To me, the problem isn't with the few troll/flamer anonymous guests. As Jon Freeman pointed out, a number of Usenet folk music (and other) newsgroups, have learned to largely ignore those messages. As some of us have pointed out before, other forums which are unmoderated, open discussion groups are self-policing in this regard, and usually do just fine.

But that means regulars come down on one another (the only ones you can hope to have any influence over on-line) for showing poor judgment or lack of restraint re: responding to trolls/escalating vitriol/flaming those they disagree with. What is happening here is the members regularly flame anonymous guests for entertainment. Which gets the ball rolling every time. As long as you have members flaming guests with impunity, it ain't gonna get better folks. Because flaming is flaming, no matter who is doing it. And a lot of regulars admit to doing this and enjoying doing this in this thread.

It seems to me, the real issue is a whole lot of Mudcat regulars (both guest and member users)have problems with self-control, AND problems accepting they have no control over what others say about them.

And please, can someone explain to me why so many people posting in an unmoderated discussion forum on the Internet believe that some big daddy should come to their rescue when they are personally attacked/flamed, and make that mean man go away and leave them alone?

Bizarre stalking claims are increasingly being made by some obviously very paranoid individuals whenever someone makes a rude or insulting remark about them, or some one of their Mudcat buddies.

Pardon my blasphemy but, deleting that Morticia thread--what the hell was that all about anyway?

I read it, wasn't offended--there were no really abusive obscentities, nada. Totally a non-issue. Yet, the minute it appeared, we had the usual suspects and their Joe Clones tripping over each other, screaming "sexist stalking"--same things as virtually yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. The stampede to censorship took on a life of it's own.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I see this sort of "defending members against personal attacks" forms of censorship to be incredibly insidious, and increasing at a frightening rate, while the worst sort of offensive, hateful stuff is tolerated, condoned, and rewarded by the Mudcat community and the site maintainers. Its a damn slippery slope. And as the recent racist trolling shows, if you don't stand for something, you'll end up standing for anything. Mudcat is a really poisonous environment this week. Really poisonous.

I'm afraid I don't hold out much hope for Mudcat at this point. Too many regulars lack the necessary self-control, self-awareness, and personal maturity it takes to maintain a good on-line forum.

Which does make it something of a magnet for Usenet kooks masquerading as members and guests. How else can you explain the way so many problem members get away with behaving badly with impunity from both the community and the site maintainers? If you are a member, well, one of the privleges apparently is to be able to engage in troll/flamewar behavior and suffer no repercussions for it because Mudcat membership has it's privleges, after all...