"You have couched your argument under the umbrella of it being helpful to the Mudcat management. But Joe Offer has said further up the thread that people are welcome to post under whatever name they like, so long as it's consistent. So whose agenda are you really working to?"

My agenda is the diminution of what is reckoned by many in the UK folk scene to be a major and growing problem. (I've canvassed opinons on this, just as I have on many other issues that I think are important).

You see, this is my old day-job. I have a long history of advising large corporate managements about communications issues, on a professional basis, and I have a long history of saying things people don't necessarily want to hear. And some history of effecting some unexpected improvements by use of carefully reasoned arguments. (Quite a few in the folk world, too, actually).

There are two different but related points I'm making here, please let's not get them muddled up.

1) LOG IN

"Very few message boards require you to have an account to read the posts"

Hang on a mo - I'm suggesting that everyone should be required to log in to POST (not to read, goodness me - that WOULD be a VERY bad idea)!! This would, I believe, help the team - because it would remove the Un-Moddable Guest problem, while helping to change the character of the site in a subtle way; reducing confusion, sock puppetry, guest trolling and so on, and so promote a calmer, more generous atmosphere, which should benefit all users, who are all now members. And IF the team did want to ban someone they could do so properly - which they can't, easily, now.

Knowing you can always continue as a Guest removes the need for members to think before they post. There's no threat of exclusion at the moment, and I believe that's one of the key reasons that some people behave so badly so often.

As Paul says, and as I've said above, some of the worst offenders are members. But why do they feel they can get away with it? Because they so often do. A firmer hand on the tiller would be a benign influence. It's not a major change, it's commonplace on other forums, and it sends a crucial message about what the community expects (one that is conspicuous by its absence now).

Joe may not be convinced of this at the moment, but I'm hoping to change his and Max's minds (in case you haven't twigged I write here on this topic as much for them as for you dear readers).

(And I do write to them direct as well, of course).

2) REAL NAMES

I'm not suggesting that this should be compulsory, and I've explained why. I just think real names should be encouraged, specially for people in positions of power, for the reasons I've given. Again, it's about sending a message that people should behave here as they would in real life.

Yes, the team seem happy with the status quo on this as well. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't suggest changes if we believe, as I do, that they will make this website stronger by minimising unpleasantness and so allowing more people to post more freely (a lot of people have gone away thanks to the fighting), and so make it more useful to the wider folk community and an unqualified benefit rather than a potential problem.