BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: GUEST,fred miller
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 11:40 PM

The Villan, didn't you start this thread? Was nothing much going on in the world then? It seems rather odd, and a bit rude of you to introduce such a serious, shaming, but rather unrelated announcement, now, into a rather silly hypothetical discussion you proposed.

It reminds me what I like and respect about some of the 'rudest' matter that gets posted. Often when we suppose ourselves to be speaking in a reasonable and polite and inclusive way, we just really aren't. Polite language often excludes, even precludes different fundamental ideas and attitudes. It says, in effect, To participate you must accept our premises and speak from where we have placed you in our scheme of things. And that to very much disagree you must, much to your disadvantage, explain your entire other paradigm, and wholly account for youself--all of which we don't plan have much patience for, anyway. We'll nit-pick you to death before you get started.

That's why I suppose some people signal their point of view rudely and crudely. They don't care to apologise at great length for not sharing a more generally accepted view. You have to read the subtext of this. Haven't you ever seen a boardroom full of soft-handed sons of bitches politely being utterly obscene? Anyone who doubts that polite language can also be obscene and completely offensive, even much more so, is unfamiliar with political discourse, the daily doses of mendacity, or is simply not thinking about it, really. Or choosing not to. Some people, however open-minded they like to imagine they are, have just never had to hold their own mind when surrounded, have never really been the Other, but like to congratulate themselves for fake second-hand wisdom they've never had to actually learn for themselves.
   This is why I don't like smarmy political jokes (unless they're really good jokes) and why I would personally favor letting racist remarks stand, if there was a wider range of races participating--which I don't think is the case. As it is, it seems to me the best, slightly imperfect, somewhat compromised, but within reason, judgement is at work here, more or less.

   This is why I think I like the mess. To y'all, with love and squalor. Gosh darn it.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: GUEST,fred Miller
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 06:28 PM

Shambles, and Guest,

Guest, it does happen, sometimes. The thread Shambles cited was deleted entirely. There were a couple of similar over-lapping threads going also, one got a bit out of hand, and it was not the lost
library of Alexandria.

Shambles, I think I started that trouble thread you quote, wondering what happened to my last post. I got a reasonable and timely answer, and was satisfied with it.

I don't think anyone's saying everything is perfect, some people are saints, and your analogies are the root of all evil. I think people are taking a reasonable view of things, and registering some appreciation for considerable efforts made.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 05:56 PM

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 02:15 PM

A new level of terror

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Rasener
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 12:22 PM

This thread is so so so unimportant, compared to what is going on in the school in Russia.

At least 150 people are reported to have died in a school in southern Russia where Chechen separatists had been holding hundreds of hostages.
Dozens of corpses were seen outside a local morgue, and the number of dead is expected to rise further.

Heavy gunfire and loud explosions were heard throughout the morning as Russian troops stormed the school, in the town of Beslan in North Ossetia.

Russian troops are fighting to free children still held hostage.

That is so sickening.

Patch up yer difereneces maties and put your thoughts in to hoping these poor children are released unharmed.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: jimmyt
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 11:34 AM

Anyone want a drink?

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 11:31 AM

Subject: RE: Gallery of Mudcat Quotations
From: The Shambles - PM
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 11:00 AM

Aside from some minor distortions in time-measurement I would also mention that the slippery slide toward fascism is a tad more important than whether someone thinks I talk too much.

Amos, in the following thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 11:27 AM

routine deleting of entire threads and all their posts

doesn't happen - has never happened and probably will never happen

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 11:14 AM

Where is all the serenity? Pat our friend from Hull had said all what you said in just two words! And I didn't take any more notice of those two words than I intend to take of yours.

I get answers? Like you have answered this one? Perhaps If when YOU ever do answers such questions as the following and it gets debated, I and others can stop asking questions like - where have our contributions gone and why has my thread been closed? Until then or until this thread is deleted or some excuse is found to close this one - I will just carry on trying to find out or hoping that I will reading some calm and reasoned thinking and some evidence that will change my view.

Wolfgang et al - do you think that the routine deleting of entire threads and all their posts - to address a few posts judged to be 'offending' - is the best and fairest course of action to those Max has invited to contribute and who just happen to be unlucky to share this thread? And just because the volunteer in question "couldn't see spending much of my time sorting the wheat from the chaff?" [The full quote follows.] Do you think action should be taken to ensure that it does not happen again?

