From Max: State of the Union Address

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: GUEST,Former member/current occassional drop-in
Date: 13 May 06 - 01:50 PM

Another time honored Mudcat tradition: deflecting criticism by claiming that legitimate criticism is the equivalent of complaining and whining. One of the many blindspots many here have, which only serves their self-interests (ie keeping their playground open for business).

But most of us old timers who left this place behind have always valued is the music resource. We left because we didn't want a BS playground with 6th grade cliques, but a valued music resource that was being developed and maintained to a useful standard, much the way other online music collections and archives are.

We left when this place became the domain of the catspaws and Little Hawks. When this place became all about members vs guests. When this place became obsessed with internet nicknames and stolen internet nicknames. When jerks like Little Hawk and catspaw were rewarded and applauded for their ability to hijack music thread after music thread.

And then, Max put the inmates in charge of the asylum.

I wouldn't expect anything more from those of you who are still regulars here, except contempt and a condescending dismissal. Because you care a whole lot more about having daily access to your BS playground than you do about the music.

And just because there is now a BS section doesn't mean the BS has been taken out of the music section. Not by a long shot. All non-musical content should be shit canned. Period.

I mean, who the hell really cares what giok said four years ago about pubic hair?

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: pdq
Date: 13 May 06 - 01:46 PM

Nothing Max says will change Mudcat one iota. What he does, like block Martin Gibson, will change things a little bit. Maybe.

Mudcat's problem is that a few people, Mudcat's "Dirty Dozen", do almost half the posting.

Here is a plan:

               > Anyone who has posted over 10,000 times should be banned from posting for one month.

               > Anyone who has posted over 20,000 times should be banned for two months.

               > One relentless overposter is just short of 30,000 posts!!! That person should be:

                                     a) banned for three months

                                     b) heavily fined and made to pay for the computer space he has wasted

                                     c) hanged

                                     d) sexually abused by Chongo Chimp

                                     e) all of the above

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 May 06 - 01:42 PM

You know this is just about the only thread where no poster has asked for it to be closed (yet)...........

Subject: RE: BS: Is closing threads censorship?
From: Little Hawk - PM
Date: 09 May 06 - 07:36 PM

Anybody out there listening? Close this fucking thread. Do it now.

You can quote me, Roger. ;-D

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 28 Apr 06 - 12:43 PM

Hmmmm.
Name-calling?
As far as I can recall, the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is generally quite careful not to directly refer to anybody by a name.

--------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 23 Apr 06 - 01:35 AM
>snip<
Why should anybody bother with you, Roger? You're just a self-centered, puffed-up buffoon who has made a mockery out of himself. I wish it were otherwise, but you're really a sad case.
-Joe Offer-

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dunno, Roger. As I see it, I sometimes disagree with people, but I'm not combative. It's the combative stuff that causes trouble at Mudcat. and I do believe that needs to be controlled.
Joe Offer,

Shambles, go whine somewhere else, or maybe we should start threads about you and the sheep or something.
Joe Offer
-----
But Shambles believes in this sort of thing, so I think that maybe this would be a good opportunity to smear his reputation. Shambles, I'm sick of you and your shit
Joe Offer.
------
Ah, Shambles - we make an exception for you, since you seem to think it's a good thing to have personal attacks. We want to keep you happy, after all. Your whining is so annoying.
Joe Offer
------
Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted.
Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass.
-Joe Offer-

Max - are posters really now expected to provide financial support for being subjected to and to watch others being subjected to the above and similar examples of personal abuse set over many years by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team?

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 May 06 - 01:33 PM

There are two reasons for complaining. One is because you want to make things better, and think that you have suggestions to make that might achieve that, and that complaining is a good way to bring them about.

And the other is where the complainer has a temperamental preference for kicking up a stink for its own sake, or as a way of being noticed.

Wouldn't it be great if the latter sort just pushed off somewhere else?

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: artbrooks
Date: 13 May 06 - 01:26 PM

Max, I'd go along with Cruiser's suggestion. My own Mudcat link goes directly to the "Threads" section, and I rarely look at the home page where the "Support Mudcat" link is. Yes, I know that you can get to the same place by clicking on the fish-in-a-banjo, but right now (on the threads page, it says "Buy Mudcat CDs", so other folks might now know that.

By the way, please don't let the 3 or 4 whiners who have joined this discussion (multiple times) put you off. Non illigitimi carborundum est.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 May 06 - 01:22 PM

You may have missed the following editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh this thread.

