Fixing links, putting in the line breaks, consolidating EXACT DUPLICATE THREADS (not threads that a clone or Joe has deemed repetitive)--those are the things I understood were being done by Joe and the clones.

I have understood the unspoken "rules" of Mudcat to be that those are the only sorts of tasks done by Joe and the clones, and that decisions about what gets deleted based upon content alone, was a decision that was made by Max.

It is clear Max isn't involved with the daily operation of the forum now, and hasn't been for some time. So my guess is that Joe now makes those decisions, and has instructed the clones to delete here and there, consolidate there and here, based upon content. That is a very big change.

The new "thread management" system being implemented now, ie the selective deletion and moving of posts and threads based upon the post/thread content, is the slippery slope to censorship. I agree that the word 'censorship' is a powerful, potent word. But that doesn't mean it doesn't apply here.

And why the secrecy about who is actually moderating the forum? In an open, friendly forum, one always knows who the moderators are, so why is Joe insisting on keeping the identities of the clones a secret?

Answer: power, control, and a lack in self-confidence about what Joe and his clones are doing. Not necessity. Only fear could be driving this paranoid set of rules. And the fear driving this engine of change Joe and his clones insecurities. They don't feel confident about what they are doing. I don't think they should feel confident about their abilities to moderate, because they really don't seem to be up to the task. I agree Jeri, that moderation isn't that tough for people who can do it well. I've been in a number of forums where it is done beautifully, and one never even notices that it is being done. But one of essential elements to good and even excellent forum moderation is not bearing grudges about certain posters who are frequent and/or regular contributors to the forum.

It is easy to say that we shouldn't use the names of the people who we perceive are the problem. But that tactic often shields and protects the guilty. Let's face it. Everyone knows that Beedubya/Bruce, CarolC, The Shambles are all members in good standing in the forum. So it seems to me that painting them as guilty parties publicly, as has been done here in recent days with these bullshit "consolidation" and "deletions" (don't use the word "censorship"!) games being played by Joe and clones, is just patently unfair, and selective prosecution.

Some people here are being held up as examples, who are guilty of nothing. Absolutely nothing. And I do include myself in that list. The two threads and posts I have voiced an objection to having deleted/consolidated, were the BS thread providing a link to a Vonnegut interview, and a thread on the Justice Dept's prosecution of sellers of drug paraphenalia. One was serious, the other was intended to be humorous. Neither were about Iraq or PEL. The justification used was first that the subject matter of the threads was "frivolous". When people challenged that, the justification given was that I was a "problem guest". I'll admit to being a thorn in the side of many here, but I'm not any more guilty of being a problem than the anonymous guest who was behind the Drumcree threads. A bit of a double standard? You bet. Finally, when people like Lepus Rex challenged the whole "anonymous guest as nasty character" thing, the justification became that I hadn't provided enough context for a reasonable and worthy thread discussion to ensue. That too was challenged, most recently by Beedubya/Bruce.

Considering that none of the above justifications have been legitimate, I think it is easy for at least some here to conclude that these "changes" aren't in the best interest of the forum. Liz said she did want to know who the clones were. That isn't an unreasonable request in a moderated forum. Well moderated forums always have the information visible and up front on who the moderators are, so they can be part of the solution, not part of the problem. Here, with the secrecy that is rampant among the Mudcat inner circle and a few in the ring surrounding them, secrecy about the "identities" is paramount.

The obsession driving this, once again, is rooted in the identity issues that are so central to the problems on Mudcat. As has been pointed out, there will never be a solution that satisfies those who are so deeply disturbed by the internet identity issues in this forum, who have become the power behind the Mudcat throne. Because even if this forum were made member only, there would be no certainty about all identities used by members, just like there is no certainty about all identities used by guests.

As has been pointed out so often in this forum, the problem isn't with the identity labels typed in the from line, because that will never be sorted out. Too many ISPs generate random IP numbers, and won't answer questions from site maintainers about the identities of their users. So the identity issue in Mudcat is a false one to begin with, because that is just the reality of the internet.

The problem here truly is with a few Mudcat members who now have power members haven't had in the past. Sadly, those members, including Joe, are obsessed with the identity issues, and use them to drive a wedge between users of the forum. Some of them, though few of us except the privleged few, know who the clones and the power behind the throne are. And just as Lepus Rex has said repeatedly, they are the ones driving "the changes" being made now. Their grudges against me may very well be driving a lot of this. We have no idea which clones are now allowed access to the files and logs that contain information about individual poster identities. And my guess is, we never will. But the people who are now calling the shots haven't impressed me with their ability to set aside any personal feelings they have about specific users of this forum, and moderate judiciously and fairly. Rather, everything I've seen so far indicates that they are regularly overstepping their bounds and tripping over one another to "get back" at certain posters they have it in for, and will use the protective cover of the new rules as justification for their personal vendetta campaigns.

Welcome to the new and improved Mudcat.