Now threads get deleted (along with perfectly acceptable postings) because certain people only - (this does not seem to apply to some) - are saying nasty things.

I must be the only one who ever had ever ask why a thread that I originated had been closed twice? This was because some fine folk that I respect, (including Joe) were (at that time) saying very nice things about me and when it was recently refreshed - some people continued to say nice things about me! Perhaps this thread can be re-opened - as there is no justification for its closure?

Why was my thread closed twice?

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: catspaw49
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 09:29 AM

Sweet Jesus sucking on a watermelon seed.............

First you want answers and when you get them you want to debate them because they aren't the answers you want. While they may be the truth and the reality of the situation, they do not match the Shambles answer so they are wrong. You have answers from the inside, outside, left side, right side, upside, downside, sunnyside, shadyside, trackside, wayside, east side, west side, all around the town. You even got an answer from a side of beef immersed in 55 gallons of cider.

From Jeri and Wolfgang to McGrath and Bill D, you have received all kinds of reponse but nooooooo.....not enough and they don't match what you want. Joe gives you a factual answer of exactly the reality of the situation and you don't like it either. More debate is required. Yeah, right.....my fuckin' ass more debate......If that horse you're beating gets noticed by the local constabulary, you'll be arrested for abuse of a corpse!

If I am being abusive to you....GOOD!!! Perhaps you will understand better because you HAVE to be masochistic!!! You have been told in a thousand ways that no one else much cares but you continue. Well that's okay I guess.....You deserve your opinion! But let's look at your last line in your last post:

"Enough judgements of our worth by volunteers who do not in turn feel they and their action should be judged by those they have volunteered to serve. Priviliged indeed. Max - as our creator and the site owner, is entitled to that sort of privilige - no one else."

Yeah, enough IS enough....on that I can agree! I could not possibly have said it better. It's beautiful and factual. Indeed, enough is enough. You then rightly say that only Max has the privilege and right to do as he pleases with certain threads. Again, I agree. As you rightly state, he is the site owner.

It seems though that Max, as is his right, has delegated some of these responsibilities to others that he trusts to handle them as he would. At this point in time he must be happy or at least satisfied with his choices. After all of this continual harangue on your part, he has chosen not to do anything. Do you think he hasn't noticed? Or could it be that he has and is wise enough NOT to respond to you, knowing full well that any answer that is not YOURS will be unacceptable to you?

Geeziz man, do you belong to any other forums?? If you can find one with much less moderation than this one, let me know what it is huh? Most restrict language and any kind of abuse to members. Most immediately kill entire threads that even begin to get out of hand. Debate of any sort about the judgement of the mods is not allowed and your membership can be pulled for almost any reason and at any time if you fail to play by the rules.

Your right to be right is irrelevant. Your right to be wrong is what gives you the ability to post here. Let it go. Or take it up with Max by PM. No one else can possibly give you the answers you want...but may fail to get.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 07:34 AM

You really have far to much time on your hands

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 06:50 AM

I was hoping that I could indeed shut-up. But I have read nothing that really even tries to demonstrate or convince me that I am wrong. I am still waiting.....

Wolfgang et al - do you think that the routine deleting of entire threads and all their posts - to address a few posts judged to be 'offending' - is the best and fairest course of action to those Max has invited to contribute and who just happen to be unlucky to share this thread? And just because the volunteer in question "couldn't see spending much of my time sorting the wheat from the chaff?" [The full quote follows.] Do you think action should be taken to ensure that it does not happen again?

For nothing seems to have altered even a small amount. The evidence is (generally) ignored, the 'system' is still defended as perfect and those involved in it are defended as saintly individuals who could not possibly be doing anything any better and the fault is all mine and that of anyone who may question this. And the only important issue at stake here is seen to be me or my analogies. Disagreeing with me is one thing but I do ask that folk do think long and hard before they attempt defend every last aspect of the forum's censorship, based mainly on the fact that I am such an unpleasant individual that everything I say must be wrong. Posting to disagree with me will probably just keep the thread going, as I will probably reply.

Will the routine deletion of entire threads continue because volunteers 'can't be bothered' - only to delete what they judge to be the 'offending' posts or in future will deletions always be confined only to the 'offending' contributions?