Hi, Mo - PermaThreads are just edited threads, so the information in them is supposed to be edited and kept current.
-Joe Offer-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: BS: Proposal for members only posting of BS?
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 22 Feb 06 - 03:59 AM

Well, I actually get more flak about what what we don't delete, than about what we do delete. Generally we follow the same guidelines we've always followed - we delete personal attacks, threats, racism, and Spam - but we do our best to allow people to express their thoughts and opinions freely. I suppose some of those opinions are objectionable, but if they're not outright hateful, we usually don't delete them - much to the chagrin of some Mudcatters.

For a long time, I opposed members-only posting, because I didn't want to scare away visitors or make Mudcat a closed, exclusive club. And yes, we have a lot of that exclusivity already - I feel like an outsider myself when I go into the "BS" section. But our nastiness has been too much, and it has gone on far too long, to the point where it's impossible to carry on an intelligent discussion on most non-music subjects nowadays. I have three Mudcatters on 100% review much of the time, and I have to do partial review on a number of others, and then I have to deal with all sorts of petty complaints about so-and-so saying this or that - and I deny about half the deletion requests I get, and undelete a fair number of messages deleted by JoeClones.

And despite our best efforts, Mudcat is no longer a pleasant place to hang out and goof off or have a good discussion. So, I think something has to be done. Ebbie's suggestion about putting Secret Santa in the music section is a very simple answer to one major objection I had to members-only BS posting - duh, why didn't I think of that?

So, short of members-only posting, what can we do to bring peace to this place? I'd rather have another solution, but I haven't been able to think of one.

-Joe Offer-

Dear Max

Can you confirm if the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team's latest proposal to restrict the BS posting to members only and to 'review' all the Guest posting on the Music section - is going to be finally accepted by you or not.

And if this not going to happen (in the near future) - is our forum going to continue to be divided by and subject to the current imposed and personally motivated censorship actions that the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team has recently and publicy admitted have failed to impose the required 'peace'?      

Or is there now going to be a change to this approach? An end to anonymous editing button perhaps?

Without answering these questions - any requests for financial support are really asking posters to sign a blank cheque. Especially any posters who may wish to provide some support and to continue posting as a guest - but who may find themselves excluded - should this proposal be accepted.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: GUEST,Former member/current occassional drop-in
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:57 PM

It is my understanding (and someone will correct me if I'm wrong, which is fine) that there was a marriage of Max to the DT because of Max's expertise in data mining.

So why have we never heard anything about Max & Dick's plans to create a truly valuable resource with the DT by cataloguing it in a way that any legitimate music collection is catalogued, and data mining the forum for musical content and cross-referencing it to the collection?

And no, I'm not saying only the Library of Congress or people with a Masters in Library Science are up to the task. But this is a job that requires a considerable amount of expertise to do it well enough to make it a truly valuable resource. That just isn't happening.

People here are absolutely obsessed with controlling one another's behavior.

What ever happened to the reason why people come here in the first place? It sure as hell isn't to read Little Hawk's "wisdom" or katlaughing's published works.

I do still come here occassionally looking at the resource. The other day, as serendipity would have it, I stopped in to look something up, and stumbled (early on) upon Max's thread.

As someone who was disgusted by the turn the DT & forum took much earlier on than those who reside here now (hint: catspaw is your Martin Gibson's behavioral grandfather), I stopped in to see what, if any, improvements on the DT & data mining the music information in the forum were being proposed.

I was not surprised to see Max didn't even mention the DT or the mining of music information. It was all about him attacking certain posters, admonishing his moderators, and telling people to behave responsibly.

Well, thank you Max. Our second grade teachers could have said the same thing.

Just proves the site ceased being about music a long time ago.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:55 PM

"Generalizations are ALWAYS wrong"
Bzzzzt.... sorry.... care to play again? :-)

" I now recognise them as such"
So you took responsibility for your own reactions and emotions... what I'm asking is why can't/don't others?

"in this instance, no response"
Their silence is way more telling than my questioning....

I will continue to lay way more 'blame' (not the best word for what I'm after, but I'm undercaffinated) at their feet than at someone like Martin Gibson.....

After all, who is more foolish? The fool, or the fool who takes his blustering seriously?

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: kendall
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:53 PM

Homeless, do you know how hard I tried to make you laugh. Finally, at our last meal I came up with something that made you lose it and that saved my reputation.

I also wonder why the malcontents still come here.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Cruiser
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:49 PM

Max/Joe:

Please make the PayPal section easier to find as a quick reminder for folks like me that forget contributions. I know it is within the Mudcat Support Page, but a direct link on the main Lyrics & Knowledge page would help.

