, fi-fi, fo-fo, fum
I smell smoke in the auditorium

Charlie Brown, Charlie Brown
He's a clown, that Charlie Brown
He's gonna get caught
Just you wait and see
(Why's everybody always pickin' on me)

That's him on his knees
I know that's him
Yeah, from 7 come 11
Down in the boys' gym

Charlie Brown, Charlie Brown
He's a clown, that Charlie Brown
He's gonna get caught
Just you wait and see
(Why's everybody always pickin' on me)

Who's always writing on the wall
Who's always goofing in the hall
Who's always throwing spit balls
Guess who (who, me) yeah, you

Who walks in the classroom, cool and slow
Who calls the English teacher, Daddy-O

Charlie Brown, Charlie Brown
He's a clown, that Charlie Brown
He's gonna get caught
Just you wait and see
(Why's everybody always pickin' on me)

[Instrumental Interlude]

Who walks in the classroom, cool and slow
Who calls the English teacher, Daddy-O

Charlie Brown, Charlie Brown
He's a clown, that Charlie Brown
He's gonna get caught
Just you wait and see
(Why's everybody always pickin' on me)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 02:21 AM

That's one reason for me to be consistent in my point and refusing to get drawn in on "the debate".

If you judge that this a thread about me and that giving attention to it is not something to be encouraged - why can you not simply ignore it?

But 'the debate' may draw you in yet.

I may be wrong - but I seem to remember that before your posts in this thread and your stated refusal to get drawn into 'the debate' - in another thread did you post publicly to our forum, only to tell me to F*** OFF (or words to that effect)?

And unlike very similar or even more persoanally abusive posts from certain favoured posters that are now seen to encouraged to be posted here by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - wasn't that post of yours 'silently deleted' by our 'moderators'?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 02:44 AM

On the other hand, attempting to persuade someone with a clear problem to try to extricate himself from a mental and emotional quagmire of unimaginably disproportionate magnitude, before he wakes up one day to realise that he has wasted the best years of his life bitterly typing rhetoric about his virtual civil liberties, when he could have been enriching himself with other discourse if not experience, strikes me (for a limited time) as being worth a shot.

Well yes this might have been worth a shot - if indeed that is what it was - but if it was you have been seen to have had that shot.

It was not what I asked for but I am grateful for your public show of noble intentions never the less. But now I would be grateful if you would do as I did ask and either discuss the issue which IS the subject of this thread or ignore it. Thank you.

Any more generous and helpful attempts to save me from my self can be made via PM (where all of the posters to our forum will not run any risk of being inflicted with them).

Or if you are really so concerned about my welfare - you could always ask for the special restrictions imposed on my posting to be removed.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 03:54 AM

What special restrictions, Shambles? Serious question.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 04:03 AM

The inability to repeat the same post in every thread on this board, that's what he's complaining about!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 04:48 PM

What special restrictions, Shambles? Serious question.

Any posting restrictions that are imposed on my posting only and not to you or any other poster - are special ones. Serious answer.

Especially when what I have asked for (for 6 years) is for all posters to be seen to receive equal treatment by our 'moderators'.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 05:16 PM

[yawn]
199

---

You're right, Shambles. You do get special treatment. We put up with you, and we shouldn't have to. With the way you've Spammed this forum with the same old thing (oftentimes multiple copies of the exact same thing) for six years, the fair and equitable thing would be to bar you from Mudcat for life - but we don't have the ability to do that to you just yet. So, we restrict your complaints to one active thread at a time, and allow you to say almost anything you like as long as you keep it in that one thread. If you want to post complaints in another thread, you have to stop posting in this thread and wait until tomorrow - and if you do, you can expect that this thread will be closed.
Most people post what they have to say just once, and then go on and say something else. Why can't you do that?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 05:16 PM

200!

[yawn]

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 05:38 PM

It looks as if yet another thread has been 'silently deleted'.

The following from Snitchers Corner.

http://help.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=3454&messages=4

Did this one meet the reqired criteria?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 02:25 AM

Who knows? Most people don't have the time to keep track of it all like you do, Roger...let alone the inclination. (very big yawn)

That was my only post today. Feel free to delete it if you want to, because it's not of any great importance anyway. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 02:51 AM

Who knows? Most people don't have the time to keep track of it all like you do, Roger...let alone the inclination. (very big yawn)

Yes it is a thankless task and those of us volunteers who do to undertake this service do not get paid but we are doing our best - so give us a break?

But it is clear that the poster in Snitchers Corner was not so in need of sleep as you and the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team appear would claim to be (when you were both obviously not too tired, bored or disinterested to take the time to post)- did have the inclination to at least ask the question.

I feel that that is an encouraging sign? Don't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 02:57 AM

But it is clear that the poster in Snitchers Corner was not so in need of sleep as you and the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team appear would claim to be (when you were both obviously not too tired, bored or disinterested to take the time to post)- did have the inclination to at least ask the question.

And this was the answer.

Subject: RE: Humor/humourless thread gone?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 16-Dec-06 - 05:56 PM

It was taken over by anonymous trolls posting nasty things, and I received a request to delete it. Another good reason to go members-only, hey?
-Joe Offer-

I think not - but it is something that could be discussed in this thread.

Along with the now familiar double standards being displayed - do you see a (not very-well) hidden agenda here in these actions?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 05:08 AM

Ah but, was the anonymous poster in what you in your condescending, and sarcastic fashion, like to call Snitchers Corner you Roger?
It is a known ploy on this site to post anonymously to back yourself up, I've even seen it done to contradict oneself in an effort to start an argument. Not that I'm accusing you of trying to start an argument Roger; perish the thought!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 05:35 AM

Ah but, was the anonymous poster in what you in your condescending, and sarcastic fashion, like to call Snitchers Corner you Roger?
It is a known ploy on this site to post anonymously to back yourself up, I've even seen it done to contradict oneself in an effort to start an argument. Not that I'm accusing you of trying to start an argument Roger; perish the thought!
Giok

No.

Perhaps you should not make the assumption that any questionable course of action that you may judge to be acceptable would even occur to other posters?

Subject: Humor/humourless thread gone?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16-Dec-06 - 03:06 PM

"This thread has been deleted."

Why on earth? It seemed a perfectly innocuous thread about a potentially interesting subject. Then someone pulled the plug on it.

Something going on?

I had thought that the excuse of throwing out the bathwater in order for our 'moderators' to be seen to throw out the baby with it to further shape our forum to their requirements - was a thing of the past.

That the 'silent deletion' of entire threads and all of the posts contained in it was something our forum had seen the last of.

That it had been accepted that if 'silent deletion' was ever to be judged necessary - that it would be imposed and limited to only on the offending posts?

It would appear that I was wrong?

But being seen to only be taking action against the few ofending posts - would be a more proportionate approach and a more logical course for our 'moderators to ask and expect posters to support.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 06:02 AM

"It would appear that I was wrong?"

Surely not Roger? You're never wrong are you?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 10:41 AM

Is he responsible for this?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 02:45 PM

I'm not disinterested, Roger, I am uninterested. There's a difference. It is only idle curiosity that causes me to check this thread now and then. It's like glancing at a nasty auto accident as I drive by, I just can't help but take a quick look. Then I realize there's nothing I can do about it, the ambulance is already there, and I move on.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 05:48 PM

It's like glancing at a nasty auto accident as I drive by, I just can't help but take a quick look.

(Yawn.)

Help! All this tiredness must be catching.

I just hope you don't drive when you are obviously so tired. You could cause accidents - rather than simply finding crash scenes and viewing the plight of their victims so compulsive.

But as you have taken the time and trouble to post - instead of just posting yet more unhelpful and pointless judgements to this thread - you could have addressed the issues being discussed - if you are not too tired. For this thread is hardly short of such posts.

Or you could even now follow the example encouraged to be shown by certain favoured posters and post only some more of the scatological insults and names that are so loved by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.. I am sure you would be allowed and encouraged to indulge in this also.

But I had forgotten you claim to be uninterested.

How come it does not come over that your post was motivated by lack of interest? It (and the online yawning) could look a lot more like if it was following the example set and motivated by a poster wishing to be seen to be 'sucking-up' to the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

Subject: RE: BS: Washing snotty handkerchifs
From: Jenny O
Date: 23 Sep 06 - 03:17 AM

It always amazes me, the people who come onto threads where the subject can be very clearly seen without opening them, just to read them and criticise us poor little plebs for wasting our lives on them. Obviously they don't mind wasting THEIR lives to do that.

I may have thought that those posters - who unlike me are still fortumate enough to remain free from special posting restrictions would make more positive use of their freedom to post what and where they wish - especially when they are so very tired and claim to be uninterested.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Dec 06 - 09:46 PM

Joe,

Just out of curiosity, if Mudcat was able to ban Martin Gibson why doesn't it have the ability to ban Shambles?

---

Shambles is smarter than Martin Gibson...on some matters.
[grin]
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 02:13 AM

Just out of curiosity, if Mudcat was able to ban Martin Gibson why doesn't it have the ability to ban Shambles?

I am sure that Max has the ability.

The question is why would he feel he had to ban a valued long-term posters and one of his and our forum's biggest supporters?

For anyone with even half a brain can see that what is at the core of this is two posters who both consider they have our forum's best interests at heart - but who have totally different views on how this is best achieved and one who thinks that being seen to abuse his editing powers to win this dispute at any cost - is acceptable.

That this personal difference has become the public battle that is now evidenced - is regrettable. For important issues are being overlooked and posters confused and inhibited in the process.

As far as this personal dispute goes - the question is how and why did one of our forum's biggest supporters become labelled as the current 'public enemy number one' be seen to be subjected to and encouraged to be subjected to abusive personal attacks by our 'moderators' and certain favoured posters and what does this say about our forum?

How can our forum ensure that all posters are seen to be treated openly and equally - that they are encouraged to post and not inhibited from posting in any way and that any 'moderators' are not seen to place the interests of all on our forum secondary and abuse their powers in personally motivated but publicly conducted witch-hunts against individual named posters?

Simply banning (or talking about banning) individual posters who do not agree with the views of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and are not prepared to be forced into agreement with him - will not address any of the above.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 02:58 AM

"For anyone with even half a brain can see that what is at the core of this is two posters who both consider they have our forum's best interests at heart - but who have totally different views on how this is best achieved and one who thinks that being seen to abuse his editing powers to win this dispute at any cost - is acceptable." RG

Note, Sham, that although you may both be posters albeit with "totally different views on how this is best achieved", one of you has power and position, the other has none.

You are NOT equal, no matter how you spin it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:36 AM

Note, Sham, that although you may both be posters albeit with "totally different views on how this is best achieved", one of you has power and position, the other has none.

Thanks for hammering home a point that I thought I had already made.

And for posting but totally ignoring the point that the actions currently being demonstrated to our forum - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - is only confirming the abuse of that power and position.

For until I am driven out, banned or seen to post only agreement of this abuse - I will be seen by our forum to be subjected to special restrictions, posts containing only personal abuse and spam that is intentionally posted to threads on our forum by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

All this in pursuit of his personal disagreements with certain named posters and despite the divisive effect the public display of all this unfairness is having on our forum.

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:08 AM

I am sure that Max has the ability.


Well as far as I can see it, to stop a person from posting under there membership name is easy but to prevent a person from posting at all is difficult and perhaps impossible. I can't think of a method that could not be worked around on a forum as open to guests as this one.

As far as I understand it here, the debate is whether it is worthwhile blocking a person who is likely to be determined enough to find a way back in. Also, there is the concern that a poster who did find ways back might seek revenge for being blocked.

This problem could, sadly IMO, end up as playing a part in the forum becoming member only.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:41 AM

"The question is why would he feel he had to ban a valued long-term posters and one of his and our forum's biggest supporters?"

I'm reminded of the joke about the guy who said, something like.

"I drive a truck, and they don't call me truck driver"
"I write a hundred songs, but they don't call me song writer"
"I screw just one sheep!!

This monomaniacal 6 year campaign is your 'sheep' Roger. It's what you will be remembered for, and all of your other posts will be as chaff in the wind.

Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:54 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 16 Dec 06 - 05:16 PM

[yawn]
199
You're right, Shambles. You do get special treatment. We put up with you, and we shouldn't have to. With the way you've Spammed this forum with the same old thing (oftentimes multiple copies of the exact same thing) for six years, the fair and equitable thing would be to bar you from Mudcat for life - but we don't have the ability to do that to you just yet. So, we restrict your complaints to one active thread at a time, and allow you to say almost anything you like as long as you keep it in that one thread. If you want to post complaints in another thread, you have to stop posting in this thread and wait until tomorrow - and if you do, you can expect that this thread will be closed.
Most people post what they have to say just once, and then go on and say something else. Why can't you do that?

At first glance the above may seem some justification for these imposed actions. But a closer look at the accusation will show that such a response is simply not proportionate and would strongly suggest that some other factor is at work.

