|
28 Feb 13 - 10:23 AM (#3484685) Subject: BS: why Mudcat? From: GUEST why not Google groups? or maybe lease Microsoft's Outlook Express I'm guessing it derives from a Bulletin Board thingy which pre-dates these upstarts |
|
28 Feb 13 - 10:31 AM (#3484689) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Bill D " derives from a Bulletin Board thingy" Nope... Why not do a little research before asking vague questions? |
|
28 Feb 13 - 10:36 AM (#3484692) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: s&r If you've got to ask the question you wouldn't understand the answer Stu |
|
28 Feb 13 - 11:40 AM (#3484716) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Amos WHy not? Besides, we have been dancing with the Cat since Sergei Brin was still trying to figure out Mario Brothers. |
|
28 Feb 13 - 12:27 PM (#3484726) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Becca72 Because my dad told me to... :-) |
|
28 Feb 13 - 12:35 PM (#3484729) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: mayomick my dad did too |
|
28 Feb 13 - 01:26 PM (#3484742) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Wesley S Because at Google groups you can't find a consensus to the age old question "What is folk music?". |
|
28 Feb 13 - 01:31 PM (#3484745) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: GUEST,999 Wesley, now you've done it. |
|
28 Feb 13 - 04:47 PM (#3484806) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Nigel Parsons The question is "Why?"; and the question is hot! 'Cos the question is new (come on, don't lose the plot) Now some here may answer, though some here cannot. The answer is always "Because!", or "Why not?". |
|
28 Feb 13 - 05:32 PM (#3484831) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: The Sandman if u want 2 no wot folk music is, ask a horse, but not a dead horse. |
|
28 Feb 13 - 05:33 PM (#3484833) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: olddude would you prefer muddogs ? |
|
28 Feb 13 - 05:37 PM (#3484835) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: McGrath of Harlow If it ain't broke, don't fix it. One thing of course is because there are a bunch of people who regularly post here that wouldn't come together anywhere else, and I'd miss them. And a shared history. Also, I've never come across an online forum which doesn't feel clunky and unnavigable compared to the Cat. They just don't work. Several times I've asked people who criticise aspects of the Mudcat to point me in the direction of somewhere that does it better. Based on any subject. No one has ever been able to do that for me. This place is subtly brilliant. |
|
28 Feb 13 - 05:45 PM (#3484838) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Bill D I give thanks regularly to **Jeff** (Pene Azul), who did much of the original design & programming of features. Not that Max can't do stuff, but Jeff was special. |
|
28 Feb 13 - 05:45 PM (#3484839) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Jim Dixon I guess the main reason everybody ends up here is that Mudcat has already accumulated a huge amount of information and it's all searchable. Reddit, by comparison, doesn't have a complete search. Imagine being able to search only the title of a thread and the first message in each thread. That usually means that a question is searchable but the answer is not. Also, every thread only stays on the front page for a day or so and then it disappears forever. You can still find the thread with a search (provided, of course, what you're searching for is in the title or the first message) and for the first six months, you can add new messages to it, but the thread will never be "refreshed," that is, it will never appear on the front page again, so nobody will know that you added a message (unless they happen to find the thread by searching for it themselves). Therefore people almost never bother to search for old threads or add messages to them. People keep starting new threads about popular subjects all the time. There is a lot of redundancy, and a lot of turnover of members. People don't work very hard to do research, either, knowing that whatever they post will disappear almost as soon as it is posted. Reddit is fine if you only want to have a conversation and then you don't care if your words will never be seen again, but it's terrible as a place to try to store or look up information. |
|
28 Feb 13 - 06:57 PM (#3484857) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: JohnInKansas I don't recall offhand whether it was Reddit or Twitter, but one of them announced last week that they were "expanding their search" to include posts beyond two weeks old. Until they complete this revision, NOTHING more than that age can be found with their site search. Here, you can go back to the First Post at Mudcat and with a little work you can retrieve anything that was ever here. (The first post is #4 because the first few "setup" posts were deleted.) This is a very important difference for anyone who actually wants to learn (or share) something, instead of just pasting the latest recycle of ancient urban lies. It is not at all uncommon here for a question asked in a thread to be answered ten or more years later, or for discussion to continue. On many of the "social sites" three minutes old isn't news anymore (and most of it probably wasn't when posted). John |
|