I'm actually one of those members who forgot how long it had been since I contributed to this site with a PayPal donation.

Joe is doing a fine job. A little less editorial on why threads are deleted or modified would be good. Set standards we all understand then quietly make the decision behind the scenes based on violations of those standards...no explanation needed, except perhaps by PMs.

The BS section tarnishes the value of the music section and should not be on the same page. Is there a permanent way to Filter out that page? I've tried, but it comes back. I must admit I will still occasionally visit the BS section for decent posts on interesting threads, but would prefer in on a separate page.

Thanks,
Cruiser

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Homeless
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:41 PM

Clinton, whether you call it a fight or asking questions, it amounts to the same thing. You are trying to prompt a response in someone; they are responding as they see fit - in this instance, no response. Each of you have different preferences; you are trying to persuade them to change. Maybe I should have used the word battle rather than fight. And I reiterate, the repetitiveness is boring. Maybe it's time for a change of tactics.
"It's simply one convention of the structure of internet discussion" Dog, you, of all people, should know better than this. 1) You can't lump the internet together as if it's one thing. Generalizations are ALWAYS wrong. 2) this isn't your average group of internet lusers. r u shure th1s 1s b3tt3r? Granted, we're not in high school anymore (*please* don't remind me how long I've been out), but isn't that all the more reason to give up the "I know you are but what am I" mentality?
"I am honestly curious how and why people would let this sort of thing get under their skin at all." Go out and find the book "Unlimited Power" by Anthony Robbins. In there is a section on state and triggers. Read that section and you might then understand. I agree with you in that no one else can hurt you, but there are a dozen or so names that have become triggers for me. I now recognise them as such, but before I read that book all I knew was that just seeing a particular name, not even reading the post, would make me feel worn out.

Kendall - hi back at ya.

Susan, yes, the old threads are a resource. But they are *not* ever-growing. They only way for that resouce to grow is for new threads to be valuable as well. It is the personal touch I miss, but not as you see it. Honestly, I couildn't give a rat's ass less how politely someone creates a link. What I'm looking for is personal insight and/or experience. If I were to go visit, say, Kendall, and I asked him a question about guitar, he might just walk to a bookshelf, pull out one book, hand to me and say, "Everything you need, and then some, is in there." Or he might engage in an afternoon of relating stories and jokes, eventually making me choke half to death on my dinner over some particular witicism. The former is the equivalent of posting a link, the latter is the creating of a resource.
Also, when I ask a question it is usually pretty specific. I try to communicate exactly what information I am after before posing the question. If someone posts a link, I really resent wasting the time to read thru the whole reference if it only lightly touches on the subject in question. I'd rather waste the time minimg someones experiences.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:36 PM

I think we have got your message former member, you despise Mudcat as it now is, and you enjoy telling us so.
Question: If you despise it so much why do you drop in at all? Occasionally would seem to be too often to visit, given the way you feel about the site.
Giok

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Cruiser
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:31 PM

Guest, FM/CODin:

Mudcat is a musicological treasure, although admittedly without the scholarship of the Library of Congress' AMC.

I agree, the junk threads need to purged or put in the BS section (I would completely remove the BS section or put on a separate page/site).

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:31 PM

As an expert thread drift-er, (s that called a hijacking attempt?) it is bemusing to see what this thread has turned to. It began with Max's message(s) to us and then our reactions to it and has now morphed into 184 1/2 other subjects and nuanced sub-subjects.

Here's to the Cat- Long may she live!

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: GUEST,Former member/current occassional drop-in
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:20 PM

The Library of Congress' American Memory Collection is a national treasure. Not Mudcat.

But people here believing it to be the other way around explains why this site has so little value in the world of online music collections.

It is a mess. It would take 40 years just to search the damn forum to find information now.

All those Shatner threads and burp and fart jokes to be waded through instead.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: GUEST
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:19 PM

Art... have you tried adding the mudcat's URL to your 'Trusted Sites', or, even 'Local Intranet' Zones...?
Cookies have been known to fester out in 'Internet' land

Just a thought.

Pretentious or no, cruiser, many would pick it up that way.
And given all the 'Cash for Peerages' scandal, its something that can be abused itself.

There are too many Pharassees in Mudcat already

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Amos
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:17 PM

I think people of good heart, as I stated, start out by granting someone like Martin actuality in full. After all, there is a live person pounding those keys, one with real and human feelings thoughts and concerns, much like you, or me. The trust is abused when the errant soul at the far end --in response to some disagreement or irritation -- pours out scatological characterizations or other guttersnipe talk just to add weight.