You're right, Shambles. You do get special treatment. We put up with you, and we shouldn't have to.

Should our forum have to put up with the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and what he will allow?

The first question must who is the 'we' referred to? When used by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team - this divisive use of the words 'we' or 'us' never makes clear who it refers to but the only thing our forum can be sure of - is that it no longer refers to all of the posters to our forum.

Perhap it means the same noisy few posters who complain to him about what other posters choose to post in order to get editing action imposed on these contributions? For these are not seen to be dismissed by him as 'complaints' but are referred to as 'requests' and are often implemented at speed.

Unlike the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team , many posters do not judge my posts to be 'obnoxious' and appear to be perfectly happy to put up with me. And even those who do not - unlike the current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - would probably accept that - as they accept that other posters 'should' put up with seeing their posts - they in turn 'should' have to put up with seeing the reasonably expressed posts of others.

With the way you've Spammed this forum with the same old thing (oftentimes multiple copies of the exact same thing) for six years, the fair and equitable thing would be to bar you from Mudcat for life - but we don't have the ability to do that to you just yet.

No evidence is provided to support this accusation. Unlike the Current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - who has intentionally posted spam posts on our forum - I have not posted any spam to our forum - just my honest views.

And even if such an exagerated accusation had any truth in it - would the 'fair and equitable thing' really be to bar me 'from the Mudcat for life' for such a 'crime'?

Seeing a post with views you may not have agreed being posted subsequently in different threads - may be slightly irritating to some and not make anyone who had, any more inclined to agree with it - but I would suggest that a proportionate response for such posting 'crimes' would not be to bar the poster from the Mudcat for life.

And had not so many threads been routinely closed and deleted by our 'moderators' - there would not have even been a need for them to be posted or pasted again. For this is tool to be used on our forum - it is not a 'crime' and perhaps should not be inhibited - just because our 'moderators' may not like to see certain views posted?

Especially when certain posters and 'moderators are seen to be free from any censure and are now seen to be encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to follow their example in posting only abusive personal attacks and name-calling and the targeting of certain posters?

So, we restrict your complaints to one active thread at a time, and allow you to say almost anything you like as long as you keep it in that one thread. If you want to post complaints in another thread, you have to stop posting in this thread and wait until tomorrow - and if you do, you can expect that this thread will be closed.

Yes - out of all the posters on our forum - you have been seen to impose these special restrictions on my posting.

And from the evidence in this thread alone - still this punishment is plainly seen by our forum to be not punishment enough for the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team..........

Most people post what they have to say just once, and then go on and say something else. Why can't you do that?

Mainly because our forum is constantly being given assurances by our 'moderators' that are not honoured.

So until all editing actions are recorded to enable our forum to know for the first time - the true nature and current level of 'silent deletion' and all other imposed actions - I will continue to do my best to try and bring this to its attention.

Of course another way the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team could ensure that he does not see similar posts appearing - is to actually implement some of these suggestions - rather than getting his knickers twisted and spending his energy in attempts to prevent these from reappearing?

For just as it unlikely that a poster may like seeing a view posted again that they did not agree with the first time - it follows that if the poster considers it to be a good idea - they will judge it no less good, the more attempts are seen to be made to prevent other posters from seeing it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 08:45 AM

You are clearly very intelligent Roger, and with 6 years of practice you have fine honed a pretty compelling argument.

If I were to concentrate on the issue as you suggest, I would find your logic very persuasive. What's more, I would possibly find the serious tone of your words and your eloquence, to be inspirational in comfirming the importance of the point you're making.

However, I understand the importance of perspective and the ability to remove oneself from a discussion so as to evaluate it from a new pespective. When I do, I see it as being equivalent to a campaign of letters to a parish newsletter complaining about how the annual christmas panto is organized.


Poor old Father Max ;')

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 10:08 AM

You should be able to note by the length of my rather infrequent posts here, Roger, just how deeply interested I am in addressing those "issues"... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 11:22 AM

"Yes - out of all the posters on our forum - you have been seen to impose these special restrictions on my posting."

Shambles,

You really know how to turn things totally around. YOU are not limited to posting in only one thread. YOU can post anywhere that you want. You are only allowed to POST YOUR COMPLAINTS in one thread rather then in every thread on the Mudcat. That really is not much of an imposition for someone who complains as much as you do. In any other forum your threads would be totally eliminated and you would eventually be banned. At least here you are allowed to express your whines and complaints in one place and not have them eliminated.

I don't call that very harsh treatment.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 01:35 PM

I don't call that very harsh treatment.

Perhaps the best ones to judge the extent of any harsh treatment are the victims of it - rather that those (in this case an anonymous guest) who are not subject (currently anyway) to any special posting restrictions?

However, I don't think it has been claimed that this special treatment is harsh - but I suggest that it is foolish, pointless and most importantly - it is counter-productive.

For in all truth (apart form all fuss made and maintained in public about its imposition) - it would be hard for our forum to detect any change from the treatment my posting has been subject to - in the 6 years during which our forum was assured by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - that there was no personally motivated restrictions on my posting.

It is clear that all the forms of editing action that continue to be imposed are seen to be as eagerly imposed and justified on my posting now (and not on others) as they were before.

When all this time our forum was assured by the current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - that all posters were treated equally.

The only difference is that after years of maintaining this to be the case - and of asking our forum to support this as being the case - the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team now feels brave enough to publicly admit what has always been obvious - that all the special treatment reserved for my posting only - was personally motivated.

As I have always maintained and evidenced that it was - and which evidence our forum was encouraged to ridicule and for which my so-called 'crime' in persisting with - instead of being bullied into silence or being driven away - these special posting restrictions are claimed to be imposed for.

No it is not the harshness of this special treatment that is seen to damage the credibilty of our forum and its 'moderation' - it is its dishonesty and the hypocritical double standards that are exposed by who this editing action it is seen to be imposed on - who it is not seen to be imposed on - and the real reasons for this display of unfair treatment by our 'moderators'.   

If our 'moderators' and their certain favoured posters wish to be seen to indulge in online bullying and others wish to support this (if only by not being seen to challenge it) - that may be OK - but let our forum not continue the pretence that this is something other than it plainly has always been seen to be.

It is my view that our forum deserves better than both this bullying and this pretence.

A pretence that seems to include our forum now being expected to forget that for over 6 years our 'moderators' claimed that they were there to protect posters from posts containing only abusive personal attacks and name-calling.

And expected to forget that our 'moderators' have not only set the example of being seen to indulge in such posts but are now seen to actively encourage certain favoured posters to indulge only in such posts and inflict them on our forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 02:21 PM

You should be able to note by the length of my rather infrequent posts here, Roger, just how deeply interested I am in addressing those "issues"... ;-)

I will be even more convinced of your lack of interest when you don't post feel compelled to post this thread at all. *Smiles*

But should you be unfortunate to ever find yourself in a similar situation to the one you find me it - you can rely on the fact that I will not be as uninterested as you often post only to claim to be.

please rely on the fact that I will always be prepared to do what I can to help and be willing to challenge any unfairness you may be seen to be subjected to.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 02:46 PM

However, I understand the importance of perspective and the ability to remove oneself from a discussion so as to evaluate it from a new pespective.

You could also apply that to viewing a victim of broken leg.

From the perspective of the one who is not suffering the pain - you may judge the victim to be making too much of it.

If you are the one suffering from the broken leg - no matter how important you may judge the ability you suggest, to be - you rather obviously lack the ability to move yourself to any other perspective from that of the one on whom the pain and suffering has been inflicted upon.

In this case - it would perhaps be more positive for you to evaluate the discussion to the perspective of those set on intentionally being seen to inflict the pain?

Who could also perhaps be expected to view the discussion from a new perspective and one other than their own rather narrow perspective?

If you were to be fair - you may accept that my perspective is not in fact only limited to my own special and unfair treatment, which is used mainly to evidence to my concerns for the larger issues and our forum in general?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:55 PM

Shambles,

This is such a stupid issue to argue over for 6 years. You are acting like you were accused of some crime. People are suffering from incurable diseases, losing loved ones in Iraq and Afghanistan, fighting poverty, etc. and you are complaining because some lousy comments that you write get deleted and that you are only allowed to whine on one thread but can still post to every other thread on Mudcat. You truly are an ingrate and have a lot of nerve to complain so much about something so trivial. You live in a free country, have a roof over your head, eat three meals every day. If this is the only thing that you can get passionate about then you have a very serious problem. Why don't you spend the time that you write all of this nonsense doing something that will make the world a better place. Volunteer to work for a non-profit agency that helps people, do some work at a senior citizens home, work in a food kitchen.

I wish that I had the free time that you obviously have so that I could do some good things and make some people smile. Assuming that Max and the moderators have a complete change of heart and do everything that you ask (not a very likely situation). What will you have accomplished? You'll be able to write nonsense anywhere that you want and make sure that others are forced to read it. Big deal. 6 years and that is all that you can accomplish.

I was always taught to help other people and to give back things to the world. Maybe you would feel better inside and have a sense of accomplishment if you could bring a smile to the face of even one unfortunate person every few days. Give up this stupidity and put the time to good use. The people whose lives you touch will certainly appreciate you more then anyone on Mudcat will do for fighting for absolutely nonthing meaningful.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:34 PM

I see. ;-) Okay, Roger, how much are you willing to pay me monthly to resist amusing myself by making the occasional humorous (at least to me) post on this thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:49 PM

Okay, Roger, how much are you willing to pay me monthly to resist amusing myself by making the occasional humorous (at least to me) post on this thread?

Pay you not to 'hyjack' a thread?

I should not need to do that - are not our 'moderators' supposed to place special posting restrictions on any poster who is seen to do this?
Except of course for certain few favoured posters who are permitted and now actively encourged to do this and also our 'moderators' who are not only seen to indulge themselves in deliberate attempts to 'hyjack' threads - some of our 'moderators' intentionally litter threads with the spam posts that other 'moderators' are under the impression they are supposed to delete from our forum.

LH - I doubt if your attempts at humourous posts could be any funnier than this sad reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:58 PM

The answer is very simple. Those who don't like Roger's posts on this thread are free to ignore those posts--and this entire thread.

Roger, I hope you have a very Merry Christmas and an excellent New Year.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 07:06 PM

And for that matter, Roger is free to ignore all the other posts on this thread as well!

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you Peace.....and let me send an additional Sloppy Easter Eggs.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 07:11 PM

And to you, too, Spaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 08:25 PM

Roger, I hope you have a very Merry Christmas and an excellent New Year.

Thank you.

Wishing a Merry Chistmas a Happy New Year and peace to you, the world and all our regular readers.

Let us hope that all the divisive efforts devoted over the past 6 years to try to prevent free and open discussion of these issues on our forum can be devoted to actually addressing them and finally putting them to bed.

Then our forum will be all the better for it and some of us will not have to keep trying to discuss and some of us will not have to try to avoid discussing the same old issues over and over for the next 6 years.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: number 6
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 11:21 PM

"Roger is free to ignore all the other posts on this thread as well"

If the Shambles did ignore all these posts ... then this thread wouldn't exist ... and we would be deprived of reading and posting to this thread which continues to exist because it is prove that we are free to post and exercise our freedom of expression (regardless of others opinions).

Happy Holidays and a prosperous and Healthy New Year to all !!

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 02:23 AM

If the Shambles did ignore all these posts ... then this thread wouldn't exist ... and we would be deprived of reading and posting to this thread which continues to exist because it is prove that we are free to post and exercise our freedom of expression (regardless of others opinions).

I would agree that this one thread does just about still demonstrates this.

The fact that it littered with various attempts to prevent discussion of its subject - and is only limited to this one thread demonstrates how close our forum is becoming to having this right of freedom of expression taken away from us all by a very few short-sighted posters.

And how much effort must be put in to ensuring that those few posters - who are seen to be prepared to use just about every means and attempt any justification to take this right away from posters and for the very slightest of reasons - never succeed on our forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 04:24 AM

I don't hyjack threads! I hijack them. Let's get that clear.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 04:33 AM

That's alright then.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 09:23 AM

Hy LH ;')

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 09:38 AM

If the Shambles did ignore all these posts ... then this thread wouldn't exist ...

That is untrue. Shambles has had periods of being alone on this thread and he still posted to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 10:15 AM

Alone like for 3 hours ... there is always someone who will post to this thread.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 11:58 AM

Alone like for 3 hours ... there is always someone who will post to this thread.

Our forum is about encouraging posters to post.

It is not about finding ways to inhibit posting.

Inhibiting posting can be safely left to our 'moderators' - for I will accept that they are now doing a very good job of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,KB
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 12:11 PM

If a thread existed in a forum and nobody posted to it, would it make a noise?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 01:11 PM

Well, I think it's a real shame that various people on this forum are consumed by the apparent need to tell other people what they can and cannot post. For instance, there has been quite a bit of resistance here to threads on Kirkology, and Kirkology is a very worthy subject.