I ask the perfectly valid question once again in the hope that in the light of experience (and in time) there may be an answer provided and one based on the reality and that the question will be debated here.

I also provide the evidence here. Others can then decide for themselves if the judgement passed and editing action on imposed 'GOOFING-OFF' – i.e. the complete deletion of many postings – is really showing the required care. Just as importantly to judge where in the Official Line about racist and personal attacks does it say that 'GOOFING-OFF' and not being profound is cause for judgement and imposed deletion?   

Subject: RE: favorouter mudcatters, my last post,
From: The Shambles
Date: 22-Jul-04 - 08:20 AM
Did not see the thread so I can't judge if it was more nasty or contained any more personal attacks than many other threads that do not get deleted. Two questions. 1. Did any poster write to complain or request that this thread be deleted?
2. As many of the posts do not sound as if they were 'nasty', would if not have been better to just delete the few offending posts - rather than all the contributions in the entire thread?
Post - Top - Help Forum Home

Subject: RE: favorouter mudcatters, my last post,
From:
Date: 22-Jul-04 - 10:14 AM
As many of the posts do not sound as if they were 'nasty', would if not have been better to just delete the few offending posts - rather than all the contributions in the entire thread?
I had been wondering that myself actually.
Post - Top - Help Forum Home

Subject: RE: favorouter mudcatters, my last post,
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22-Jul-04 - 02:11 PM
1. Yes, somebody wrote to complain.
2. If I can delete just one or two messages without affecting the flow of the entire thread, I do that. If I can't, I either leave the whole thread intact or delete it entirely, or close the thread. It depends on a number of factors, including what Max and Jeff and I think of the overall value of the thread. "Favorouter" was just a goofing-off thread, and nobody spent much time composing profound messages. I couldn't see spending much of my time sorting the wheat from the chaff.
It's a shame when people mess up the fun that other people are having, but that's what trolls do. We do our best to control the trolls without affecting the rest of the people. It isn't an easy task.
If you want a copy of the thread, send me an e-mail.
-Joe Offer-
[e-mail]
Post - Top - Help Forum Home


The above posts are from the following thread on the HELP forum

http://help.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=2629&messages=15

Note that the devil - as always in in the detail. The reply refers to: "It depends on a number of factors, including what Max and Jeff and I think of the overall value of the thread". This answer implies that this is a matter for consultation but then it is clear that what actually happened was that this volunteer did exactly what they wanted based only on their personal jugement: ""Favorouter" was just a goofing-off thread, and nobody spent much time composing profound messages. I couldn't see spending much of my time sorting the wheat from the chaff."

Is this evidence of a conspiracy, is this such a terrible crime, is the volunteer a bad person? No of course not and it may not be the most pressing issue that faces us all, BUT:

We would all agree that censorship is a sensitve issue. If you are expected to defend something: What you are defending MUST be that. If it is publicly stated that consultation takes place before certain actions are taken this MUST happen - every time. If is publicly stated that ONLY racist and personal attacks are deleted - then it must be limited to this - every time. If it is stated that 'cut and paste' contributions that don't fit on to Joe's screen will be deleted - then this MUST always be the case!

When it is demonstrated (even once) that what is defended as happening is proved NOT to be he case, is it not a good idea to openly ensure that this is corrected and changed and certainly that it does not continue to be defended as being the reality, until it is? It needs to be reviewed in the light of these case and preferably IN the light. The more open and less secret - the better. As has been pointed out, this is a (friendly) forum. It is not the FBI or even the tax office. Passing judgement on the worth of invited contributions and imposing editing action based on that judgement is a BIG DEAL. Should any volunteer (no matter how nice they are thought to be) not accept that, or their responsibilty to set the best example - should they be in this privileged position. And why of why would they wish to remain anonymous?

I think that judging and imposing editing action upon posters who are just unlucky to share in a thread that is deleted for the 'offences' of others is just about, if not more 'nasty' as the 'offending posts' and I think, far more damaging to our forum. We can be encouraged to ignore these 'offending post'. However, it is difficult to ignore the fact that your contribution has been judged and deleted against your wishes - for 'GOOFING-OFF'?