ZThis is like walking down a crowded city street and instead of moving lightly through the crowd, with little "Excuse me"'s, throwing elbows and kicks into anyone who gets in your way, because after all he's not part of the circle of those you know and trust. It's a bass-ackwards way to approach interaction with friends not yet made. It implies, instead, that you see the world as enemies not yet showing their true and harmful colors.

This is one of those self-fulfilling postulates about the nature of other people that can color your whole life, and should therefore be chosen wisely. Gibson's animosity to so many indicates his wisdom failed in this regard.

A

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:07 PM

Mick, Those CDs will go out to you probably on Monday. Sorry for the delay. Had to take care of Carol's medical treatment in Rockford first, and she is my only way of getting them to the post office. (Maybe Wednesday is more like it.)

All the best,

Art

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:56 AM

*Cross post*

"hijacking threads with supposedly clever posting"

The key word there is supposedly.....

Perhaps a "No hijacking" rule could be implemented here? Is that a possibility? (First, define it eh?!?! heh) At least in the REAL threads.... People can still do what they like in the BS section... Might that elevate the discourse at least in the music threads, to add a level of seriousness that might be missing?

I'm just thinking as I type....

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Cruiser
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:52 AM

Max:

I contribute to 6 sites on a regular basis, at least yearly. A Mudcat contribution is due from me.

I suggest you place "Supporting Member" next to each Member's name who contributes. Not to be pretentious, but just to show these people value this site enough to help keep it online and as a simple "Thank You" recognition.

I know many people are unable to contribute because of financial constraints, but many of us can afford at least $10.00 per year for the information gained here. I've found valuable info on songs through Mudcat I have been searching for over 40 years.

Thank you for the bookkeeping information...that helps in making the decision to contribute.

It would be a musicological tragedy to lose Mudcat.

Cruiser

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:51 AM

"to grant them full being in the world"
Sure... But do you take offence to everything that anyone on the street might say?!?! What about what people you see on the news, half a world away? This is the bit that boggles my mind.... Why oh why give ANYONE the power to wound you with their words?!?! When you can very easily protect oneself, and save ones REAL interaction for people who prove they are worth it?!?!   I think I mentioned elsewhere, I ONLY give people I know and love that power over me... Cause I know they aren't going to use it, unless I really need it....

"why should the burden be thrown on people whose only error was to take you seriously"
Because very person is responsible for their OWN emotions... No one can MAKE you feel anything unless you chose to allow them to make you feel something... It's a choice... a responsibility...

" treat people as ciphers on your screen -- your fatuous "this is cyberspace, not real space" argument"
Well, I for one don't believe it's fatuous in the least... I'll wager that 99.999% of people online are doing some kind of role-playing with their interactions... And given how ephemeral the connection is, one MUST assume that things are NOT what they appear to be in cyberspace, until you learn differently.

Lemme put it this way.... What does it matter what some "nick-name" says about your "Nickname" on some backwater message board, in the vast wash of cyberspace?!?!    I guess THAT is what I well and truly do not understand... And I'm not asking to be facetious or argumentative in the least.... I am honestly curious how and why people would let this sort of thing get under their skin at all.... I mean, it's not like, for example, Martin Gibson is real... It was a nick-name, thinly painted over a balloon here in cyberspace...

And even if there was any substance behind the veneer, how does it really matter? Is Mudcat, and what anyone says on it really capable of affecting your life in such a drastic manner? Why?

I guess my big question is, why, how can people take this place (And by inference ANY internet messageboard) so seriously?? That might be what I don't understand. Mudcat is NOT the people you've met in real life though it may have facilitated the initial contact. It's nothing more than, as William Gibson put it, a consensual hallucination... a fabricated reality. If it went away, people who met here who wanted to stay in touch with each other would still keep in touch.

That's way more real than this place, isn't it? Or is it just me that sees it that way?

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: GUEST,Former member/current occassional drop-in
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:48 AM

I've read this entire thread now, and I have to say it is yet another example of what another poster referred to as a "more heat than light" thread. I don't come here much anymore because both music and BS threads are like that now.

I have never seen this place as a community. I describe it to other music afficionados as a forum dominated by a couple of cliques, separated by the Atlantic Ocean.

The list of obnoxious posters, as others have noted, is quite long here. Another problem I have with this place that cannot be fixed is the regulars, both members and guests, but mostly members. And those I find to be most obnoxious are being applauded on this thread, or thanked for being clones.