Then there's the word "n*gger", which you cannot even type out properly or say ANYWHERE these days in ANY context whatsoever, not even a historical treatise on the past use of the word when it was considered normal in certain quarters, not EVEN in order to show other people that it IS now an officially very BAD word and that THIS is how it's spelled, so then if they see it they'll know what they're bloody well seeing! (Because someone might think you really meant it...EEEEEEYYYYYAUUUUGHHHH!!!)

But I may be going off at a tangent here...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 01:16 PM

"Alone like for 3 hours".

No. As an example, the shambles was the sole poster on part one of this thread between 28th Aug 2006 and 6th September 2006.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 02:13 PM

I would say to Joe etc though, That if you don't want to engage shambles on this issue or you feel he shouldn't be included in Mudcat policy formation, then you should just ignore his posts on the subject. I don't see how attacks on him are helpful in any way other than to make this place look a bit uglier.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 03:21 PM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into the thread and did not refresh it. There was no need for this so-called editing comment to be inserted - for it was not to indicate where editing had been judged to be necesary - as no editing action was taken.

Shambles is smarter than Martin Gibson...on some matters.
[grin]
-Joe Offer-

It is claimed by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - that this is done to ensure that an answer is provided to where in a thread, a question was asked.

Posters without edit buttons - who are not able to insert answers in this manner - do manage to do this perfectly well by copying the question and posting the answer.

This answers the question, ensures that posters will not miss the answer - and it also refreshes the thread.

So perhaps in future all editing comments can now be limited to where some form of imposed censorship action has been judged to be necessary and are always provided to indicate where and why any form of censorship action was judged to be necessary?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wolfgang
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 03:46 PM

So perhaps in future all editing comments ... are always provided to indicate where and why any form of censorship action was judged to be necessary?

Please, not. I see so many (and guess I only see a small fraction of them) spam and complete nonsense posts from GUESTs with a name I see here for the first time that I want these posts to be removed without any comment.

Shambles' wish is in particular nonsensical in the many cases in which an old thread with no post in the last three or more years is refreshed by a spam mail. The present way to deal with that ensures that the spammed thread does not appear in the menue. I do not want to open a dozen threads (like a week or so ago) with no relevant new post to it. If the editing comments were inserted in the last relevant post in order not the refresh the thread, noone would see these comments.

After 6 years, you should be able to come up with a better thought-out suggestion than that, Shambles.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 04:32 PM

After 6 years, you should be able to come up with a better thought-out suggestion than that, Shambles.

My concern is not with the dirty bathwater but to ensure that the baby is not thrown out with it.

Spam (when it is not intentionally posted to threads by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team) is not usually a conventional contribution from a poster. Who will have feelings to be hurt and may also become angry (just like the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team).

Most automatically generated spam is usually automatically deleted before most us see it. So what happens to the little spam that slips past - should perhaps not concern our forum to the extent that it is currently encouraged to be seen to?

It should certainly not be used as an excuse and justification to treat invited contributions from posters as if they were also automatically generated.

When any invited contributed is posted - I suggest that the poster should at least always be made aware in an editing comment that their post has been judged by our 'moderators' to require some form of imposed censorship.

'Silent deletion' is perhaps accepable for automatically generated spam and for conventional posts in the few very extreme cases.

But I suggest that it is not perhaps the proportionate first and only response for all the other cases? Where is seems to be overlooked that such drastic treatment will result in (possibly an equally drastic) reaction?

Any poster who cannot find their contribution - should perhaps know if the reason is that it has been subject to imposed censorship?

For if posters do not see an editing comment to that effect - they will have no reason to become paranoid or defensive and can then consider other reasons for their post's non-appearance.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: MMario
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 04:54 PM

My concern is not with the dirty bathwater but to ensure that the baby is not thrown out with it.

My initial reaction to that would be - who are you trying to kid?


Most automatically generated spam is usually automatically deleted before most us see it. So what happens to the little spam that slips past - should perhaps not concern our forum to the extent that it is currently encouraged to be seen to?

How "little" do you think that is? I have to view "new posts since your last visit" frequently - and know that Mudcat sees a dozen or so spam messages a day that slip past the filters. Not a lot, seeing as some spambots send out thousands a minute, but on many forums even ONE piece of spam generates a big stink.   

It should certainly not be used as an excuse and justification to treat invited contributions from posters as if they were also automatically generated.

What proof do you have that this occurs? I doubt that it does.


When any invited contributed is posted - I suggest that the poster should at least always be made aware in an editing comment that their post has been judged by our 'moderators' to require some form of imposed censorship.

Your suggestion has been refused, publicly. YOu have been notified that your sugfgestion has been refused. You have also been informed that if you dispute that judgement you need to take it up with the site owner in private communication.

In addition to your suggestion being refused - it in inherent in posting to this site that the Mudcat Cafe reserves the right to delete, modify, move, edit etc any post.

'Silent deletion' is perhaps accepable for automatically generated spam and for conventional posts in the few very extreme cases.

What you term "silent deletion" is standard practice on virtually the entire internet. Not only is explanation of editing not required or provided - in most cases questioning of such procedures is automatically deleted.

But I suggest that it is not perhaps the proportionate first and only response for all the other cases?

Why do you seem to always try to make your points absolute? And, again, what proof can you show that deletion is the "first and only" response"?


Where is seems to be overlooked that such drastic treatment will result in (possibly an equally drastic) reaction?

Possibly there will be a reaction- normally that reaction is the offending poster reforms their behaviour. Sometimes they leave the forum. Normaly if the offending poster does NOT reform their behaviour they get banned.

Any poster who cannot find their contribution - should perhaps know if the reason is that it has been subject to imposed censorship?

NO. Why? Any post to this site is potentially subject to deletion, editing, modification, etc. It is a given.

For if posters do not see an editing comment to that effect - they will have no reason to become paranoid or defensive and can then consider other reasons for their post's non-appearance

The above, I think, means that *IF* posters *saw* such a statement they would have no reason etc.....

In general - your average poster does NOT get paranoid and defensive - if they have a post deleted most people assume there was a reason; whether or not they know what that reason is.

---

Faulty .html coding in the above post has been corrected by an anonymous moderator.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 05:25 PM

Heh! Everyone needs a hobby, right?

But does everyone need an obsession? It's debatable.

Let's launch a permathread about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: number 6
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 05:48 PM

"YOu have been notified that your sugfgestion has been refused."

..... hmmmmmm, have you been nipping into the Christmas cheer MMario ??

ok ... I'm outta here.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Jeri
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:24 PM

This is where it started - almost 4 years ago, not 6. And there are a few of the same folks in that first thread who continue to post the same stuff in reply to the same stuff from Roger, over and over.

So, you see, it's not just Roger who doesn't know when it would be wise to stop. It's no wonder why the human race can't seem to evolve out of accepting war, world hunger, torture, poverty and all the other big problems, when this sort of inanity is so fascinating to average people.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:28 PM

The original complaint about the altering of the thread title is older than that isn't it Jeri?
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Jeri
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:34 PM

No, Giok. 2003 - 'In the UK'. (Unless I missed something.)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Lox
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:41 PM

This is madness.

Having taken the opportunity to dip my toe in the proverbial water of this debate, I am more deeply persuaded than ever that it runs way too deep for the context within which it exists.

There is a whole submerged Archive of precedent and long considered opinion on this issue more proportionate to a law Library than to what, in all fairness, equates to a squabble between regulars at a bingo hall concerning whose seat is whose.

My conclusion, with which I bow out, is that this is actually all about personalities and that the "issue" is just a big impenetrable smokescreen.

I think this applies to those on both sides of the argument and that posting on these points is a compulsion for the abusers as much as for the abusee.

However, the main issue for me remains, increasingly so, that ultimately this is an unhealthy experience, particularly in the long term, for Shambles and it would be in his interests to drop it. I believe he has a responsibility to himself to do so.

I also believe that the abusers need to face up to their weakness in this matter and to accept that if they do not wish to deal with shambles they should leave him alone.

As I said a while ago on another thread, he is the playground punchbag. He's an easy target and you can be sure of a cheer from the crowd when you score a hit.

He's like a volunteer bull at a bullfight, but that doesn't suddenly make bullfighting ok.

Shambles is harmless. Just leave him alone and there will be no argument.

And if he posts in a way you don't like - so what. Just read the next post or refer to the one before and keep the thread on track.

If you engage him in argument, then you cannot expect him to roll over and die. You will merely find yourself getting frustrated at both his stubbornness and his depth of reasoning.

You may find yourself tempted to take that frustration out on him, and so the cycle continues.

As I've said before, the relationship is symbiotic. Like that of a codependant couple. Destroying each other, but remaining together nonetheless, looking forward to their next row as despite the pain it causes it will be a familiar part of their routine and in the absence of positives is a source of a perverse kind of security and stability.

This has been my last post on the subject.


Good luck.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:47 PM

Yeah, it's funny, isn't it, Jeri? You can see exactly the same dynamic happening in the seemingly endless quarrels and misunderstandings between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, Jews and Muslims in the Middle East, whites and blacks, Democrats and Republicans, the North and South Koreans, Michael Jackson and almost everybody...

"I'm not going to quit until HE (or they) admits he's (or they're) wrong, and I was right all along!"

Now, consider the fairly large number of individuals involved. Is there any chance that they will ALL wise up and decide not to say another word about it?

LOL! Not a dog's chance in hell. This will go on forever...or until either the Mudcat Cafe or Roger vanish into the sunset, depart this mortal coil, and cease to be.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:51 PM

Possibly there will be a reaction- normally that reaction is the offending poster reforms their behaviour. Sometimes they leave the forum. Normaly if the offending poster does NOT reform their behaviour they get banned.

MMario I have read your post with interest and concern.

It seems to me that it is an argument for carrying on treating posters less well than they could be treated - without really explaining what is to be gained by this approach.

It appears to be a rather unfriendly take or leave it approach and one that does not come to mind when I think of our forum. For had it been - it would not have been a place I would have supported for so long.

For this is an approach that would seem to ensure that posters were inhibited from posting to our forum - rather that one designed to encourage posters to feel safe to post.

I have found that when you take a little time and trouble to treat people well - they tend to respond in kind.

And if they do not - by not being seen to stoop to their tactics and attitude - you then have the moral high ground (and for what it is worth) - some justification to then judge their conduct wanting.

From the little personal experiance I have seen of the way our police tend to treat football fans on big match days - when people are judged to be and are treated and herded like livestock - they tend to respond as if they were.

When those who would judge themselves to be nice people are seen to adopt the tactics of those they judge to be the not-nice people - it becomes difficult to tell the difference.

Perhaps by being seen to be doing this - there is a danger that the so-called nice people become the not-nice people?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:59 PM

Indeed. But who is going to get the last word in? Who? Whaddya think? And when will it happen?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 07:09 PM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into the thread and did not refresh it:

Faulty .html coding in the above post has been corrected by an anonymous moderator.

Perhaps anonymous moderators inserting corrections could do so in manner that refreshes the thread, so that everyone may know that a correction has been made?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 07:15 PM

Yeah, it's funny, isn't it, Jeri? You can see exactly the same dynamic happening in the seemingly endless quarrels and misunderstandings between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, Jews and Muslims in the Middle East, whites and blacks, Democrats and Republicans, the North and South Koreans, Michael Jackson and almost everybody...

I suggest that it is the other way around.

It is perhaps time to recognise that all these big disputes are caused by just the same ordinary people having the same sort of squabbles as is witnessed here.

Those who post only to judge the discussions in this thread not to be important and encourage the participants to address the world's big problems instead - are entirely missing the point.

There is no point in discussing and no hope of us solving the world's big problems - if posters here cannot just accept for a start that others have as much right to express their views as they do and where they are encouraged to feel they have some right to prevent, or restrict the views of others.

The only way the world's big problems will ever be solved is by discussion and tolerance. Posters here know this - but insist on turning differences in opinion into open warfare - by issuing threats and using all the words of armed conflict where might is right - as if this approach to disputes ever resulted in anything other than yet more conflict.   

If our forum can just be allowed to be seen to agree to disagree - they will be some hope.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 07:23 PM

"It is perhaps time to recognise that all these big disputes are caused by just the same ordinary people having the same sort of squabbles as is witnessed here."

Yeah. That's exactly what I was saying, Roger. I'm saying that people usually continue an argument simply because they've already got a lot of emotional investment IN the argument, and they want to "win" it, and by winning it to make someone else lose. And they, of course, want to get in the last devastating word in such a telling and brilliant way that it reduces their opponent to stunned impotence... ;-)

Just like in a TV show. The decisive wrap-up. Like when Steve McGarret says, "Book 'em, Dan-O." The music rolls dramatically, and the episode ends! Once again "good" has triumphed over "evil". ;-)

Alas, real life is just not that neatly arranged most of the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 08:06 PM

Shambles is harmless.