Enough judgements of our worth by volunteers who do not in turn feel they and their action should be judged by those they have volunteered to serve. Priviliged indeed. Max - as our creator and the site owner, is entitled to that sort of privilige - no one else.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: katlaughing
Date: 03 Sep 04 - 12:55 AM

Well said, Wolfgang and Joe.

will the routine deletion of entire threads continue because volunteers 'can't be bothered' - only to delete what they judge to be the 'offending' posts...

will Shambles ever get over his *conspiracy theory?*

kat aka el joeclone who does NOT delete ANY threads

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: GUEST,fred miller
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 11:13 PM

I kind of like the way things are, not as an argument, or any right I have for it to be this way, I just like it. There are plenty of other moderated forums with less fuss. But without some fuss there is less folk, I think. Avoiding profanity is a choice someone might like, but some others may like at least the option to mimic what some real folk sound like. Or it may be how they get emphatic. So what. It's just old rutted culture bias that makes these words profane. They aren't, really.
   David Mamet's plays seem to me to demonstrate a corrosive effect of profane, unimaginative use of language, but at the same time, the plays are imaginative, and say Fuck! more often than any comparably serious literature I've ever seen. Twain was vulgar. I can't believe people call each other potty-mouthed. If it's lame, why not say that, if it's misplaced, why not say that. If it was funny or insightful you wouldn't care.
   I like taking up a torch with a troll every now and then, just in sport, because it really doesn't upset me, and it's fun to imagine somebody really like that somewhere, it's boggling, bracing to one's sense of what's real, like the sea, like having to chat with your in-laws.
I'm afraid a really warm, friendly, earnest feel-good folk forum would reinforce stereotypes of minority groups, like folksingers. I would miss the ire and groans of members who can't stand the dominant tone, sometimes, I like the (sometimes) strident voices of some of the conservative capitalist folkies (This land is my land, this land is my land) who challenge liberals to be liberal-minded in the hardest ways.
Although I use my own name and all that, I like fooling around a bit with what my personality is, online. It's a unique outlet, in a way. It's a great site, a resource, a luxury, sometimes a vice. I'm actually trying to quit, except for straight information.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 10:55 PM

Well, I was gonna post about lots of things, halfway down, but now have mostly lost interest ....

It looks to me as an amateur, that Martin (as one who has publicly boasted about just how much support he gets for 'saying it like it is') now has his drugs working for him... I was disappointed that he thinks that writing is so easy that he posts to a literary challenge thread without taking any care to check spelling, grammar, etc. Would he enjoy so casually tossing off his music without such relative amounts of care? I'll leave that line about what else he ...

Martin shoots from the hip - without much intellectual response, and for a time it was nothing but "potty mouth" - with no intellectual content exceeding that of a teenager. Sadly those who don't live their intellectual life that way, eventually may find it boring and leave, leaving only those who appreciate having him in charge of the manger. The whole point of human intellectual existence is to increase, and not go downward, but there are those who have to justify their lack of capability (and unwillingness to work hard to progress) by doing all they can, which is just to denigrate.

Martin claims to have contributed significantly to the music part of this forum. I have looked at the large number of his posts, and not found any. Can someone please post some links to those contributions, as I am always ready to learn, especially from someone who is self acclaimed to be a 'forty year expert' (I haven't found anybody else say they know who he is and praise his expertise). The music is why I came here in the first place.

Funnily enough I used to enjoy a place where folk music was played live, but there was also a 'smokers room' (I don't smoke) that I used to hang out in because of the stimulating conversation that wasn't always just on music. Since the legislation preventing smoking in public places, that stopped, and I get bored sitting down all night just listening to other people make music (I too can play CD's or radio if I just want to listen passively) - I can cope with being involved for much longer periods, but very much miss the stimulating conversation.

I do enjoy the stimulating conversations (and the silly stuff) here at mudcat as well, but people like Martin whose level of intellectual stimulation and repartee can't rise above 'ya mudder's mustache' ... well to misquote someone above - If the Foo Shits...

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Wolfgang
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 01:25 PM

I consider the rape analogy offensive, Shambles, for two reasons:

(1) To compare the pain of a rape victim with the 'pain' someone suffers when a stupid or offensive posting is deleted lacks any sense of proportion.
(2) Any editorial measure here is clearly a reaction and not a whimsical action. Something has happened before. So have a close look at your analogy and you'll see that, in consequence, you seem to think that a rape usually is a reaction upon some provocation. I would have thought that that old thinking 'she did ask for it' was no longer in use, not even in bad analogies.