The tradition of hijacking threads with supposedly clever posting was started by the catspaws and Little Hawks.

As to money donations, I wouldn't send a dime to this place. If there were some way to wrench control of the DT away from Max and Dick, I would contribute to it in a heartbeat. They have squandered the only valuable resource here. Max, et al put all their effort into controlling people in this bogus forum, and nothing into developing the DT and harvesting the forum for music related information.

They have always been in over their heads when it comes to the DT & valuable music information in the forum, and arrogantly and stubbornly refused help of people who could have gotten the job done for them.

This place is nothing more than a sandbox on a playground for a group of adult children with serious social skill deficits.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: BuckMulligan
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:34 AM

Well put Amos. In 20+ years online, I can't count the number of times "it's the internet" excuse has een used for "boorish, ill-mannered and sociopathic" behavior. Doesn't work - while it's true that people do indeed behave that way when they think they're hidden behind a screen name and excited phosphors, that's not an excuse for anyone behaving that way. It's the old "Geez Ma,, all the other kids are doing it..."

"On the internet, no one knows you're a dog" - but everyone can tell if you seem to be an asshole.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: wysiwyg
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:28 AM

Homeless,

I always enjoyed your posts. It would be great to see more of them.

About this part of your post:

The magic was lost somewhat when there were few, if any, responses to a question thread, and many of those were just links to a past thread or other websites.

It IS a bit too Googly, isn't it?

But the old threads ARE an ever-growing resource. Is it the personal touch that you miss, as a learner-- knowing that a specific someone is in it with you? Would it be a better approach, I am wondering, if a suggestion to review a particular past thread were done with more personal input? Such as, "You might find [member name]'s post of [date/time] helpful in [thread link]."

Would that link you more effectively to the person whose post is recommended? Would it encourage you to not only look at that thread, but particpate in it actively?

Sometimes posts like you describe are made by a member who does not share your instrument, who just is trying to be helpful in a more general way (who may also be or feel ill-equipped to talk music).

Another approach would be for you to see the recommended thread, choose the post in it that most closely addresses your interest, and PM that post's contributor to request renewed discussion in the thread. Something like, "I was looking at your post in the old [thread name], and I'd like to discuss it further-- could you look at my post of [date] in that thread?"

Sometimes a thread lacks replies just because it isn't seen when someone with a similar interest happens to come in to look at the day's thread list-- so a PM would help in that regard. And, that way the thread continues to hold information that might help others later, and it builds community too.


What do you think?

~Susan

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Amos
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:19 AM

In all honestly and curiosity, I don't understand why you allow it to BE so painful...

Some folks see others on the Forum here as real people, initially -- they extend their imagination to see it that way, as a courtesy to the other guy, to grant them full being in the world. When instead of real communication, abuse is returned, intended to shock and hurt, that can often succeed. The alternative is to treat people as ciphers on your screen -- your fatuous "this is cyberspace, not real space" argument. Gibson used the same argument as a rationalization for his nastiness. But doing so nullifies the people who post here.

It is boorish, ill-mannered and sociopathic, usually, especially when it is done badly.

It is always possible tot hrow out the "suck it up! get tougher!" response to this sort of statement, instead of learning manners. But why should the burden be thrown on people whose only error was to take you seriously by mistake a couple of times?



A

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: kendall
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:19 AM

Welcome back, Homeless.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:17 AM

" I think you'd be better off choosing your fights"
Mostly all I've done here is ask questions... questions that people apparently are either afraid to or unable to answer....

"the repetitiveness becomes a bore"
Just trying to get answers is all....

"It's not going to change until Max is ready"
And as long as Max has people lining up to fill his beer fridge, he's never going to be ready to change either.... If mudcat is half as popular, as traficked as we're supposed to believe then this beg-a-thon should be completely unnecessary....

Notice over the last few years, we only ever hear from Max when he needs money....

"The frequent, apparently off the cuff, one shot snipes at a variety of people only look like defensiveness."
Well, it isn't.... It's simply one convention of the structure of internet discussion.... This isn't highschool.... it isn't necessary to always write in paragraphs....

"It was disheartening to see someone start an -*****- thread, and immediately be hit with all bad jokes"
Yes... yes it is.... too many people here only THINK they're funny

" I'd love to get together for an afternoon and buy ya a drink or two."
Only if I can then buy you a drink or two....

