But what is the problem? Is there one?

Too many threads? Too many posts? Too many threads on subjects that some people do not like?

Before the attempt is made to fix something it may be a good idea to see if it in fact broken. That people are going round fixing things without bothering to find out if it is generally considered to be broken, and doing it IN MY NAME, is what I see as the problem.

Is less than one thread a week over a two year period on aspects of the same music related subject, too many? For that is the situation and figure established with the PEL threads. But this fact has not prevented a witch hunt and a mind-set verging on hysteria, that every attempt made by the posters to address the various concerns expressed, has not mangaged to alay. But surely if you don't care for the subject, don't open them, for they are (mostly) clearly marked.

Jeri's post continues the myth that an issue seems to have gotten out of hand, without ever establishing what that means or that less than one thread a week over two years IS in fact presenting any more of problem than the same number of threads over the same period of time, on other subjects.

As far as the large list of PEL threads - yes, a lot of threads have been started on the PEL issue. We could combine some threads, but that's very intensive and no doubt would be used as evidence against us. It would be possible to move the list somewhere, but that would also be evidence - "I can tell you don't want anybody to find it way down at the bottom like that!" Same with completely deleting the grouping. It's not up to me, but I don't believe it's reasonable to change the entire structure of Mudcat for one particular issue that seems to have gotten out of hand regarding number of threads. On the other hand, maybe the PEL threads could be broken into subgroups.

When your strict rules are seen to present a problem by an unforseen response to one issue, it may be an idea to re-examine those strict rules, rather than critising the large forum response, or number of words on that perfectly valid subject.

And again without indentifing the exact problem, the suggestion solution comes in. To break them into subgroups! They are already broken into subgroups - they are called threads................ Some joined up thinking is called for at his point, not drawing around the wagons in defence and shooting from the hip. This post expresses perfectly the paranoia that is evident in those who refer to themselves as 'we', as a group distinct from 'us'.

The only real problem with the PEL threads, apart from matters of personal taste is that having that many related threads at the top of each thread and then the list of posters (400 or so posts to the petition thread for example), is that folk lose the will to live before they ever get to the discussion itself. I gave a out a link to one of the PEL threads and the person I gave it to, gave up, telling me that the site was not working as all they saw was a list of titles and names....

I fail to see this as a difficult problem. A single link to a thread where a full list of all the related threads can be found would solve this small problem for all subjects that may prove to have many related links.

Despite these problems, The Mudcat has made a huge inpact on this issue and has been directly responsible for creating the team and informing the individuals whose efforts have resulted in many changes being made to the legislation. Something I feel all those on the forum can and should be proud of. I would like to give thanks for all the positive efforts made and those who are just putting up with the PEL threads. There will still need to be a few more yet, I fear.