If you complain that people jump on your analogies, perhaps the reason is that you have nothing new to say except saying the same all over again, each time with a worse analogy. You seem to think we do not understand yet, if you feed the same content all over again with slightly different words. We understand but have a different opinion.

The analogy I see is to a four year old who asks "But why can't I have an icecream" and after being told about half a dozen times still asks the same question. Four year olds do not use the repetition of the same content as a mean of argumentation but simply want to get on someone's nerves in the hope that they get what they want simply because the sound of them shutting up is such a nice change. There is one big difference: acoustic noise is more difficult to ignore.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Joe Offer
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 01:21 PM

Shambles, you've slipped into barracuda trial lawyer mode again. I don't mind giving information about our editorial policy and actions, within reasonable limits - but the Mudcat volunteers are not on trial and we have no reason to defend ourselves. There are no new questions in your latest messages, and I have no new answers.

If I move into a defensive mode, I am not a nice person - nobody is nice when they're forced to counterattack. I'm here to enjoy myself, not to fight - and I don't enjoy fighting. So, sorry, I have no answer for you.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 01:05 PM

I think The Shambles needs to start a blog. He quite obviously has a lot to say, and it looks to me like this particular medium is cramping his style a bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Once Famous
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 12:56 PM

Lady John from Dull

SHUT DOWN!

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 12:33 PM

Shambles-SHUT UP!

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 12:31 PM

I do wish people would stop climbing all over my analogy and go off and build one of their own......*Smiles*

Of course, when you put graffiti on a wall you obscure the previous graffiti. If someone doesn't like what's up there, they don't need to try to get someone to go cleaning the wall, they can just write something over it. It's all essentially temporary, provisional.

The Mudcat doesn't work that way. Unless it gets removed, it stays there. Someone paints a swastika on the wall, its there for good and all, unless it gets formally scrubbed out by Joe and Co.

The point I was trying to make here (and obviously failing badly) was that on our forum, perfectly acceptable posts get rubbed off along with the graffiti. When they have the bad luck simply to share company with 'offending' posts in threads that are deleted entirely, because our volunteers can be bothered to delete only the graffiti.

But in a world covered in graffiti and an internet that surrounds us with all manner of unwelcome things, yes it would be nice to find a place where we did not have to put up with any of this. But as always, there is a price to be paid for this illusion. Even with automatic filters - there is a danger of filtering out the good along with the bad and relying on the personal judgement of other human beings to do the filtering - is just as problematic.

Seeing swastikas may not be very pleasant but we do know the implications of such things and not seeing them or filtering them out, does not mean these things don't exist. We also well know that these sorts of things are mainly done with the sole intention to shock and cause a reaction. But knowing this does not appear to prevent us from obliging with this very reaction. A reaction that does not prevent it, but that only ensures that the same childish attention seeking tactic will be used over and over again.   

But the main diffence with grafitti on a wall is surely that even if if should be left alone to stay there uncensored - the 'offending' post is contained in a thread, on a discussion forum, on a website and on the internet? You don't have to log on, use that site, go to the forum or to open that thread. And if you do open it and you do then choose to read it, you can choose to respond, not respond or you can ignore it.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 11:13 AM

We've lost a good one

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 10:53 AM

>Badly -informed attempts to minimise what editing action is actually happening and why, are probably just as - if not even more harmful that any unfounded exagerated claims. But what would be the point of making any claim that you could not support with the evidence? What contention of mine do you doubt and what supporting evidence can you provide that the 'official line' - is what is always and only what is happening?<

Kevin said:
If there was a serious problem here about over-censorship and immoderate moderation, I think I'd definitely have run up against it - and I haven't. I've often looked at the Help forum, and the instances cited

It was exactly because of such ill-informed (if sincere) defensive postings that I have made a point of establishing the firm evidence that will support every claim that I have made here. For if such evidence is not supplied - the defenders (in a usually blind defence) will demand to see it or they will dismiss it as a generalisation. I have requested the evidence from you to support your claim and you have not provided any. But what exactly is your claim? Not that the firm evidence I refer to is not there - for you have already given evidence yourself here of such an instance.....!