28 Feb 13 - 07:26 PM (#3484870) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: gnu Bill D... Yes, Jeff was cool... I always wondered what happened... where is he now? I sent $ to the Mudcat established fund to help him out when his Dad got sick. An update would be welcome. In addition to all of the positive posts above, as I have said MANY times... Max's dedication to free speech save ONE RULE is exemplary for all internet sites. It is truly inspiring and to be lauded at every turn. So... thanks for the umpteenth time, Max. And, he has a beagle so he must be a VERY tolerant man... maybe the beagle taught him patience??? |
|
01 Mar 13 - 05:28 AM (#3484999) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: JHW Mudcat is very helpful but it isn't that searchable. Sometime it works, often it doesn't. Going outside to Google will find what you want in Mudcat that Mudsearches can't. But if I remember right we're not supposed to talk about Mudcat purr se on Mudcat. |
|
01 Mar 13 - 05:45 AM (#3485005) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Megan L because "daft auld beggers who should know better but obviously don't" didn't fit across the top. |
|
01 Mar 13 - 10:04 AM (#3485098) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Big Al Whittle folk music.....? too obvious, I suppose. |
|
01 Mar 13 - 10:29 AM (#3485104) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: JohnInKansas Mudcat was originally started by Max for discussion of BLUES, and the name derives from that connection. When the folkish Digital Tradition lost the sponsorship of it's previous site, Max offered them a new home. The merging of the two, folk and blues, evolved into what we are now. There wasn't that much of anything very interesting on the web when it started, and I actually had to wait a couple of years after I found it to log in because I didn't have an email account then. There are very few sites that have been (successfully) around for as long as mudcat, and in my opinion even fewer that deserve the respect that mudcat has earned. Thanks again, Max (and all the loyal elfs). John |
|
01 Mar 13 - 12:16 PM (#3485134) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: MartinRyan There wasn't that much of anything very interesting on the web when it started Not many people know that! ;>)> Well said. Regards |
|
01 Mar 13 - 12:28 PM (#3485139) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: John MacKenzie Because it's there! |
|
02 Mar 13 - 06:47 AM (#3485404) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: gnu JiK... quite the "coincidence" that the merging of the two sites have provided even more insight into the history and development of both genres and their influence on each other. I find THAT one simple aspect of Mudcat to be remarkable. Mudcat Digital Tradition |
|
02 Mar 13 - 02:59 PM (#3485546) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Claire M Hiya, Some of us aren't old anyway. Do you mean #1 – why is/was it called Mudcat, or #2 – why are we on it?? If you mean #1 it's to do with a song/band if #2 – I use it because I love folk/blues, & am a bit paganny, & don't know too many others who do/are – they seem to think I'm a bit strange! I could talk about all of this all day, & I can do that with you lot. |
|
02 Mar 13 - 04:43 PM (#3485594) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: skarpi if not for Mudcat , I had never met those great people and friends all over the world ...:) ...since 1995 0r 6 can´t remember ... |
|
02 Mar 13 - 04:51 PM (#3485597) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: number 6 Why?? Because I'm mad, all of us here are mad ... otherwise we wouldn't have come here that's why biLL .. ;) |
|
02 Mar 13 - 04:58 PM (#3485601) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: GUEST What are you mad about, sIx? |
|
02 Mar 13 - 05:04 PM (#3485605) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Ed T Because if people were not key boarding here, they would likely be playing with their instrument (annoying family and neighbours),drinking or smoking more, picking their nose, or playing with themselves. It is just the best alternative from the lot. |
|
02 Mar 13 - 06:50 PM (#3485627) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: number 6 "What are you mad about, sIx? " not 'mad' as in angry ... 'mad' as in .... oh forget it. now, on the subject of angry I'm Damned, DARNED angry that Guests can post to threads here in the Madcat. biLL
[this Guest is actually a regular member. Perhaps it would care to take credit for the post?] |
|
03 Mar 13 - 06:30 AM (#3485751) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: gnu Perfectly okay for guests to post IF they follow the rules. I can understand why a guest might not know the rules. It's up to the mods to decide if an OP by a guest is acceptable and I think they were correct this time (as usual). Of course, there is even an exception to the exception but it's all in the newcomer guide and discussed in a number of threads. I hope you feel better now, six. "on the subject of" loony toons... thank goodness! Otherwise, I would be mad. |
|
03 Mar 13 - 06:45 AM (#3485759) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: kendall Where else can you go and get educated and insulted at the same time? |
|
03 Mar 13 - 02:11 PM (#3485904) Subject: RE: BS: why Mudcat? From: Stringsinger Most people who are interested in folk music have a social conscience, a base for being interested in folk music to begin with. Mudcat offers a chance to exercise that "conscience" by allowing views to be expressed that you won't find on other blogs particularly run by Google or Outlook Express. On Mudcat, no holds barred discussions can occur and many are illuminating if sometimes contentious. Folk music in my opinion is not just about "scalp collecting". It's about being involved in a process that includes views of a social nature. |