Now look here - you can post any personal abuse at me - but please don't ruin all that has gone before. I have a hard-earned reputation to maintain - don't you know?

I am public enemy No 1 and safe to be blamed as the cause of all Mudcat ills (and a few more).

And things will only improve when I recant or I am driven away or when Max is finally pushed into implementing the required change to members only posting.

For I am I not seen to be publicly judged - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - as not to be a nice person.

No I am not a cowardly and harmless 'dandylion' - I am the fierce, proud and dangerous King of the Jungle.........

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 08:17 PM

No Shambles. These rants and whines make you seem more like a jackass then like a lion.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 08:34 PM

Hmmm. Well, I can sort of hear McGarret saying that...but not at the end of the episode. That's the sort of thing that gets said about halfway through the show.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 09:34 PM

Little Hawk .... you are a wise man.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: jeffp
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 09:39 PM

Because he remembers Hawaii Five-Oh? Now I am confused.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 10:49 PM

That show had a lot going for it, specially the theme music. Very rousing.

Roger, please do not start a Hawaii Five-O thread now in response to these comments or I shall be forced to resort to extreme measures... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 02:21 AM

Why not - the threads started on the other two subjects introduced into this one have turned out to be very interesting?

If the show gets mentioned again in this thread, it will indicate there is similar interest - and I may well start a new thread on that subject.

This is not stopping you or anyone else from doing this.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 05:36 AM

But you're no allowed to post in other threads Roger! You said so yourself, so it must be right.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 08:40 AM

In general - your average poster does NOT get paranoid and defensive - if they have a post deleted most people assume there was a reason; whether or not they know what that reason is.

Our friend Lox posted in an earlier thread only to tell me to F*** O** and this post appeared but was later 'silently deleted' by some anonymous 'moderator'.

The poster in this case may have assumed that it was later 'silently deleted' because it was abusive against an individual named poster and used foul language. So they may well not have been very surprised at this imposed action.

But when a poster's contribution is 'silently deleted' just because it was unfortunate enought to share a thread with posts judged to meet the criteria and instead of just taking action against the offending post(s) the propotionate action is judged by our 'moderators' to be to 'silently delete' the entire thread - such a poster may be very surprised.

Our friend Lox may not have been surprised at their post being deleted - and perhaps they may be thankful that the proportionate action in that case was not for the anonymous 'moderator' to 'silently delete' the entire thread?

As they have made their last contribution to this debate - we may never know.

We may also never know if Lox would have been surprised to see similar posts to the one of their's that was 'silently deleted' - not only remaining on our forum but to see the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team openly encouraging such posts from certain favoured posters?

And to read the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team refer to a named poster is now banned for such postings.

But perhaps after this and witnessing the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team intentionally posting (in two different threads) the spam threads that other 'moderators' were busy deleting - Lox and our forum will not be surprised at any of the actions imposed, justifications given and assurances given to our forum by our 'moderators'.

Especially as the first thread targeted by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to litter with spam posts - was to be later closed by him - because he then claimed it had become a target for spam posts.......Duh!

I suggest that the average poster to our forum (if there is such a thing) deserves better than this open display of double standards by our 'moderators' - especially as they are asked and expected to be in support of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 08:51 AM

Hawaii Five-O it is...

Did you know that Jack Lord was originally considered for the role of Captain Kirk. But he was rejected by Roddenberry because he wanted to co-produce and take a share of the royalties. So they threw a bone to Shatner (and he's been running with it ever since).

And I've wondered if Jack Lord used the same lacquer product on his hair that that annoyingly intense Caruso guy from CSI Miami uses.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 08:59 AM

Well here is a link to thread that is devoted to Hawaii Five O

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 09:02 AM

Here is another link.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: jeffp
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 09:18 AM

Trying to tell others where to post again, I see.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 09:34 AM

And another.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 09:51 AM

Uh oh... the linky-loos are taking over.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wesley S
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 10:21 AM

Actually - there is talk that Matt Damon will be the next person to play Capt Kirk. The movie is supposed to be a story about the early days on the Enterprise. We'll see if it ever happens or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: kendall
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 10:46 AM

It's the characters that make or break a series. I don't miss Shatner, but no one will ever replace Spok.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 10:57 AM

I smell a new thread coming up...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 11:10 AM

It must be a pre-dump fart.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 01:26 PM

Don't talk like that! You'll disturb the other Guest, and she's already disturbed enough as it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 09:29 PM

I agree, Kendall. Spock was the one for me.

Kirk in some ways was what is wrong with the world. He had better people around him, most of all Spock's expertise and logic but he was the salesman for Startrek.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 09:38 PM

Hey! Don't knock William Shatner. He gave every un-talented, under-acheiver hope that they could be a success too. If Shatner could do it, why not me? Shatner was to Spock as John Davidson was to Frank Sinatra. Someone unkindly said that John Davidson had a two hundred dollar hair cut and a fifty cent brain.

Do I sense another thread being started by the Self-Appointed Protector Of Thread Purity?

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 09:46 PM

If Matt Damon plays the young Jim Kirk, then how are they going to explain the Shatner Kirk? Like, uh, maybe at the end of this movie he gets zapped with a Klingon Brain Zapper and loses 75% of his IQ but is still capable of bad acting or something along those lines.....maybe? Not a prequel part I'd recommend............

TRIVIA: What two actors both won an Oscar for their portrayal of the same character? It has only happened once.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Dec 06 - 10:06 PM

Stop Shatner

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 05:00 AM

Do I sense another thread being started by the Self-Appointed Protector Of Thread Purity?

If there is any chance of any poster (like Jerry) who insists on posting on that subject here, really wishing to discuss the good Captain and they do not have any ulterior motives for being seen to attempt to hYjack this one - in the case the subject of William Shatner - there is no shortage of exsisting threads that can be refreshed.

So there is no need to expect the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team to start a new one to ensure threads have titles that indicate the contents of the thread. in his quest for thread purity.

However, he may well be tempted to impose a new name on this thread and change it to yet another Shatner thread. It depends on which of his personal crusades is currently uppermost and which is seen to present the biggest concern in this vain attempt to be seen in some sort of control over every aspect of what posters choose to post.

Compelling as the subject of Mr Shatner may be to some posters - on a purely practical level, I think you may accept that such posters will be very unlikey to be aware of or able to find discussions and contribute themselves to their favourite subject when this is conducted and posted on a thread that is quite clearly titled Closed threads & deleted post (2)?

Joe Offer In the UK......? (thread title change complaint) (697* d) (thread title change complaint) 26 Jul 05

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


Of course, if anyone dares to disagree with Shambles, it's labeled "abuse." Heck, if I say anything in disagreement with anybody, no matter how politely and logically, I get accused of all sorts of horrible things. I guess some people think I'm not allowed to express my opinion here. Such is life.

I was certainly aware that adding the tag (thread title change complaint) to the title of this thread, would be viewed by some as an act of defiance against the rules Shambles seeks to impose upon us. Still, the title In the UK... had no meaning at all, and our general principle is to ensure threads have titles that indicate the contents of the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 05:10 AM

William Shatner and Sandra Smith for playing James T. Kirk in the original Star Trek episode "Turnabout Intruder?

Brando and De Niro, Vito Corleone?

Giok

♪♫I feel a thread coming on ♫♪

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 05:40 AM

I feel this thread getting to 2000 + posts - (most of them ignoring the thread's subject and motivated by attempts to prevent discussion on it) like the previous ones.

Or posters could just finally accept that simply ignoring a thread that is not to their taste - leaving it to those whose taste it is and not posting anything to it - is the very best example for them to set.

But being seen to to join in with the 'nice persons' who are now encouraged ti indulge in their abusive online group bullying of the 'not-nice persons' - is just so much more fun.

Merry Christmas.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 05:54 AM

Or posters could just finally accept that simply ignoring a thread that is not to their taste - leaving it to those whose taste it is and not posting anything to it - is the very best example for them to set.


It is not the example you set. You try to turn other threads into your campaign AND you try to move off topic discussion in your thread into other threads.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 05:59 AM

Shamby.....Y' gotta' notice that no one except you wants to discuss it. First, you never discuss anything and second, everyone has heard all of your complaints hundreds of times and have heard all the answers so what is left? Now go and try this crap somewhere else.....you'll not last a week, probably not a day. Nobody gives two shits anymore becasue everyone except you seems to get it.

Now on to the subject at hand..........

Giok, my congrats! DeNiro and Brando are correct. I don't think we've ever run a Godfather thread.........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:10 AM

It is not the example you set. You try to turn other threads into your campaign AND you try to move off topic discussion in your thread into other threads.

Such is the accusation and punishment from many who are seen to set a far worse example.

And they are judged to be 'nice persons'.

Would the 'alleged' example set by a 'not-nice person' be followed?

Song about The Godfather

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:12 AM

If proper sanitation facilities are no avail;able, the best way to deal with shit is to bury it. This will help prevent the spread of disease.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:20 AM

Shambles no one sets a worse example than you. You are everything you complain about here.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:24 AM

If proper sanitation facilities are no avail;able, the best way to deal with shit is to bury it. This will help prevent the spread of disease.

It has not proved to be the best way - has it?

Especially as proper sanitation facilites have always been available.

As if you are encourged to keep burying it with more shit - all you see is a huge smelly pile of it - which those who created it - only moan about having to see and smell.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:29 AM

Which is what you are doing shambles.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:29 AM

Shambles,

if you actually would do what you claim to do, namely discuss, there might even be people joining such a discussion.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 07:53 AM

if you actually would do what you claim to do, namely discuss, there might even be people joining such a discussion.

Well Wolfgang - you seem to be keen to post helpful observations (and less helpful judgements) like this one - but when our forum could reasonably expect you to discuss the issue - like confirming (when requested to) the existence of the thread we both posted to but has now entierly vanished without trace or explanation - you decline to discuss this.

Or are now prepared to confirm and discuss the circumstances of that thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 07:57 AM

Shambles no one can hold a discussion with you. You demand agreement with you no matter how ridiculous what you say might be.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 08:26 AM

You demand agreement with you no matter how ridiculous what you say might be.

If I did demand agreement for such things - I would only be following the example set by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM

Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship.
So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

I only expect discussion to be able to freely take place in a clearly titled thread on the subject and on a forum set up for such a purpose.

Being seen to demand agreement, silence or issuing threats until another poster is forced to agree or is driven off is however an accusation that could be more suitably addressed at others on our forum.   

Those, like me who would also judge themselves to be a 'nice person'.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 08:28 AM

Shambles you are the worst example here.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 08:33 AM

http://neal.oxborrow.net/Thomas_Hardy/HenryMoule.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 09:29 AM

Henry Moule died in 1880, but even in his seventies he was still trying to persuade the British government that the earth-closet was the system of the future, and he nearly succeeded.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 09:29 AM

Oh dear 300

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 09:46 AM

The earth closet - the future?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 09:47 AM

How come no one appeared to smell that one coming?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 09:49 AM

...when our forum could reasonably expect you to discuss the issue - like confirming (when requested to) the existence of the thread...

LOL. See what I mean, that's your idea of "discussion": confirm at your request. LOL

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 11:29 AM

See what I mean, that's your idea of "discussion": confirm at your request

Not really.

Given the title and subject which we were discussing in this thread - yours is perhaps the stanger idea of discussion?

As it includes making a refusal to a polite request to contribute some important information to the discussion - when this information is lacking or also intentionally witheld.

Unlike me - you may still have the right to choose what you will discuss or where you will discuss it on our forum but perhaps not to then critcise my idea of what a discussion is?

Wolfgang I expect we are possibly equally at fault. But as none of are perfect - we can surely have a discussion without the need to point out what each other's faults are?

Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a pedantic New Year.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 12:01 PM

"Not really."

Exactly. You don't see.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 01:59 PM

Oh, SNAP!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 04:35 PM

Polite? That's not a word that comes to my mind when I'm thinking of you, Shambles. Your language is polite but you as a person are about as polite as a salesman ringing the bell each day of the week and asking whether I consider to rethink my initial no.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wolfgang
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 05:14 PM

The story of Sheila and Gregor

Gregor: Sheila, em, you know how much I like to come to your place and I think, I wish, what do you think about making love?
Sheila: Gregor, you are such a sweet person and you know how much I care for you, but it does not feel right. So, I'm afraid but I have to say no.
Gregor: But why, Sheila?
Sheila: I've thought about it for a long time, even before you have asked, and I think it is not what I feel comfortable with. I could have decided differently under different circumstances and I nearly did but as it is now the answer is no.
Short pause
Gregor: Don't you think we could reconsider my suggestion one more time. I mean it would be so much fun to both of us.
Sheila: Your persistence flatters me, Gregor, but I have said no.
Gregor: But why, Sheila?
Sheila: I have my reasons and I don't expect you to understand them so just accept what I have said as my final word.
Short pause
Gregor: But it could be so rewarding and so exiting
Sheila: I think you should learn to understand a no. My no will still be a no in five minutes, in an hour, tomorrow, next week or next month.
Gregor: Could you explain to me once more your reason for saying no?
Sheila: You wouldn't accept it anyway, so why should I?. Could we talk about something else?
Short pause
Gregor: But wouldn't making love be fun for you too?
Sheila: CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORD NO?
Gregor: I don't know why you shout, Sheila, I'm just asking politely. So, how about we both just making love to each other?
GregorSheila: You bloody idiot, you behave like a complete asshole.
Gregor:: It disappoints me, Sheila, that you are using such words. Have I ever insulted you in a similar way?
Sheila: OH, JUST FUCK OFF:
Gregor: But you had invited me don't you remember? And do you think your insults are a good example to follow for others?
...