Your unsupported claim is simply to minimise all these instances by saying they: don't add up to very much, so far as I can see.
Which to my mind is a bit like ignoring the pain of the individual victim and saying that just a little bit of rape never did anybody any harm, that rape is acceptable if you don't see much of it and shit happens!

Now that is a matter of opinion, to which you are (still just) entitled to express here. However it does not get rid of the firm evidence that I have provided that others can decide their own opinion from. It does seem to me, to be very much out of line with your caring thinking on so many other topics. Your care in this instance would seem only to for those who inflict the injustice that you accept IS happening - rather with the victim. The censor here has a choice as to whether they volunteer to place themselves in the position to be judged or criticised for imposing the censorship based on their judgement. The poster suffering the imposition - has no such choice, they just discover their contribution to have been judged and deleted.

If and when the poster's only offence is only to have the bad luck to have posted a positive contribution to an entire thread that is deleted, along with all its posts, because the volunteer did not judge that it was worth the time and effort to ensure that only the 'offending' posts were deleted - is just this one such example of "over-censorship and immoderate moderation," - just one too many????????

I would rather have many 'offensive' posting remaining on the forum (for ever for me and others to use our oen edit buttons and ignore) than accept that even one contribution invited here by Max, is deleted simply for lack of care.

I suspect that on other issues - you may agree. With all respect Kevin, is it not really up to the poster who has had editing action imposed upon them to decide whether this 'adds up to very much' and not you?

Many of the examples I referred to in the HELP forum (and elsewhere) and have followed up on, start off with a surprised poster asking where their contribution has gone, after having judgement and editing action imposed upon them. To my mind if not yours, these posters wishes do 'add up to very much'. In nearly every case - I have gotten rather tired of keep reading (after the damage has been done) that 'this or that volunteer should not have done this or that'. And that 'the correct procedure should have been this or that'.

We all screw up but we all hope that we learn from this and correct what is causing the screw-up. As I have said, I have given up long ago in expecting our forum to be free of censorship and concentrated on damage limitation, for if it is to be done - this sensitve issue has to be done right, it has to be seen to be done right, to have some clear and consistent aim and to be open to suggestion and review - if it is to be defended in any way.

We do all screw-up. It is as well to first accept that and to find out the true situation before setting out on a defence based mainly on the fact that the cock-ups you are defending were well-intended and caused by good people. I have never doubted this but I wonder why there needs to be all this secrecy.

However, If the postings of equally good people are being lost because volunteers cannot be bothered to sort out the 'offending' posts and continue to delete entire threads - I greatly fear that it won't be long before all the good people join Jerry, Art and the others. And you and I Kevin will be left here trying our best to talk to ourselves - whilst the 'vandals' carry on as before and our postings are deleted by unknown numbers of unknown volunteers, just because we were unlucky to post in the same thread as our 'vandals'.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 10:06 AM

Grok--

Hope you don't mean 1938. It need not be 1938.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 07:20 AM

Things go wrong sometimes, Shambles, and, given the number of threads and posts it'd be amazing if they didn't. Big deal. By and large this aspect of the Mudcat is managed extremely well, so far as I can see.

I have posted pretty often, and got tangled up in some fairly controversial threads, sometimes expressing opinions that some people disagree with very strongly. If there was a serious problem here about over-censorship and immoderate moderation, I think I'd definitely have run up against it - and I haven't. I've often looked at the Help forum, and the instances cited don't add up to very much, so far as I can see.

Anyway, I'm off to Wallingford Bunkfest now over the weekend, to get some music in. I think getting some music in is what we probably all need to do...

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 02:12 AM

Joe perhaps it is just time for a little 'reality' and less 'stonewalling'. If certain aspects of your editing policy have changed, it is not weakness to state this openly.

If some things have been reviewed and changed (even a little) in the light of experience, stating this would been seen and welcomed by most as a sign that some of our comments, suggestions and concerns will at least be taken on board, even if you may not personally be in favour of them.

At the same time as imposing your judgement and editing other people's posts based on this - you also have strong views about what you like and do not like and you feel you have every right to express these. That may be acceptable to some? However, it may lead posters to believe that only comments, suggestions and concerns that comform to yours have any chance of actually happening. Prehaps a few specific questions can be answered here?