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: frogprince
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:06 AM

Okay, y'all; one deadbeat who has been hanging around here for a couple of years has just sent off a check; your turn.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 13 May 06 - 11:05 AM

Good post, homeless: Good to see you again.

Jerry

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Homeless
Date: 13 May 06 - 10:55 AM

I, too, am one that used to spend a lot of time here but rarely stop in anymore, and post even less frequently. Why? Because Mudcat has lost its magic.

But I can define what the magic was, to me. It was the synergy of people posting on topics in a cooperative effort, building on one anothers' experiences. I'm not really a musician, and not a singer at all, so I never could contribute to a thread in a meaningful way. But as a instrumental learner, I could get questions answered. The magic was lost somewhat when there were few, if any, responses to a question thread, and many of those were just links to a past thread or other websites.

It was disheartening to see someone start an accordian (or whistle or banjo or ...) thread, and immediately be hit with all bad jokes, possibly humourously intended but insulting comments, etc. Not the nurturing environment that a student needs.

More magic went away with the incessant harping of either the same people or the same topics. Shambles, Shatner, Temple of the Golden Globes, john from Hull. Yeah, I could skip past the threads/posts I don't like, but it became so much easier ust to skip past this website entirely. Why spend the energy to pre-edit what you read when it takes even less energy to skip everything? At one point, I would loved to have had a killfile. If I had, I might still be checking in regularly.


Clinton - as much as it pains me to say it, you would probably be one of those added to the killfile. At least (relatively) recently. I think you and I are a lot alike, and I share much of your ideals and opinions. But I think you'd be better off choosing your fights, both location and execution. You've become one of those that the repetitiveness becomes a bore. We all know your points by now - stricter moderation, better software, banning guests - but to re-read the same shit, over and over, is tiring. Add to that that your arguements are falling on deaf ears. How long until you realize it's a lost cause? It's not going to change until Max is ready, and he's shown over the years that people complaining isn't going to change his mind.
For me, it isn't so much what you say, but how you say it. Max mentioned you arguing, and you took exception to it, but I have to agree with him. Expressing a differing viewpoint is fine. But write a well thought out paragraph, with a topic and supporting points, rather than just quoting a line from someone else and disagreeing with it. The former is discussion, the latter is arguing. Choose one person, and engage them in a debate. The frequent, apparently off the cuff, one shot snipes at a variety of people only look like defensiveness. The frequencly with which your respond only exacerbates the situation.
You have made some very worthy posts in the past, but what I've seen lately isn't up to your standard. Yes, everything changes, but that doesn't mean it has to change for the worse. Maybe you should step back, examine your recent posts and attitudes about the 'Cat, and reevaluate if it's worth the effort. All that being said, if ever I'm up north of the border, I'd love to get together for an afternoon and buy ya a drink or two.

Would I ever become a regular member again? Maybe, if the general environment became one of helpfulness and cooperation rather than the combative one that I perceive now.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 13 May 06 - 07:17 AM

Roger stop digging!
G.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 May 06 - 07:11 AM

The split between BS and non-BS does have a down side, in that it encourages people to imagine that there is a rigid barrier between music and the rest of life. Personally I think the best threads are the ones where muasic and song and other matters interpay, so that the thrread cold equally be on either side of this barrier.

But on balance it has worked well enough.

However I think that any further move towards having further divisions woudl be a serious mistake. I doubt if it will happen, and I'm glad for that. (I also doubt if the changes that Shambles keeps havering about are going to happen. Though his insistance on droning around like an bluebottle in a locked room might in fact make them a lot more likely to come about, if that is seen as the only way of stopping the persistant buzzing noise...)

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 May 06 - 06:58 AM

Am I right in suspecting that most people are like me in not looking at permathreads because we dont understand them? (I'll try it now)

A discussion forum that is freely open to the public is a simple enough concept.

So is the website that this forum is part of.

But there is confusion when attempts are made to combine the two.

If contibutions that need some control or any editorial judgement to be made are confined to the website - a lot of the confusion and argument about what the point of the Mudcat Cafe is and what is the point of the open discussion forum - would be avoided.

Max and whoever he choose to help him are of course free to run the Mudcat Cafe as they wish.

But the discussion forum that is currently freely open for the public's contributions, will be what the public make it. And if some posters do not like what their fellow invited guests post - no one is forcing them to read or respond to any of this and they are free to go elsewhere.

