Shambles, when we give an answer to your question, why not respond to the answer, rather than restating the original question and acting as though we had never given you an answer? Why don't you write one message with a systematic description of what you want, and what you're complaining about - When you've finished that, go find the answers we've given already, and post them alongside your questions.

It's really difficult to communicate with you because you keep repeating yourself, going around in circles, and ignoring our answers. Therefore, the temptation is either to ignore you or to scorn you.

I think I've answered almost every one of your questions, time and time again. Mick and Jeri and some of the other volunteers have also given you answers. Many of our answers have not been to your liking, but we have always given honest answers. We have no reason to be dishonest. While most of your arguments have validity, they are usually simply a matter of choice. When we have chosen an alternative path, you continue to argue, as if yours were the only way. It's hard to argue back because you're right - but so are we.

For example, I have chosen to make editorial comments in brown, indented, directly under the message asking me a question. You don't like that practice, and you've stated that time and time again. Your reasons for not liking it are valid - but this is just a matter of choice and judgment, not right and wrong. You speak as though every editorial act here is a grievous wrong, and that's just not the case. It's simply a matter of choice and judgment, done to achieve a goal of comfort and civility.

Same for identifying the individual editorial acts done by volunteers. Sure, we could do that - but we don't want to, and we have good reason not to. We edit sparingly and only when we feel we have to - to remove a hurtful or damaging statement or to stop a battle. Publicizing our actions and opening each to discussion would serve to call attention to the very problems we are attempting to deal with quietly, and it would serve to feed our trolls' craving for attention - that's just what we have to do. Our editing is like a game of poker - if we have to show our hand, we lose.

As for thread closure, sure it could be called censorship - or not. whatever the case, its effect is the mere inconvenience of having to post a continued discussion in another thread - and yet it seems to work to cool things down. It allows serious participants to continue their discussion, while making it inconvenient for the troublemakers to steal the stage.

It has been years since you were able to ask a new question, and I'm really getting tired of having to come up with the same questions to the same answers. You seem to have a file of all of my statements, anyhow, as indicated in the Gallery of Mudcat Quotations and in so many other threads. I'm tired of being held to answer for things I answered long ago. Besides, it's really kind of spooky to think that somebody is keeping a record of every statement I make.

-Joe Offer-