Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 27 Nov 05 - 09:16 AM

As for the un-named (we all know who you're talking about, Shambles... how disingenious) Mudcatter who started the thread on Racial No-No's, AZIZI exhibited several qualities you might emulate:

   1. When challenged about particular statements she did not:
       Endlessly ignore them with no response
       Insist that she never writes anything that isn't exactly
       the way it should have been worded
       Respond by cut and pasting someone's elses post, as proof
       she is right
       Whine that she gets no respect
      

   2. She did:
       Rephrase and clarify some of her statements that were
       challenged
       Aknowledge that perhaps some of her opinions were just
       personal and perhaps (Gasp!) wrong
       Indicate an openness to reconsidering some of her own
       opinions

And your response to her admission that perhaps her attitude on banjo needed revision? A playground "Nyah, Nyah" attitude, cutting and pasting her sincere admission as further proof that you are right.

If all of these qualities in the Racial Non-No's thread make AZIZI "nice" I don't feel so bad about being called "nice." Not that you would ever call me "nice" to my face...

Jerry

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Nov 05 - 07:01 AM

No soldier shall die in vain, as long as there is perpetual war.

DH

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Nov 05 - 05:18 AM

Racial No-nos

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Nov 05 - 05:14 AM

Is there such a organisation as the Constant Riders Under the Double Standard? For I see that many of the usual suspects are again gathered here and blindly and pedantically stumbling around under it for mutual support.

I fear the drive on our forum that has seen – what posters say – be overridden by who is saying it, has now reached a critical level. Those posters who are generally considered to be 'nice' can posts the most dangerous things and set the most negative examples and have these ideas supported. And can freely post abusive personal attacks - as long as they are directed at certain easy targets who are considered to deserve such treatment.

When those who are not now generally considered to be 'nice, can post requests for equal treatment and freedom of expression for all and have these attacked and be subjected themselves to abusive personal attacks. Even when they do not respond in kind to the many abusive personal attacks they are regulally subject to.

All of this when we have anonymous volunteer fellow posters who are supposed to be protecting all posters from this but when some of them also indulge in making these abusive personal attacks. These fellow posters are also supposed to protect all posters from racist posts.

Under this double standard - we have just recently seen an example of one the most racist and divisive threads ever started on our forum. Many contributors even commented that this thread was a 'good one'. I rather suspect that what they meant was that the person who started it was a 'nice' person so however uneasy they may have felt about some of what was being said – the 'nice' person saying this things should be supported. And that anyone who posted to disagree with what this 'nice' person was saying – must be truly 'nasty.

In some respect it did turn-out after a struggle to be – if not perhaps a good thread – but a better one. Mainly because of the sensible way that those who posted to disagree with the main points conducted themselves and made their arguments. This enabled the dangerous premise of the thread to be turned into a sensible discussion and the double standard to be at least questioned.

It's wise to question both your foe and your friend.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Nov 05 - 04:23 AM

Or perhaps this one too?

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 26 Feb 05 - 11:25 PM

A dipshit is the offspring of a jerkwad and a fucknuts. It's in the fourth tier of profane vocabulary.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Nov 05 - 04:21 AM

How about a stylistic consideration of this one also - and choose again to totally miss the point?

Subject: RE: Gallery of Mudcat Quotations
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 24 Nov 05 - 02:06 AM

Dear Roger,
As I understand it, most people don't want you cluttering up yet another thread with your anti-censorship campaign. Post what you want in this thread, and stay out of the other one.
Be happy that you're tolerated as much as you are.
Thank you.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 09:29 PM

LOL, Cluin!!

But that song was much too brief!

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Cluin
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 08:41 PM

You're a mean one, Mister Grinch!

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 08:37 PM

It seems to me rather a well crafted tirade, what with its alliteration, and its rhythmic qualities.

Clumsily punctuated, true - it should have rerad:

Shambles, you are a self obsessed, self interested, self important, supercilious, pompous, priggish, paranoid prat. Deluded, devoid of humour, dreadfully boring and disgustingly repetitive.

Considered stylistically, it contrasts very well with the stuff that some people here seem to feel necessary to spew out when they get crossed. I think Shambles could well actually feel quite pleased to have elicited a denunciation like that.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 08:17 PM

Is there such a thing as Professional Victims Anonymous?

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 07:09 PM

well, gratuitous tediosity, anyway...(I HOPE there's such aword!!)

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 05:30 PM

Roger, bleep for gratuitous vulgarity, and I mean that sincerely.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 05:22 PM

A little swaybacked, though. *G*

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Peace
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 04:38 PM

LOL

Never been told that before. Thanks for makin' my day.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 04:34 PM

Nice ass, Peace.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Peace
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 04:31 PM

A picture worth a thousand words.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 01:27 PM

Roger, I wasn' going to say anything further but you have caused me to speak again. No. You have not. I CHOOSE to speak again. Don't you see the difference? One cannot be "caused to say something. We can be given reason to do so, we can be encouraged to do so, we can be goaded into doing so- but the decision to do so remains with US.

Have you ever been at a youngsters' ball game of some sort where a parent keeps carping and harping - loudly - on how the coach is performing his job? Within a VERY short time ALL of the people around that parent are sick and tired of the PARENT.

The coach is the one designated to do the job. So, if you want to be the coach and not the parent, get your own job.

And that's what I have to say about that.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 07:11 AM

Ah but, Roger, I can decide something for myself without feeling the need to impose my views on others.

*Smiles* - Ebbie are you saying seriously that I will not be able to provide many past quotes from you containing your views on what I should or not do? Perhaps you would like to provide us with one or two of them first - to save others the effort?