It is that simple so why complicate it by needless intervention when it is accepted that this will never make everyone happy? What this has resulted in, is apperently making everyone unhappy.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 13 May 06 - 06:57 AM

On the other hand, maybe a Van Dieman's Land permathread wouldn't be such a bad idea. Then there would be one more reason for not looking at it.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Mo the caller
Date: 13 May 06 - 06:37 AM

I agree with paddymac, or maybe I'd go further.
Lets replace BS with a local events section.
Am I right in suspecting that most people are like me in not looking at permathreads because we dont understand them? (I'll try it now)

---

Hi, Mo - PermaThreads are just edited threads, so the information in them is supposed to be edited and kept current.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 May 06 - 06:37 AM

I've got to tell you, I'm sick and tired of some of the crap that I've seen lately.

Martin Gibson: you have to pack up and go. Your knowledge and contributions are valuable, and it's a shame that your sociopathy prevents us from hosting you or taking you seriously anymore.

Shambles: I just don't care anymore. You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell.

Joe: Do I need to separate you two?
Max
-----------------------------------------------------
Max's request seems a fairly straightforward to me.

I think you are being a little selective in your public judgement both of me and this statement.

For there would be no need for Max to suggest - Do I need to separate you two? - if in fact he had already done this. So this statement is not straightfoward at all.

I am sorry to dash anyone's hopes but I have not be banned (yet). And as as I have done nothing to justify such a ban (such as indulge in repeated abusive personal attacks, name-calling, stalking or bullying - I don't expect to be banned.

While the choice to continue as a poster on our forum seems to be left up to me, I will make that choice on what Max's current and future intentions for our forum are. I would never have been interested in posting to a private members club and have no wish to do so now - if our forum is to be changed into this.   

But until Max informs us whether the latest proposed restriction is to be imposed or not - I (and others) will not be able to make an informed choice.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: sian, west wales
Date: 13 May 06 - 06:32 AM

I think we should have an International Mudcat Day - early summer, perhaps. Something along the lines - enthusiasm, expectation, fun - of Secret Santa, but we'd all be Santa and only one Santee (Mudcat Central). It would focus attention, anyway.

And perhaps, while we're talking about moving ads to the top (which wouldn't bother me personally) might Mudcat Central consider putting some sort of very obvious links (on each page) to the various payment channels, be they Paypal, Friends of Mudcat UK, or whatever else? Make it easy for impulse contributions if any of us have reason to feel suddently flush.

siân

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 May 06 - 06:27 AM

O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us
It wad frae monie a blunder free us
An' foolish notion...

For the attention of Shambles.   And also Clinton.

(For the rest of Burns' eloquent pitbull of a poem, with an interesting critical analysis, see here.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 13 May 06 - 06:22 AM

Shambles,

Max is not a political leader at the service of the general public and you're not Jeremy Paxman. If he doesn't want to answer your question, he doesn't have to, no matter how many times you repeat it.

DC

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: treewind
Date: 13 May 06 - 06:05 AM

If by "certain entities" you mean the taxman,
(a) you're never guaranteed to be under their radar
(b) Max can easily demonstrate a loss, though having to do the bookkeeping would admittedly be a tedious extra chore (been there, done that, still doing it)

Max - I've sent in a small donation.

Amos and Little Hawk - for some reason your postings (anywhere in Mudcat, not necessarily this thread) stand out in my mind as some of the most inspiring and enjoyable snippets of human wisdom. Thank you, and I hope we get to meet sometime, though I can't imagine how.

And to the nitpickers who don't know when to stop - well I guess there's no point in saying anything. Nobody's listening and neither are they.

Anahata

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 May 06 - 05:53 AM

You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site.
Max

Max - Perhaps you can re-state for all of us what you consider the real point of the site is and what role our forum plays in this?

And if - as it now seems the real point is to encourage personal judgements of the worth of posters and to raise money - perhaps it would be fair to inform our forum what is the future shape of the forum they are being asked to support - by answering the following questions?

For many years I have supported what I have gathered from your public statements is the point of our forum. My efforts to establish the following answers have now earned your public judgement of my worth and your displeasure. I think it would only be fair and possibly result in more (financial) support - if these answers could be supplied to our forum? Then all posters will know if they are being asked to (financially) support the open forum it has always been - or supporting a futher imposed restriction to a private members club?

Can you confirm if the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team's latest proposal to restrict the BS posting to members only and to 'review' all the Guest posting on the Music section - is going to be finally accepted by you or not.

And if this not going to happen (in the near future) - is our forum going to continue to be divided by and subject to the current imposed and personally motivated censorship actions that the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team has recently and publicy admitted have failed to impose the required 'peace'?      