Will the routine deletion of entire threads continue because volunteers 'can't be bothered' - only to delete what they judge to be the 'offending' posts or in future will deltions always be confined only to the 'offending' contributions?

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: GUEST,GROK
Date: 02 Sep 04 - 01:06 AM

We now have peace in our time. That's a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Once Famous
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 11:18 PM

No, problem with that.

Stay cool.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Ron Davies
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 10:52 PM

Martin--

Re: your post of 1 Sept 04 2:19 PM

I'm crushed.

But at least you realize about Nader.

Now perhaps you could read Rabbi Sol's excellent post of 31 Aug 04 6:36 PM on the Jihad thread, taking note of the references to George W. Bush and to the "Christian" Right, now hand in glove with Mr. Bush.

By the way, I was delighted to see your post on the "Do All Musical Acts Have To Sing?" thread. Couldn't agree more.

It's time to bury the hatchet.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Once Famous
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 10:09 PM

99.9% of any attacks that I do are responses to attacks against me.
I don't believe those threads get deleted but are left to see a response.

I just like to hit back harder and with more impact.

Maybe not the Christian way, but I don't have that burden to worry about.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 08:13 PM

We don't ask JoeClones to consult with Joe/Jeff/Max before deleting obviously problematic things like Spam, Hate messages, racism, and personal attacks. That just wouldn't make sense. If it's obviously a serious problem, we ask that they delete it right away, and then consult with Joe/Jeff/Max for approval of the decision. If the decision is not approved, the message/thread is undeleted. Messages are not deleted to punish anybody - they're deleted to stop a problem before it gets out of hand, which is why immediate action is required.

The anonymous volunteer who deleted the item in question should not have posted a message to defend his action. His error was in attempting to explain the decision, not in posting anonymously. If any explanation is needed, it should be done by Max, Jeff, or Joe. They're the ones who approve editorial decisions.

And as I've said over and over again, such deletions are quite rare. I gave a detailed analysis in the Help Forum a couple of weeks ago. Of course, Martin got two or three personal attack messages deleted from this very thread - but ordinarily we don't have to edit quite so heavily.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 05:36 PM

And there comes a time when protesting about a censorship which you see, and other people don't, becomes a bad example, and one that I'd hate to see followed by people with a different agenda. As it surely will be.

Just hold on - enough of this already - Perhaps Kevin you could provide some evidence for this bad example you claim that I am setting - this censorship that I see and which you (and others) claim not to?

If you really wish me to inflict this - I can certainly provide you with evidence for everything that that I have stated - it is not just a matter of my opinion, as I suspect you are well aware. A quick look at the HELP forum will probably suffice to everyone except perhaps those who are determined not to see.......

For a start - how about the volunteer whose action was defended when they even went so far as to post as a Guest to defend the editing action they had imposed on a 'cut and paste'? Taken without any prior consultation with Joe, Jeff or anyone else? Are you saying that I imagined this or is the attempt to be made to simply minimise this also and again? It may be possible that steps have been taken to ensure that this will not happen again but as it was so defended at the time, this seems somewhat unlikely and I have not seen any announcement that any measures or changes to prevent this have been taken. Have they, and what are they?

Badly -informed attempts to minimise what editing action is actually happening and why, are probably just as - if not even more harmful that any unfounded exagerated claims. But what would be the point of making any claim that you could not support with the evidence? What contention of mine do you doubt and what supporting evidence can you provide that the 'official line' - is what is always and only what is happening?

If someone has a less than positive agenda and a tough hide and wishes to follow my example. (God help the poor sod) - openess and the truth will always remain the best defence. Certainly a better one than having secret numbers of anonymous volunteers.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Once Famous
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 04:27 PM

masochists need not apply..............

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: MaineDog
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 04:25 PM

Let's have a separate quick-link to a category of anything-goes posts.
People who enjoy that sort thing should be free to indulge, so let them, as long as they are not disruptive.
Abusive threads should not be deleted, but moved into the proper place.
If you want to send me something abusive, kindly send me a link to it, so that I can decide whether to read it, and then I will know not to be offended if I choose to go into that place and read it.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 04:07 PM

"things we cannot change" means precisely the same as "things we aren't able to change."