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 05:17 PM

My New Year's Resolution is to come to this thread every now and then and write, "If you don't like what Shambles has to say, don't read the thread."

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:06 PM

I dunno' Peace. That'd be okay but you might want to alternate. When you drop in now and "then" you post what you said which is very good. But on the times when you might drop in now and "again" you post, "Shambles, since everyone already knows your point, please take it to Max directly by PM."

Or here's something we could do together! I'll drop in and slam the livin' crap out of Roger, gettin' real nasty and all, then YOU post your line, "If you don't like what Shambles has to say, don't read the thread."   But then next time I'll try to explain the situation to Roger in a pleasant tone using logic and parsing his points one by one. So then YOU come in and post the other line, "Shambles, since everyone already knows your point, please take it to Max directly by PM."

Then when that gets boring we can swap roles for awhile. Or maybe one of us could take over BOTH jobs for a few weeks. Lots of options. One thing for sure, this thread will be here and a working thread for awhile longer.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:09 PM

Sounds good. So, uh, who's doing what now? OK, I'll do this:

Shambles, please speak with Max directly.

Back to you, Spaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:44 PM

Okay, lemmee think here......that means I should slam him so you can do the not read the thread post. Okay.....

Shamby-Pamby what is your problem man? Every swingin' dick in the joint has prettty much told you to get bent but you can't take "Fuck You" for an answer! Let me repeat for your benefit.....FUCK YOU!.....and the horse you rode in on. Matter of fact, you need to notice that your horse was killed by the last windmill you failed to topple but a broke-dick fanook like yourself probably beats animals. Matter of fact we DID see that from you before didn't we? Why not drop this sillyass vendetta against Max?   You DO relaize that it is Max you're attacking here don't you? Probably not.....what a fuckin' mook............

There.....That one included most of the aspects needed and followed generic lines. Sub a word here or there and you have a whole new post. Back atcha' Peace.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 07:32 PM

Don't you just hate it when you settle down all cosy, with the heating on and the curtains drawn. Kettles just boiled and your favourite film is due to start in five minutes and some uninvited and unexpected guest knocks on the door and says :

"It's fucking Christmas. Leave shambles alone and go and instil some seasonal fucking cheer where it is needed."

And then they rip your holly wreath off the door and piss off home.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 08:03 PM

Peace...Catspaw.... do you two think you can handle this all by yourselves, now? (With the alternating posts, I mean..) Gee, that would free a BUNCH of others to...to...ummmm...What is it we do when we're not responding to Shambles complaints?

and, in case anyone cares, I **LOVE** Wolfgang's little story...*grin*...It does capture the essence of the whole multi-year adventure.

"I never met-a-phor I didn't like."
    Bill "Will Rogers" D.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 09:37 PM

I dunno' Bill. We're just getting started here and it will take some time to get into a rhythm of things. For instance we did too many tonight. I think we need to stretch it to a day or so intervals and see how it works.

And let me apologize in my haste to leap into this new project, I completely ignored my duty to post in support of a great post by Wolfgang. Well done wolfie.....really. As Bill says, it captures much of the essence of this whole thing beautifully.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 10:29 PM

Wolfgang's story is wonderful. ;-) And there are guys around like that too. Lots of them. There are even a few (fortunately very few) women like that. (shudder!)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 05:40 AM

My New Year's Resolution is to come to this thread every now and then and write, "If you don't like what Shambles has to say, don't read the thread."

Good idea but you will see that this approach has been tried.

Perhaps if other posters followed your example - that may convince the usual noisy few but favoured posters that not only have they no right to be seen to bully and try to prevent others from posting their views.

That our forum has always been about Max encouraging posting - not finding ways to restrict and inhibit it.

And on a purely practical level - that all the 'fun' tactics encouraged to be used to this questionable end - over a long period of time - ranging from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team setting the example of indulging in and encouraging abusive personal attacks and intentionally littering our forum with spam posts - have proved not only to be ineffective they seen to be totally counter-productive.

Being seen to encourage such tactics only serves to demonstrate that what is evidenced in my posting here and for which I am restricted and abused for trying to continue - will remain the truth.

For a mirror is being held up and if posters to our forum do not like seeing their reflection (and far less supportive posters than me pointing out how ugly this now appears) there is little point in closing one's eyes or devoting all efforts to break the mirror.

If it is accepted (and taken for granted) by certain posters and 'moderators' - that posters have the right to say what they wish and to see their words remain as posted (except perhaps for very rare extreme cases) - what more is there to be said by those who are now encouraged to feel they have some right to prevent and deny others that right?

My New Year's Resolution is to come to this thread every now and then and write, "If you don't like what Shambles has to say, don't read the thread."

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 05:59 AM

The analogy is perhaps a good one - I am just not sure which side is now supposed to be Don Quixote and who are the windmills?

Chords Req: Old Man's Song (Don Quixote)?

Perhaps the attempt to scorn and ridicule what is judged to be a Quixotic quest - is now seen to be more foolish and desparate and to be carried out in far more 'Quixotic' fashion that the original?

Which could have been ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 06:29 AM

shambles, if as you pretend you do, you respect Max so highly, why do you not take the matter up with him in private?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 06:59 AM

shambles, if as you pretend you do, you respect Max so highly, why do you not take the matter up with him in private?

Why would anyone assume that I have not?

But why is there any expectation of this - when I an other posters are seen to be judged, sentenced and abused by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and support for this is then sought and all this still undertaken in public?

Our forum is going to be what all the posters make it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 07:08 AM

Our forum is going to be what all the posters make it.

It is now.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 08:43 AM

One day Charlie hearing a knock on his door, open it to find Helmut - who lived across the street from him.

Helmut asked Charlie to stop picking his nose and explained his concern..

Charlie asked what business of Helmut's it was if he did pick his nose and how Helmut was even aware that he had been picking his nose in his home?

Helmut explained that everyday when he went up into his attic - stood on an orange box and looked out of his window into Charlie's house through his telescope - he could clearly see Charlie picking his nose.

Helmut explained that looking at Charlie picking his nose was not an activity that was to Helmut's taste - and insisted that Charlie must stop it.

Charlie pointed out that Helmut did not have to go up to his attic everyday, stand on an orange box and look out of his window into Charlie's house through his telescope and that if Helmut did not go to all this trouble - he would not even be aware that Charlie was indulging in an activity that was not to Helmut's taste.

Charlie perhaps did not use these words.

And Helmut carried on complaining.

But Helmut carried on standing on an orange box and looking out of his window into Charlie's house through his telescope.

And Charlie carried on picking his nose in his own home - when he judged it to be necessary and enjoyable.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 08:45 AM

What on earth is shambles on about now?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: number 6
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 08:55 AM

I dunno ... but ya gotta luv the shambles.

LOL ... that was good

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 09:11 AM

I think he's afraid of bogey men.
G.

Bogey

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 10:19 AM

Joe Bloggs birthday

The above harmless piece of fun (and another thread posted shortly after, questioning the first thread's deletion) was 'silently deleted' by persons and for reasons unknown.

The following is the type of post (from those presumably judged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - to be nice persons) that is now encouraged and remains.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:44 PM

Okay, lemmee think here......that means I should slam him so you can do the not read the thread post. Okay.....

Shamby-Pamby what is your problem man? Every swingin' dick in the joint has prettty much told you to get bent but you can't take "Fuck You" for an answer! Let me repeat for your benefit.....FUCK YOU!.....and the horse you rode in on. Matter of fact, you need to notice that your horse was killed by the last windmill you failed to topple but a broke-dick fanook like yourself probably beats animals. Matter of fact we DID see that from you before didn't we? Why not drop this sillyass vendetta against Max?   You DO relaize that it is Max you're attacking here don't you? Probably not.....what a fuckin' mook............

There.....That one included most of the aspects needed and followed generic lines. Sub a word here or there and you have a whole new post. Back atcha' Peace.

Spaw
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

Please feel free to discuss the deletion here. This thread was a troll designed to open up another discussion on this topic. Not allowed under current rules. But you may discuss it here for another 3 years or so. Mudelf

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 10:27 AM

Maybe because it was a thread started with the idea of causing an argument, or pursuing an agenda Roger?
Can't think where he would have got that idea from can you?
G

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,JB
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 10:43 AM

Shambles
Thank you - I posted the JBB thread as a tongue in cheek 'harmless piece of fun'.
I then posted a comment 'so much for free speech' when I saw it had been deleted.
As you say, very selective policing here - odd, when so much other rubbish 'is encouraged and remains'
JoeB

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,Maggie C
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 10:47 AM

I'm surprised this thread itself hasn't been deleted !

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: number 6
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 10:51 AM

Why Maggie?

It happens to be one of the most popular threads down here in the BS.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 11:15 AM

Maybe because it was a thread started with the idea of causing an argument, or pursuing an agenda Roger?

Well I wouldn't know about such things, for I just simply try to post my views.

When it comes to pursuing an agenda and being seen to be making attempts to prevent other posters from posting their views - the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, you and a few noisy other posters would perhaps be the best ones to know and to judge such things as agendas?

Public speculations of the possible motives for a poster starting a thread are as pointless as they are endless.

For a thread's intention matters little. It is up to all the posters our forum what the thread becomes and I would suggest that they should be the ones allowed to decide.

But where there may be threads and posts where 'silent deletion' may be judged to be a proportionate response by our anonymous 'moderators' - are such threads as these really the ones and is this drastic action to be seen to the first and only method of dealing with them?   

And is our forum now so frightened of argument and only for the like-minded now?

But if such action is judge by our 'moderators' to be proportionate - should this action be imposed secretly? Why can not the fact that such action has been judged to be proportionate to be imposed on our forum and in their name - be at least recorded openly?

Then you would not need to speculate and use the word 'maybe'. For you I and all the posters on our forum would know and could then have a say if we judged the action to have been proportionate.

Then you would not need to speculate and use the word 'maybe'. For you I and all the posters on our forum would know and could then have a say if we judged the action to have been proportionate.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Wesley S
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 11:41 AM

Roger - Have a Merry Christmas - and a Happy New year.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 11:46 AM

You may have missed the following editing comment - it was inserted into this thread and did not refresh it.

Please feel free to discuss the deletion here. This thread was a troll designed to open up another discussion on this topic. Not allowed under current rules. But you may discuss it here for another 3 years or so.
Mudelf

I am grateful for the permission given by this anonymous 'moderator' for our forum to discuss this deletion here - but whether our forum will be free to discuss anything at all in the next three years is looking rather unlikely at this rate.

As for the current rules not allowing another discussion on this subject - perhaps these current rules can be displayed?

Whatever our 'moderator judges these current rules will allow - it is clear that the threads that were 'silently deleted' were not trying (heaven forbid) to open up another discussion on this topic - they were designed to try to make a point about birthday threads...................

As they were not as claimed by our anonymous 'moderator' and did not meet the required criteria for 'silent deletion' - perhaps they can be restored to enable our forum to be allowed to judge the fate of these threads?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 12:44 PM

The earth closet - the future? (closed)

The above thread has been closed for the following reasons - given by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

Closed by Joe Offer, for obvious reasons.
Merry Christmas.
-Joe Offer-

reasons which are not very obvious at all - when you see what sort of posts by certain favoured posters are now encouraged to be posted and remain uncensured on our forum - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 01:24 PM

Posters who do wish the discuss the earth closet are allowed to on what remains of the original thread The earth closet - the future?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 02:31 PM

Once again Roger you have triumphed, by forcing the closure of yet another thread. Don't blame Joe Offer or anybody other than yourself, you set out to deliberately provoke just that outcome, so you can jump up and down in childish glee screaming 'Joe closed another thread, Joe closed another thread' However he sort of spiked your guns by editing out all the non relevant threads, and leaving the rest intact!
Don't bother with the smug answer you usually give, "Who's to know what's in someone's mind when they start a thread" We all know that your aim on Mudcat is to sow dissent, and to try and turn people against Joe Offer. Well I have news for you Roger he is not just the present head of the Mudcat editing team, he is also the secure and future head of the team, and you are likely to go long before he does.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 02:58 PM

Once again Roger you have triumphed, by forcing the closure of yet another thread. Don't blame Joe Offer or anybody other than yourself, you set out to deliberately provoke just that outcome, so you can jump up and down in childish glee screaming 'Joe closed another thread, Joe closed another thread' However he sort of spiked your guns by editing out all the non relevant threads, and leaving the rest intact!