Or is there now going to be a change to this approach? An end to anonymous editing button perhaps?

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Chip2447
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:44 AM

Being the hack musician that I am, I can rarely assist the Cat with lyrics or chords or musical folklore. I've been around here for 6 years as a member and before that as a lurking guest. I've met people here that I would gladly buy a pint or three for, and others I wouldn't cross the street to shake hands. I used to love the Mudcat, I found it a valuable resource. That was then, this is now.

If it counts for anything my vote is to file 13 the B.S. section, restrict Guests from posting (for the most part, obviously, Art and a few others are exempt from that clause) set up ONE moderator name for the mods to use, give them set of "rules" to follow, and apply them equally across the board. Honestly, I find Shambles posts less annoying than Shatner and Punch the Horse threads, only slightly though. Move the Google ads up top, especially if in doing so they help pay the bills, they are easier to find and should attract more attention.

Just my 2 cents worth.
Max, thanks for the Cat and all you've done for her. Here's to reviving her to what she used to be.

Chip2447

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Beer
Date: 13 May 06 - 12:06 AM

Max.
For the last week I've seen this post and wondered why it was not at the bottom where the B/S threads belong. Finally tonight I got curious and opened it. thank you , thank you, thank you.
Thank you for stepping forward. I'm not a contributor but that doesn't mean I won't be. I have come very close to signing off but something just keeps me here. Seeing that I am late arriving I will reserve most of my comments until I have caught up on the threads. As of a few minutes ago I am up to Alanadit- May 6th- 5:06 so there is a lot of reading left to do.
However in what I have read so far. i will make the following comments:
1) Robin........ You express much of what I think and feel.
2) Maryanne ..Yes a lot of threads have been more heat than light. Well said.
Yes the Isles have taken over. And good for them. Were to God...D..wrapped up in politics instead of music. Lots of disagreements here I'm sure.
    Max... I've just finished a good bottle of wine. Instead of going to bed and doing what a husband is suppose to be doing. I'm on the computer trying to contribute.
I also have made friends here. Peace (where are you.), Bobad who scored for me in supporting the Folk festival I am part of. The Duck'who stayed over last year from England. Oh!, I reside in Canada.
Max. Maybe another title to attract some of the other participants. Or better still p.m everyone.
Beer
Only member from Quebec. I think!!

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 12 May 06 - 11:46 PM

"I don't think Max wants to draw the attention of certain entities"

You don't think that this place is WAY under their radar?

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 May 06 - 11:36 PM

Oh, yeah...good point.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 12 May 06 - 11:31 PM

I don't think Max wants to draw the attention of certain entities by having regular dues, etc. If people 'give spontaneously', then it's just a gift, and he doesn't have to maintain such a high level of bookkeeping.

If someone else organises a regular 'gift drive', I don't know the finer legalities of that, but no one really wants to make unnecessary legal hassles for Max.

Don't Panic!

Just a tiny heads up...

Robin

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 May 06 - 11:18 PM

Sounds good, Mick.

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Big Mick
Date: 12 May 06 - 11:12 PM

It seems as though most agree that some sort of regularly scheduled fundraiser is a good idea. The benefits thing was just free thinking, and from the PM's I have gotten and the posts, it seems not a good idea.

I think this is an idea whose time has come, and I will start a dedicated thread on it next week. I hope that participation will be widespread among the members.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: kendall
Date: 12 May 06 - 11:09 PM

"The greatest of benefits will not bind the ungrateful." (Aesop)??

Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: paddymac
Date: 12 May 06 - 10:59 PM

Well, when you throw the door wide open, you never know who, or what, might come strolling in. The open door, IMHO, has been, and continues to be, a key contributor to the vitality of the goings on. True enough, some folks get downright tedious, but I think most of us learn how to ignore them and their posts. I have scant patience for the anonymous blasters, and wouldn't care a bit if they were censored, but I wouldn't want to see a ban on "Guests." Many of us once were guests. I haven't had the time the past couple of years to drop in as often has I have in the past, but I cherish my visits when I do get to come. And I especially cherish the many friends I have made here, even the ones I've gotten to know in flesh and blood. The Mudcat is a national treasure (not just, thought. It really is a global treasure and resource) and a priceless resource for anyone with a genuine interest in the music. I very much enjoy the diversity becase, in its own way, it helps to shrink the world.

Maybe it might be helpful to start a third catgegory of threads - "Events of Local Interest"

It's been too long since I kicked in to the pot. I will do that soon.

Love - to the whole famn damily.