We are told by one poster that most of the problems in the Mudcat are caused by 20% of the people here. I guess that 20% would be the "bad guys". But we are told by the thread originator that the people who are causing the problems are the "good guys". I would say this conundrum demonstrates the need to examine how people are designated as "good guys" or "bad guys" in the first place. In the case of the "good guys", we see that it can't be their behavior, because we are being told that they are behaving badly. It must be something else that earns them this designation.

Conversely, in the case of the "bad guys", how did they get that designation if they aren't the only ones who engage in bad behavior? Again, it must be something else that earns them this designation.

This need to put people into these kinds of categories is a part of the architecture here in the Mudcat. And once someone is placed in one or the other of these categories, it really doesn't matter what they ever do or don't do from that moment on. It's the label that most people will see rather than the actual person and their behavior. And the way they are treated by others (those who fall for those kinds of social dynamics) will be determined not by how they themselves behave or don't behave, but rather by which label has been applied to them by those to make those designations.

This kind of social dynamic is very unhealthy, and is the cause of most of the headaches that fora with these kinds of social structures experience. Get rid of this kind of social structure, and the problems disappear. Make it about the behavior and not about the person.