If you were right about my intentions - surely the most effective way of 'spiking my guns' (to use another term of warefare) would be be not to be seen to supply our forum with yet another needless example of imposed editing action?

Perhaps you could explain to our forum:

What the obvious reasons actually were that made this action so necessary?
What it has achieved?
Why exactly you would blame only me when the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team decides for reasons of his own subject yet another thread to imposed closure?
And why posters just could not have been left to decide the fate of that thread for themselves?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 03:16 PM

What the obvious reasons actually were that made this action so necessary?

Because you intentionally subverted the thread with non relevant posts
------------------------------------
What it has achieved?

It has saved innocent strangers stumbling upon another Shambles infested thread
-----------------------------------
Why exactly you would blame only me when the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team decides for reasons of his own subject yet another thread to imposed closure?

Because only you try to bend all threads to suit your futile agenda
-----------------------------------
And why posters just could not have been left to decide the fate of that thread for themselves?

Because not all posters can be trusted to know where to draw the line.

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

Next question?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 03:54 PM

Subject: RE: BS: The earth closet - the future?
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 12:32 PM

Please remember that this is a thread about earth closets. It is not to be used for complaining about Mudcat editing policy, or for attacks on Shambles.
-Joe Offer-

It is difficult to keep from laughing out loud whilst reading the above.

Given the ironic fact that the whole (worthy) thread subject of earth closets came directly from the attacks on me that are now seen to be encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudact Editing Team.

If I remember correctly - it was a suggestion from my ever present little Scotch stalker - about burying shit?

But - unless I am also to be blamed for posting to attack myself - along with the individual who actually closed it - there would appear to be posters other than me to blame for the course of that thread.....

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 03:57 PM

That's right Roger, take responsibility for nothing as usual.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 04:00 PM

Keep up the good work, Roger.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 04:27 PM

It would appear to be one of your favourite ploys Roger, to avoid responsibility for your misdemeanours by saying "He started it" Yet when you post, you ask people to ignore you, and ask why is it necessary to respond?
This is totally contradictory, as if it's necessary for you to respond to a post by someone, it's also necessary for us to respond to you too.
Of course I don't expect you to see the inconsistency in that!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 09:18 PM

Subject: RE: BS: The earth closet - the future?
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 09:25 AM

The Unofficial Mudcat Dictionary


Thread creep. adj.
A person who creeps around other peoples' threads on an internet discussion site, adding his own posts, usually totally irrelevant.
AKA. Dipstick, Broke Dick Mammalucca, Fuckwit, Shamby Wamby.

Wishing you all a Happy Hogmanay.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 05:24 AM

Good job you saved that before Father Offer deleted it Roger ¦¬]

A merry Christmas and a happy new year to you too.

Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 05:25 AM

Please feel free to discuss the deletion here. This thread was a troll designed to open up another discussion on this topic. Not allowed under current rules. But you may discuss it here for another 3 years or so.
Mudelf

As for the current rules not allowing another discussion on this subject - perhaps these current rules can be displayed?

Our forum may be aware that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team has restricted my posting - it may be a surprise that 'current rules' now mean that every poster is restricted in similar manner and that any new thread on any aspect will be 'silently deleted'.

As for being free to discuss this subject on this single thread - that is doubtful.

Especially as even trying to discuss this subject in this clearly titled thread is proving difficult enough. Posters now reading this thread have to be subjected to any of the foul and abusive name-calling and scatological references that a certain poster wishes to and is not only allowed to post but is now seen to be openly encouraged to post - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

There is some irony in that this poster did not contribute or display any of their usual scatological references in the the now closed 'earth closet' thread.

Do these unseen 'current rules' mean that our 'moderators' will also 'silently delete' any thread started which heaps uncritical praise of their efforts?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 05:35 AM

Father Offer deleted that post? Right.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 06:10 AM

"Subject: RE: BS: The earth closet - the future?
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 22 Dec 06 - 12:32 PM

Please remember that this is a thread about earth closets. It is not to be used for complaining about Mudcat editing policy, or for attacks on Shambles.
-Joe Offer-"

Yes anonymous Guest, and I have no problem with that.
Perhaps that was what I wanted to happen?

¦¬]

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 06:59 AM

Father Offer deleted that post? Right

Wrong.

And I am surprised that other posters who appear to be quick to correct such things have not posted to already do so.

In fact the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team took far more time and trouble to first select all the posts that he judged to be on topic and placed or left) them into a thread titled 'The earth closet - the future'. This excluding posts of mine that were both on topic and also answering other points raised.

The posts that he judged to be not addressing the subject of earth closets - he placed in new thread that he created and titled The earth closet - the future (closed).

And after selflessly making all these unasked for efforts on our behalf - the current Chief of the Mudcat editing team then closed it. The thread only - hopefully not the future.

Which is not technically deleting the thread - as if you should make a note of that thread's URL - it is possible to later read but not to refresh or contribute - when the thread falls off the bottom of the Mudcat world (otherwise referred to as the index).

You can then always make a special request to our 'moderators' to open the thread again.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 07:11 AM

My remark was sarcastic. Moderators will do that for each other. Mod 1 wants a post deleted so s/he asks Mod 2 to take care of it. It gets handled. Or the Mod deletes the post and says s/he didn't.

I read a post by a Mod a few years back in which it was said in essence that "I never delete a post if it looks like I have an issue with the person I would delete." Of course that is true. The Mod simply gets a friend to do it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 08:23 AM

The Mod simply gets a friend to do it.

The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team does not appear to need a friend to do this for him............

What does this tell us?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 08:28 AM

Nothing actually.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 08:32 PM

I think it tells us that Joe Offer is the head mod and is willing to take the heat for his actions. What does that tell you?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Joe Offer
Date: 24 Dec 06 - 12:03 AM

Merry Christmas, Shambles.
You light up my life....

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Dec 06 - 12:56 AM

Merry Christmas, Roger!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Dec 06 - 02:24 AM

Ah, shucks. Merry Christmas, Roger!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:14 AM

You can then always make a special request to our 'moderators' to open the thread again.

Which does rather make our 'moderators' imposing closure on them in the first place - more than a bit pointless.

Unless the whole point is to make our 'moderators' feel very important?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:17 AM

Roger (I have already wished you a Merry Christmas). The reference to threads being closed in this case is a reference to crudloads of fucking spam of a particularly cheap variety hitting the Mudcat.

I agreed with you about some threads being allowed to remain open or some posts being allowed to stand because some clones had a beef with some posters--may they eat shit and choke on it. However, in this case, you got it wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:23 AM

The reference to threads being closed in this case is a reference to crudloads of fucking spam of a particularly cheap variety hitting the Mudcat.

No it wasn't. And as it was me who made the referance - perhaps I should know?


Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 23 Dec 06 - 06:59 AM

Father Offer deleted that post? Right

Wrong.

And I am surprised that other posters who appear to be quick to correct such things have not posted to already do so.

In fact the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team took far more time and trouble to first select all the posts that he judged to be on topic and placed or left) them into a thread titled 'The earth closet - the future'. This excluding posts of mine that were both on topic and also answering other points raised.

The posts that he judged to be not addressing the subject of earth closets - he placed in new thread that he created and titled The earth closet - the future (closed).

And after selflessly making all these unasked for efforts on our behalf - the current Chief of the Mudcat editing team then closed it. The thread only - hopefully not the future.

Which is not technically deleting the thread - as if you should make a note of that thread's URL - it is possible to later read but not to refresh or contribute - when the thread falls off the bottom of the Mudcat world (otherwise referred to as the index).

You can then always make a special request to our 'moderators' to open the thread again.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 01:29 AM

NO, Roger. As Joe said on the Help thread, it is due to spam of the pornographic variety. Today it hit the Lyric Add threads. The stuff is shit with hot links and all. You want that kind of site linked to via Mudcat? Jesus, Joseph and Mary. I do NOT feel like arguing with you about this, Roger. I agree with some of what you say about selective editing, and if you want the names of the clones who do that, message me. But don't present a 'freedom of speech' issue like it is only about you. In this case it isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:39 AM

Peace, Do yo have to humor him and keep arguing. Everything was quiet for 5 days. Why not just let him talk to himself? That's what he is really doing anyway because the moderators won't do what he asks and he refuses to listen to anything anyone tells him. Why not leave him to his verbal masturbation?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Gervase
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 10:49 AM

Happy Easter, everyone.
(Hah, got that in early!)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 02:20 PM

Welcome back Pamby Baby....AND PLEASE TAKE NOTICE!!!!

During your hiatus ABSOLUTELY NO ONE came to this thread in FIVE DAYS! NO ONE!!! LET ME REPEAT THAT FOR YOUR EXCEPTIONALLY DUMB ASS---

NO ONE CAME TO TAKE UP THE TORCH OR TO HAVE A DISCUSSION OF ANY KIND ON THIS TOPIC!

Now what this will tell you if your mind can grasp it is the proof that

NO ONE GIVES THE TINIEST AMOUNT OF SHIT ABOUT YOUR CAUSE EXCEPT YOU!!!

I know you don't get it and you'll prattle on ad nauseum using Shamlogic as opposed to real logic but this one fact should be obvious, it won't be, but it should be.

And Sloppy Easter Eggs back atcha' Gervase!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 03:49 PM

Nothin' personal, Spaw, but you are a fuckin' showoff with all that fancy print and coloUr. And if I knew how, I'd have written that in size 2648.5 type with bright wisteria borders around a sequin-style lettering. Just the "fuckin' showoff" part. Happy Groundhog Day!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:15 PM

Aw shoot Peace.....If I KNEW how to do the wysteria thing I'd send it to you with detailed instructions so you could sing my praises in grand style!!!

Actually, I dunno' why I'm doing the color and font thing......Must be the holidays...........Maybe biLL #6 will drop by here and I can drive him nuts some more! In Shambo's case, I guess I just wanted him to notice. I know we're all looking forward to how he interprets it!

And so.....I bid you goodbye and may the fleas of a thousand camels bite Shambo's minature nut sack!!!

Ol'    SPAW

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:23 PM

there ya go Peace - I'm still searching for the sequins

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Dec 06 - 08:27 PM

Emma, you might check and see if any of the big Sequin Mining outfits in Nashville have anything on sale. There are several large sequin mines in the area and I know some of them sell "seconds" at a pretty good price. I wouldn't mind......just so everyone notices!

Ol'    SPAW

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 07:48 AM

NO, Roger. As Joe said on the Help thread, it is due to spam of the pornographic variety.

No.

Don't swallow this nonsense.

If the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is seen, in pursuit of his own personal spats, to intentionally post spam posts of the pornographic variety (for example, what is now the first post to the first version of this thread) - this fight against spam is the sham that all the other assurances, excuses and justifications posted are.

They are all just given to enable our 'moderators' to do as they wish with the invited contributions of their fellow posters.

With the exception of course of certain posters seen to be favoured by them, who are now encouraged to post any scatological and pornograpic references and for these to be inflicted on our forum.

What is worse - examples of posts like these or automatically generated ones?

I don't really give a toss if unfair treatment like this is to now be the way so-called 'moderation' is on our forum and certain posters are seen to be encouraged to post what they wish.

Just as long as the pretence is not maintained that this treatment is open and fair and that its victims and those who try to post to demonstrate this and enable it to be freely discuss - are not publicy seen to be assured that it IS open and fair.

Those posters who wish to be seen to be supporting online bullying are welcome (by me at least) to do so.

But please don't maintain the pretence to yourself or anyone else that what is being supported is anything other than what it plainly is..........

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 08:02 AM

For example.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 21 Dec 06 - 06:44 PM

Okay, lemmee think here......that means I should slam him so you can do the not read the thread post. Okay.....

Shamby-Pamby what is your problem man? Every swingin' dick in the joint has prettty much told you to get bent but you can't take "Fuck You" for an answer! Let me repeat for your benefit.....FUCK YOU!.....and the horse you rode in on. Matter of fact, you need to notice that your horse was killed by the last windmill you failed to topple but a broke-dick fanook like yourself probably beats animals. Matter of fact we DID see that from you before didn't we? Why not drop this sillyass vendetta against Max?   You DO relaize that it is Max you're attacking here don't you? Probably not.....what a fuckin' mook............

There.....That one included most of the aspects needed and followed generic lines. Sub a word here or there and you have a whole new post. Back atcha' Peace.