But the point is rather finally accepting that what others choose to post is out of anyone's control except theirs. That all this encouragement of posters who feel themselves qualified or have the need to post to only pass judgement upon what their fellow posters choose to say or do or to personally abuse them - is causing a bigger problem than letting posters like you decide for themselves.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 06:30 AM

Subject: RE: Gallery of Mudcat Quotations
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM
Date: 15 Sep 05 - 03:56 AM

Roger once again you use this thread wrongly in my opinion, it is for sometimes wise, and some times funny 'quotable quotes' which are thought worthy of perpetuation by people drawing fellow Mudcatters attention to them, and hopefully they will share the posters appreciation of the quote.
IT IS NOT a vehicle for you to pursue your paranoid campaign against perceived slights and affronts to you and your deathless [sic] prose PLEASE Roger will you for fucks sake give it a rest or better still take your obsessions elsewhere, because everybody I speak to about it is as fed up with your tripe as I am.
Giok

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 06:27 AM

Who closed the first one?

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 26 Nov 05 - 06:10 AM

"Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 04:34 PM

If anyone is interested - all this needless silliness
(and two new threads) has been caused by the relegation the B/S - imposed closure (and subsequent re-opening of the following thread.

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=68361&messages=175"



Needless silliness, mmmm. Who started this thread?

G

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 07:49 PM

Ah but, Roger, I can decide something for myself without feeling the need to impose my views on others.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 06:20 PM

Ebbie I rather agree with that - but the whole policy of the imposed censorship that is now inflicted upon is based upon it protecting posters like you and I from abusive personal attacks.

If you think that such posts are acceptable or there is no need for this imposition to protect us from abusive personal attacks - why have you not said so before? For it now sounds as if you are rather in agreement with me?

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 06:06 PM

Actually, I would not, Roger. Someone's opinion of me is not an abuse of me- I can try to change his opinion if it is important to me- for instance, if someone really believes that I am a liar based on what I have said here, but if someone, as is more likely, calls me a windbag and uninformed, out of my depth, unable to admit I am wrong, unable to just let it go- and if I keep going without acknowledgment or an effort to change, follows up his or her opinion with stronger and more vituperation, that is still only an opinion. It can hurt my feelings but it cannot hurt me. And I would hope that at some point I will be asking myself what I have done or said that gave someone that idea of me.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: bobad
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 06:03 PM

Too much alliteration
Makes a fella mean

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 05:54 PM

Respectfully Ebbie I rather suspect that you would in fact be asking for the services of those who have volunteered to protect you from such abusive personal attacks.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 05:46 PM

LOL Roger, if someone were to describe me as "a self obsessed, self interested, self important, supercilious, pompous priggish, paranoid, prat. Deluded, devoid of humour, dreadfully boring and disgustingly repetetive" I'd be out of here like a shot! That is, if I respected the opinion of the person who thought that of me.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Once Famous
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 05:32 PM

How about, [bleep] (for gratuitous vulgarity)"fuck off, douchebag?"

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 05:25 PM

My dear and fair minded Ebbie - I am sure that if I were to describe you as a self obsessed, self interested, self important, supercilious, pompous priggish, paranoid, prat. Deluded, devoid of humour, dreadfully boring and disgustingly repetetive - that you would of course simply accept the fault was all yours and such a judgement was perfectly acceptable towards someone you have never actually met?

The description may be a very accuarate one but perhaps this is hardly the point?

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: GUEST,Sleepless Dad
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 05:18 PM

Any chance we can get the clones to retitle this thread "Shambles self-absorbed anti-Mudcat Permathread"?

At least the title would be accurate.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 05:17 PM

It should occur to each of us that sometimes things are not "caused" out of blue skies by others' actions but rather in response to our own bulldoggedness not to mention, bullheadedness.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 04:34 PM

If anyone is interested - all this needless silliness (and two new threads) has been caused by the relegation the B/S - imposed closure (and subsequent re-opening of the following thread.

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=68361&messages=175

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 04:23 PM

What every the word 'noteworthy' may mean to me - does not appear to matter. For it is not a matter for my judgement but of some anonymous fellow poster who has also judged that unlike the other thread fo 'More Noteworthy Mudcat Ouotations - this one is relegated to the B/S.

Subject: RE: More Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 24 Nov 05 - 05:15 AM

Does this qualify for a 'collectible, insightful, pithy, especially well-turned, humorous or enlightening bon mot by another Mudcatter?


Subject: RE: Gallery of Mudcat Quotations
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM
Date: 24 Nov 05 - 04:21 AM

Shambles you are a :-
Self obsessed, self interested, self important, supercilious, pompous priggish, paranoid, prat. Deluded, devoid of humour, dreadfully boring and disgustingly repetetive.
No need to reply.
G.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moved from other non-Shambles-centric thread. --JC

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 04:19 PM

.....it goes without saying.....

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: gnu
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 02:56 PM

I am shocked!! This is a shambles!!!

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Skipjack K8
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 02:52 PM

Shocking grammar and spelling, true.

Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 01:48 PM

What does 'noteworthy' mean to you, Roger? It seems to me that it is something that is worthy of beng noted. Which is just what you did with Giok's post.

Subject: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles
Date: 25 Nov 05 - 01:23 PM

As the following does not appear to judged as qualifying for inclusion as a 'collectible, insightful, pithy, especially well-turned, humorous or enlightening bon mot by another Mudcatter' - perhaps it will qualify for inclusion a thread with this title? Along with other examples of less than noteworthy postings?

Subject: RE: Gallery of Mudcat Quotations
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM
Date: 24 Nov 05 - 04:21 AM

Shambles you are a :-
Self obsessed, self interested, self important, supercilious, pompous priggish, paranoid, prat. Deluded, devoid of humour, dreadfully boring and disgustingly repetetive.
No need to reply.
G.