Does any poster really think that this changing of selected thread titles through anonymous imposition has anything to do with the reasons stated?

As the required clarity can be achieved by first obtaining the originators agreement - the insistence on imposing these changes as a first and only resort - is pretty obviously a more about attempts to exert control than to achieve clarity.

I think it is done to and does add clarity.

I do not see the need for consultation with the originator. The way Mudcat works, ie. making changes to clarify without consultation is the same as the Annexe and folkinfo work and in fact the same way as just about every board I ever vist works and I don't see complaints on any of these. All I see is pretty well just one person making a big issue oo this board.

Do you visit other boards? I'd love to read your comments on this subject elsewhere.

The only other place I know you visit is the uk.music.folk newsgroup. That can't have renaming as it is known here but a poster may take it upon themself to change the title for the leg of a thread without consulting the originator. This typically happens when an topic drifts considerably and it is felt by someone a new title is appropriate, commonly to "new subject (was old subject)".

How come I have never seen you challinging such an individual as you do Joe Offer here over such "impositions", or demand to know whether they had emailed for the originators concent.

I think you show no consistancy and rather than thinking ~"is pretty obviously a more about attempts to exert control than to achieve clarity.", I observe (and suspect if you visit other web forums) your complaints are strangely confined to Mudcat and your problem is a poorly disguised personal problem you have with others here.