Spaw


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

Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely.
-Joe-

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

Now are posters really supposed to take this 'battle' against the 'pornographic variety of spam posts, seriously?

It must be clear that any form of offensive post can now be seen to be publicly inflicted on our forum's posters and used as ammunition by our 'moderators' and their favoured few supporters - in their personal but publicly conducted witch-hunts, unless an until posters are seen to comply or are driven away.

I just happen to still believe that our forum is set up to encourage and enable all posters to feel safe to openly post their views.

If anyone else should still beleive this also - I would be grateful if they would speak up and say so - while they still have the chance.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: JennyO
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 08:33 AM

What is worse - examples of posts like these or automatically generated ones?

Automatically generated ones of course.


Now are posters really supposed to take this 'battle' against the 'pornographic variety of spam posts, seriously?

Yes.


Next?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: number 6
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 09:45 AM

Well, well.

Just to let you know Spaw I ordered my bi-focals ... damn well cost me $300 cdn ... all this so I can can read your smantzy-pantzy fonts in your posts ... could I ask you to tone down the colour ... I couldn't afford the xtra $80 for the tint job. :)

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: JennyO
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 10:27 AM

Here ya go - sequins and wisteria all in one! - it's called "SULLIVAN WISTERIA" and it's supposed to have sequins on it - I'll take their word for it but I can't see 'em.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 12:24 PM

"I just happen to still believe that our forum is set up to encourage and enable all posters to feel safe to openly post their views."

yep...and catspaw has done that ...*grin*...more than once. Just as you, Roger, openly post YOUR views.

or, is it that catspaw should NOT feel safe to post his views? Do I detect a logical conflict here?


*contemplating*...Perhaps Shambles should be encouraged not to open and/or read threads & posts that upset him. But how, I ask myself, could this be done if he does not open them? Oh, I despair of finding a path thru all these thorny questions!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Jeri
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 12:36 PM

I'd just as soon the porn spammers aren't allowed to post their views. Espescially not the 'cum shots'.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 01:21 PM

(well, not unless their aim has improved!) ;>)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 01:31 PM

OK, this is getting very confusing. I thought wisteria and sequin were coloUrs, specifically off-green and reddish, respectively. Spaw and his friggin' fonts . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 01:44 PM

naawwww,,,Mauve, Puce, Ochre, and Chartreuse are colOrs...."sequin" is what happens after..."wisteria" is when you feel sad and frantic at the same time.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 02:03 PM

Sequins
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 02:13 PM

if you've seen one sequin, you've seen 'em all.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,gleaner
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 11:10 PM

There's too much acrimony and intrigue on this web site for me.

Goodbye.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 01:41 PM

yep...and catspaw has done that ...*grin*...more than once. Just as you, Roger, openly post YOUR views.

You are of course choosing to overlook that I am NOT allowed by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to openly post my views and have special restrictions imposed on my posting.

Even though I do not choose to indulge in or respond in kind to the abusive and offensive personal attacks that our forum has been assured by them, that our so-called 'moderators' are there to protect posters from.

And which (along with spam posts) the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is now seen to be openly permitting to be inflicted on our forum from certain favoured posters. Without any censure being seen to be imposed on them and for the sort of posts other posters are now banned for posting.

or, is it that catspaw should NOT feel safe to post his views? Do I detect a logical conflict here?

You should perhaps be asking our 'moderators' that question.

Perhaps you could then be kind enough to inform our forum what their answer is?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 02:07 PM

naawww, Roger, I am overlooking nothing...your views ARE posted openly. I understand that you have certain restrictions... You are just restricted from starting multiple threads to do so, or injecting your views on this issue into threads of others.

I used to have a 'moderate' personal campaign against over-broad definitions of 'folk', too....but I have not spent years insisting that people use the language only in ways I approve of.....If I had, and if I set about that campaign with the single-minded fervor you employ, I would not be surprised to my posts on it restricted to one thread.

"You should perhaps be asking our 'moderators' that question."...nope- our moderators seem to have already determined that both you & catspaw may post their views. The logical conflict is in YOUR reasoning where you ask for freedom for everyone...then suggest that catspaw should refrain...or be prevented....from posting his. (It's not quite clear which)

For the 417th time...the operative rule is: Max has a group of moderators, with a couple of overseers, to help keep the joint running, and they have certain guidelines.....one of which is to control & restrict problem postings....spam is one, porn is one- but you are another. It makes no difference if you disagree with the rules or the minutiae of enforcement policies....just as it makes no difference whether *I* want a narrower definition of 'folk'. I state my opinion now then, and it's tolerated BECAUSE it's "now & then"..

"go thou and do likewise"

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 02:19 PM

"You are of course choosing to overlook that I am NOT allowed by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to openly post my views and have special restrictions imposed on my posting."

CRAP Roger.

You can post anywhere you like, all that is required is that your post is relevant to the thread it's posted in.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 03:14 PM

The logical conflict is in YOUR reasoning where you ask for freedom for everyone...then suggest that catspaw should refrain...or be prevented....from posting his. (It's not quite clear which)

If you could evidence where I have asked or suggested such a thing - you views may have a little credibility. But as I have not - your views are seen to be as innacurate as they are selective.

My request is for ALL posters to be seen to be treated openly and fairly by our 'moderators' - as you are of course fully aware.

As you are fond of accusing others of introducing 'the straw man' - I am sure that you would not wish to be seen to be doing this here.   

Any poster who is foolish enough to be seen to be inflicting such posts (as are currently seen to be encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team) on our forum only succeeds in demonstrating their foolishness.

And any 'moderator' who is seen to be publicly encouraging such posting - (when other posters have been banned for such posting) is beyond foolishness.

So are any posters who support such hypocrisy and double standards (even if just by being silent and not challenging them).

For you wiil accept that other posters (and one in particular) - who insisted on posting similar posts as are seen to be encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team from certain favoured posters - are now banned from posting at all?

And that this was done with much noise and public support?

So what message is now being given to our forum by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team being seen to set the example of openly encouraging such posts - containing offensive name-calling, foul language, scatological references and abusive personal attacks?

That such posting is OK - when it is OK when it from 'one of the favoured few' or that all posters are being seen to be treated equally by our 'moderators'?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 03:55 PM

Another happy day at Mudcat Cafe?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 04:26 PM

"My request is for ALL posters to be seen to be treated openly and fairly by our 'moderators' - "

...and if one poster "is seen" to be making life difficult for OTHER posters?

You are inordinately fond of that "seen to be" locution, but again, the operative concept IS what the moderators, guided by the "chief" moderator "see" to be the problem(s).

You clamor for 'fairness', but you can't write a rule that everyone would 'see' to be fair. The current rules and enforcement policies ARE considered fair by most of those who bother to comment. YOU have created a self-reinforcing hypothesis about being treated UNfairly....the more you complain, the more restrictions you engender and the more abuse you attract....so you complain louder. *click*...off we go again.

Ever see the sign "Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves"?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: number 6
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 04:39 PM

That was pricelss LH ... LOL!!

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Ebbie
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 04:47 PM

I saw that one on America's Funniest Home Videos and I find myself laughing ruefully and helplessly at it. If we accept that the people who value the Mudcat are one body, biting at ourselves is not only counterproductive but very funny.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 04:50 PM

He's right about clones targeting certain posters. Absolutely right.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: gnu
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 04:57 PM

I NEVER click on "these threads" anymore... but, somehow, God, in his infinite wisdom, made me click tonight and see LH's link.

Now, I feel bad for that poor dog. But, it just struck me so funny that the analogy is him biting his own.

Seriously, I haven't followed this thread or many others of this ilk for a couple of years.... Roger... well, you konw...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 08:08 PM

...and if one poster "is seen" to be making life difficult for OTHER posters?

The precedent set by our 'moderators' for a poster who repeatedly posts to call others poster's foul and abusive names is for them to be banned - is it not?.

So if all posters doing this are seen to be treated openly and fairly there will be no problem?

But they are not are they?

A certain favoured poster has now been seen to be encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to post and inflict on our forum whatever abuse and scatological references they may wish.

Why do you consider it acceptable for one poster to be banned and the other poster to be free from any censure and encouraged?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 08:55 PM

Because the favoured poster is so lovable.

Ya' know Roger, the only reason I ever drop by here is just for fun and to take the piss out of you for no reason whatsoever. Well, I guess there is a reason...........I seem to annoy you and that's reason enough. You have been annoying this place for years. All your huffing and puffing don't mean a thing because there is only what is. At some point Max will take the piss out of you instead of me doing it. That might be a sad day because under the neurotic asshole persona, you're an otherwise intelligent being.

Maybe it will come to you in the new year though I doubt it. You're not saving Mudcat. It isn't yours to save. Back off and let Max take care of things in the best time frame that he and Jeff can. Make it a resolution for the new year huh? You've made all the points that you have to make and you can see that no one but you is too interested. "Our" forum, as you like to say, would be far better off for it. If you can't do that, then I'll be around just for the hell of it to screw with you. I'll post a lot of stupid, demeaning, and generally stupid, stuff to try and equal your stupid stuff.

Give it up Rog......Why waste the bandwidth? We can both stop now as the New Year arrives!!!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: JennyO
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 03:37 AM

I'll post a lot of stupid, demeaning, and generally stupid, stuff

Yes Spaw, but your stupid, demeaning, and generally stupid, stuff, is ENTERTAINING!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 03:39 AM

Ya' know Roger, the only reason I ever drop by here is just for fun and to take the piss out of you for no reason whatsoever. Well, I guess there is a reason...........I seem to annoy you and that's reason enough.

Well, as you having been trying for so long, have not succeeded in annoying me but suceeded only in inflicting your abuse on everyone on our forum and in the process compromised everyone you may consider to have been your friend - it may be time for you to stop posting only to intentionally annoy your fellow posters?

Perhaps you could explain why you consider it acceptable that special posting restrictions to be seen to be imposed on me - whilst you are openly encourged to continue to publicly inflict any abuse on our forum?

And why you judge it to be acceptable for one poster to be banned and the other poster (yourself) to be free from any censure and encouraged by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, for both inflicting the same sort of unacceptable abusive postings on our forum?

As you now admit you get pleasure out of intentionally annoying people, and if you intend to carry on and if you are still seen to be encouraged to inflict this on our forum publicly, and in your chosen scatological manner - please feel free instead to post whatever might please you in PMs to me.

I, and I suspect many other posters will be grateful for this and then be able to discuss what they chose to on our forum without your intentional and many 'fun' attempts to prevent this.

By these postings and the favoured treatment they have been seen to receive by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - you have mainly succeeded in perfectly demonstrating my point for me to our forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 03:51 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Visit the New Site 'Mudsling' not Mudcat
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 04:25 PM

Someone who comes into my house and behaves like some of the posters here would be regarded as an intruder and not a guest.
Guests are welcome, providing they adhere to the basic norm of respecting the person/place that is providing that hospitality.

It now appears that many of our forum's 'guests' are seen to set a far better example of showing respect than some of our members, 'moderators' and their usual noisy few supporters.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,Barry McKenzie
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 05:54 AM

As I see it, this forum is doubly blessed. Not only does it have it's very own court jester, in the form of Catspaw49, but it also has it's very own global village idiot in the form of The Shambles.

Just think, if the guy had put the same amount of care and attention into his schoolwork as he does into hunting out censorship here, he could have been a Nobel laureate by now.

As it is, it's a life wasted.

Sad really. When he's lying in that twilight home, smelling of old piss and cabbage, there'll be no queue of little acolytes waiting to see the great crusader for truth. There's just be a lonely old, sad old, mad old obsessive, convinced that some evil bastard's tying knots in his catheter.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 08:41 AM

"It now appears that many of our forum's 'guests' are seen to set a far better example of showing respect than some of our members, 'moderators' and their usual noisy few supporters."

There ya go again Roger taking a post totally out of context. My post which you quote above was against cowardly and abusive Guests. Or Guests who are in reality Mudcatters who have a personal axe to grind, and do so by appearing to support your prejudices.
Don't be misleasd by apparent 'support' from these anonymous Guests in this thread Roger, it is Mudcat they are targeting, and not you they are supporting.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 11:14 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Gno more Gnome
From: kendall - PM
Date: 30 Dec 06 - 01:11 PM

I think the clones do a pretty good job of deleting the personal attacks and name calling, but they can't be everywhere.
One of the worst offenders has finally been banned and I don't miss him a bit.

Any chance of a reality check and any joined-up thinking taking place before such posts as the above are posted? Are they posted in the hope that later reading of them will make these dreams become reality?

Led by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - our 'moderators' have for many years themselves been seen to set the example of indulging in posting personal attacks and name-calling.

How can such a public show of hypocrisy and double standards ever be expected to result in anything other than posters following this example?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 11:22 AM

From The Shambles:

Any chance of a reality check and any joined-up thinking taking place before such posts as the above are posted?

No comment...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 11:23 AM

I don't believe you know what Kendall's on about in that post do you Roger?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Sorcha
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 11:28 AM

Ah, the amusement for the day.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 11:39 AM

Gno more Gnome

Visit the new site 'Mudsling' not Mudcat

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 12:07 PM

Posting with civility

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Sorcha
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 12:08 PM

You could go find Bert some diaper rash ointment?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 12:30 PM

" please feel free instead to post whatever might please you in PMs to me."

And you should feel free to PM Max about all of your stupid, boring complaints instead of inflicting them on all of the rest of us. Obviously, no one else agree with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 09:34 PM

"As none of this well-intentioned imposition has made any difference -except to further divide us - perhaps it is now time to stop this and try another approach?"


That sounds like a great idea Shambles. Why don't you try a new approach and only post your arguments one time each instead of time after time after time. We all know what you want done. If it hasn't been done by now then it is obviously because Max does not agree with you. Stop pestering people.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 02:22 AM

The current rules and enforcement policies ARE considered fair by most of those who bother to comment.

*Smiles*

You've made all the points that you have to make and you can see that no one but you is too interested.

Our forum can clearly see that the usual noisy few who feel they have some right to prevent others from posting their views are still interested enough to use their energies to carry on posting to this rather shameful end. And to pretend that it is a noble purpose.

And that a certain favoured few are now openly seen to be encouraged to post abuse.

That this only further compromises our forum's owner - who they presume to speak on behalf of.

Please feel free to post and support this bullying on our forum - but please do not continue to maintain the pretence that it has anything to do with being open or fair.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 02:38 AM

Our forum can clearly see that the usual noisy few who feel they have some right to prevent others from posting their views are still interested enough to use their energies to carry on posting to this rather shameful end.

Shambles you are a liar. Look at the post dates. There were no posts yesterday when you did not post. When you were absent for a few days recently there were no posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 04:55 AM

You (whoever you may be) are still interested enough to refresh this thread.

And to post and avoid the thread's subject.

Perhaps as you are so interested, you could explain the point of our 'moderators' imposing closure on any thread - if these threads can be later re-opened (by special request and at the descretion of these anonymous fellow posters)?

Would it not make more sense and be more in keeping with the concept of an discussion forum - that still remains open for the public to express their views - for all threads on our forum (once started) to remain open?

Or should this be taken to its logical conclusion and all posters now be expected to first obtain permission from our anonymous fellow posters, before starting (or contributing to) any thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:03 AM

Shambles. People do respond what what you say, eg. as I did then, point out you were lying but, when you are not here this thread dies because there is only you with any interest bringing in new or repeated complaints.

Try leaving it alone for a month next time and see what happens.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:29 AM

Because posters may not feel free enough to post their views - does not mean they are not interested in reading the views of others.

As long as this thread exists - they will always have the opportunity to read such views and to contribute should they wish to.

And those who are really not interested - can simply ignore it and not refresh it.

As thankfully not all posters feel they have the right to prevent others from posting their views or any right to be seen to inhibit others by publicly judging their worth.

But as you can see from the three recent threads started and linked to here - there is no lack of interest in discussing the only subject that all posters to our forum have in common.

Which is of course our forum.

And no matter what energy is expended by those few fellow posters who feel themselves qualified to judge others - (and who divisivly refer to themselves as 'we') - consider it to be 'their' forum and do not wish anything other than blind praise of their efforts to be discussed openly on our forum - it will remain our forum.....As long as it remains.

And long may it remain.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:32 AM

Trouble is, this thread is a festering scab that has to be scratched from time to time.
Ooh, baby, that feels gooood!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:35 AM

But as you can see from the three recent threads started and linked to here - there is no lack of interest in discussing the only subject that all posters to our forum have in common.

Posting with civility

Gno more Gnome

Visit the new site 'Mudsling' not Mudcat

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,Conspiracy theorist
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:53 AM

Come to think of it, have Shambles and Teribus every been seen together? Is one's paranoia merely the obverse of the other's obduracy? Or vice versa? I think we should be told.
Oops, sorry - of course, there's a conspiracy not to tell us. Or is it the other way round.
SHAMBLES!!!!!!! Quit messing with my brain.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 06:04 AM

You may be on to something. Shambles protests about 'spin' from the authorities here and Teribus uses every bit of government 'spin' (facts to him) he can.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 01:29 PM

Shambles,

You really are a twit. Your postings are beginning to sound like a very bad Monty Python skit. Do you even possibly know how ridiculous the terms "current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team", "favoured posters", "our (not Max's) forum" sound? Not to mention that your phrasing, faulty/idealistic logic and repititious postings are totally laughable. Just give it up. Absolutely no one agrees with you or cares what you write.

It would be so nice if everyone would leave you alone to wallow in your mud but too many people feel like they have to debate every word that you say. It certainly is humorous to see you post a few times without response and to watch how each post sound more desperate then the one before.

How does it feel to know that people are laughing at you and not with you?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: kendall
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 01:41 PM

On a dead man's door, you can knock forever.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 01:56 PM

The poor guy is just a misguided simpleton. Perhaps a bit retarded even. That would explain the constant repeat, repeat, repeat. I hate comparing him to a dead person. He's daffy and obnoxious but harmless.

I guess every group needs a resident court jester or village idiot.

Does this make me a "favoured poster" because I insulted Shamby?

I just realized that he his really living up to his name. He is turning this site into a Shambles.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 02:06 PM

Subject: RE: Shambles & Birthdays, Why?
kendall
Date: 06 Nov 06 - 01:56 PM

Shambles used to irritate the hell out of me by wasting space just to have something to say. Now, I simply ignor any post that he puts up. Works for me.

If only it did...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: kendall - PM
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 01:41 PM

On a dead man's door, you can knock forever.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,Laughing my ass off
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 02:07 PM

"Dance Monkeyboy, dance!"

Ever notice how the same twits keep posting, sometimes anonymously, and saying the same thing over and over - and then they accuse Shambles of doing the same thing?   You love to bait him and then when he reacts that way you expected him to, you feign horror! What jerks you brainless boobs are!   When I see longtime members of Mudcat trolling about, it makes me realize that Shambles is far from the problem. You supposed "examples" of behavior should be ashamed of your own actions.

Perhaps the elevator isn't getting up to the top floor for some of you folks?

You love to make fun of Shambles, but you have your own set of problems that need addressed. Moderators, longtime members, anonymous trolls. You are all cut from the same cloth. You morons are all the same and love to sniff your own butts.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 02:13 PM


    http://help.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=3473&messages=6

The following from the above thread - in the Help and Trouble Forum.


Subject: RE: Well, Well, Surprise?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 03-Jan-07 - 02:31 AM
Clinton was blocked. He attacked another Mudcatter once too often. He can come back, on probation, if he contacts me by e-mail and asks. So far, he hasn't asked.
And the "Where's Clinton" thread was deleted because we don't allow threads that are critical of individual Mudcatters. Sorry, kids, but we're cracking down on nastiness around here. If you don't like it, try being nice for a change - or at least have the guts to post your name when you feel like being nasty. I gotta credit Clinton for that - at least he didn't hide his identity.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Peace
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 02:15 PM

Hi, Shambles. I guess it is about whose dog gets bit, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,more Cut and Post
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 02:17 PM

"Sorry, kids, but we're cracking down on nastiness around here. If you don't like it, try being nice for a change - or at least have the guts to post your name when you feel like being nasty. I gotta credit Clinton for that - at least he didn't hide his identity."
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 02:17 PM

LMAO just logged on.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 03:12 PM

I'm starting to think maybe Shambles has a valid point in there somewhere. Why was this thread closed?

Just wondering...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:09 PM

And this one?

Clinton?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:43 PM

BANG! POW!

Somebody's got an itchy trigger finger these days.

Oh well, Hammond always insisted this place needed a firmer hand.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Cluin
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:44 PM

Except now they're taking a pre-emptive approach and closing threads BEFORE anything objectionable might happen in them. Censor the idea....

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: number 6
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 05:49 PM

"Ever notice how the same twits keep posting, sometimes anonymously, and saying the same thing over and over - and then they accuse Shambles of doing the same thing?   You love to bait him and then when he reacts that way you expected him to, you feign horror! What jerks you brainless boobs are!   When I see longtime members of Mudcat trolling about, it makes me realize that Shambles is far from the problem. You supposed "examples" of behavior should be ashamed of your own actions."

He may not be speaking in the most eloquent manner, but unfortunately there is a lot of truth in what Laffing His Ass Off is saying.


biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,fauxno
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 06:18 PM

Reasons for closing a post should be stated in no uncertain terms if there's to be any lesson taught to the readership and posters. The reasons for the post closing should be stated in text immediately below the statement that the post is closed.

As to attacks against Mudcat members, such attacks occur and remain undeleted in several threads. Preventing the naming of an attacked member in a thread title makes that practice inconspicuous to those reading the thread titles, but does not address the practice of posting attacks within threads.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 06:19 PM

No shit!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 11:01 PM

So let's see if I have it straight. We can't post a thread asking why someone has been banished. But we can still have this ridiculous thread that insults the moderators and Max and voices constant complaints about the day to day running of the site. What am I missing here? If there was ever a need for a thread to be closed it is this one. And all future complaints about management should be edited out too. This isjust a suggestion...not a complaint. You guys are doing a great job.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 02:59 AM

Well, it got tiring playing cat-and-mouse with Shambles, so I decided to let him have one complaint thread where he could say whatever he wanted - and where others can say what they want, even if it is critical of Shambles. I instructed the Clones to leave this one thread alone and not to use their editing buttons on this one thread - and I don't delete or edit anything here, either. I generally stay out of the discussion, although I do respond with factual information when Shambles or others post something misleading or untruthful about Mudcat editing actions.

And one weekend, Shambles had a campaign that implied that we were deleting all sorts of things that we don't delete. So, that one weekend, instead of deleting messages, I transferred ALL to-be-deleted messages to the previous Shambles "closed and deleted" thread, as evidence of what we actually do delete in a normal weekend. It would seem if I'm accused, I ought to be able to present refuting evidence, no?

Past experience has shown that public discussion of individual controversial Mudcatters leads to nastiness, so we don't allow it. As I have explained before, I delete threads about Shambles, Martin Gibson, Clinton Hammond, and about anonymous Guests as a matter of course - whether or not they start out innocently. No, it isn't worth explaining each of these deletions, or to do much explaining of any of our editing. Most of it follows common sense, if one of our guiding principles is that we want to keep the peace here. No doubt, there's going to be a few who will condemn our actions and want to make an issue out of anything we do. It's a shame that we can't discuss our editing policy more frankly, but there are people here who turn any such discussion into a kangaroo court.

Are our solutions to these problems perfect? No, certainly not. Keeping the peace in a place like this is a messy job, and sometimes there are inconsistencies and mistakes. But we try to be honest and to do as well as we can.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 04:43 AM

Are our solutions to these problems perfect? No, certainly not. Keeping the peace in a place like this is a messy job, and sometimes there are inconsistencies and mistakes. But we try to be honest and to do as well as we can.

-Joe Offer-

Can you explain what is honest about you being seen to ban two members for posting personal abuse but being seen in this thread to openly encourage others to post exactly the same thing?

I have noticed that when you assure our forum, using phrases like 'doing as well as we can' - this is usually an attempt to justify doing only what you want.

Whatever consequences may result to our forum and whoever is compromised in the process.

Most systems are judged on their results - not what are claimed to be their well-intented best efforts. Why should this system be any different?

Our forum really does deserve better than this. As the mess I see is the one you have largely created - which you openly criticise - refuse to take any resposibility for and for which you openly post to judge and blame everyone else for.

If your best efforts have failed - and in your 'for the record statement' you have admitted this - can you please move on and allow someone else who will accept some responsibilty for their actions to try a different approach?

One that is seen to be open and fair.
One that can be seen to protect everyone.
And one that all of our forum can support and will not continue to divide its posters.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 04:48 AM

The crack down

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,not Joe Offer
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 05:37 AM

OK, since you insist:


This Thread Is Closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,fauxno
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:18 AM

That post of 5:37 am, which I now see is satirical, had me going briefly. So it all depends on where you draw the line, literally. Live and learn.

Previous management communications through proxy had left me wondering what might happen next.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,fauxall
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:25 AM

fauxno - can I refer you to this thread and the one preceding it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 10:40 AM

A confession was in order, given the conversation in which I engaged at the thread linked to above.

Am I the only one "around here" who ever admits error?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:32 AM

Not quite. ;-) I have admitted errors on a few occasions.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts (2)
From: GUEST,fauxno
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 11:32 AM

I made the 10:40 am post. But I guess it's no big deal around here to forget to enter a handle.

---

Thread closed. Shambles started posting his complaints in another thread.
-Joe Offer-