The only posts we control are our own, and setting a good example is indeed the best we can do. And there comes a time when protesting about a censorship which you see, and other people don't, becomes a bad example, and one that I'd hate to see followed by people with a different agenda. As it surely will be.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 03:39 PM

Kevin get ALL of Wesley S's prayer right- will you please? It is important to get these things right if you are going to constantly refer to it. And yes it does apply to me too (again).

Grant our members and guests the serenity to accept the things they cannot change - the courage to change the things they can - and the wisdom to realise that this is a forum open to the public and that they have no control over the posts and ideas of others.

It is 'things they (or me) cannot change'. Not the things that we aren't able to change

Things are able to change and they do change all the time and sometimes you need a bit of courage to even make the effort to try and change them. When and only when you have made the effort - can you decide whether you can change them or not.

We may have no control over the posts of others and finally accepting this may bring some much needed serenity. But by setting the best example, we can have influence over the posts of others. As we can by setting a less positive one.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 03:15 PM

somebody who says "Ooh, let me do it...I WANNA do it!"

Sounds like a good description of a volunteer to me. My dictionary gives - make voluntary offer of one's service. But I am often wrong.

Especially considering "Whoever these volunteers may be and however many of them there may be." Isn't that nice...you don't know who they are and you've made up little personalities for them.

My statement is a simple fact. Joe, Jeff, you Jeri and Big Mick are pretty open about being known - others do not seem to be and there are unknown numbers of these volunteers. If stating that fact is considered as being not all that nice by you, it may not be considered as being nice by others. But, Jeri, I know you feel you have detected my dark secret, but I have made up no little personalities here for anyone at all, just the all the facts that are known to me.

I have no real interest in knowing who these volunteers may be nor any hope or wish to become one or to exert any control over anyone else's postings. However, I continue to be puzzled why on a forum which makes so much fuss about knowing who is saying what that, it is thought acceptable and necessary to have unkown numbers of anonymous volunteers at all. And why, given this, any speculation about their possible number (or personality) would be thought surprising.

Now you seem to think that I have evidenced that I somehow have a problem with reality. You are probably right and I am wrong, yet again. But with the secrecy that surrounds the identity of our volunteers - I am most other posters do not have much REAL information to go on - do we? However Jeri I am quite prepared to accept that the fault is all mine and I am a thoughly bad sort.

However, it could just be that I am not a thoughly bad sort and that I simply care a lot for Max's forum and wish to carry on contributing in the best way I can to making it the fine place that I think it still to be. I find it interesting that among all the judgement of the worth of others contributions, that are encouraged. And all the complaining about bithday, prayer threads etc and general disatisfaction - that I am the one seen to be moaning about the forum! I like it.

For the starting point for this thread (and poll) was concern about the activity that has resulted in two valued members (and possibly more) feeling that the forum was not a place that they wished to continue to contribute to. This is probably also down to me, but I don't really see that shooting me down, although fun, is actually making any positive contribution to trying to ensure that the forum becomes a place these people may feel they wish to return to.

It is the stage that these threads usually get to and for that reason, there never really is the meaningful debate that is so badly required.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 02:23 PM

Of course, when you put graffiti on a wall you obscure the previous graffiti. If someone doesn't like what's up there, they don't need to try to get someone to go cleaning the wall, they can just write something over it. It's all essentially temporary, provisional.

The Mudcat doesn't work that way. Unless it gets removed, it stays there. Someone paints a swastika on the wall, its there for good and all, unless it gets formally scrubbed out by Joe and Co.
...............................

Shambles, man, you keep on repeating that version of the prayer about wanting the serenity to accept the things that we aren't able to change, even if maybe we'd like to, but you just won't apply it to yourself. This is, as you have said, a moderated forum, and the degree of moderation - which to me seems pretty light isn't going to change in either direction, it seems clear enough. Serenity, please... The state of being placid, tranquil, unperturbed, unruffled.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Once Famous
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 02:19 PM

Ron Davies

Nader sucks. he's an ego maniac.

Voting for him is a vote for Bush. Except in many places you can't vote for him as he will not be on the ballot. He is in the same catagory as Homer Simpson when it comes to being on the ballot.

I really do not have any respect for anyone who offends so easily.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Jeri
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 01:25 PM

The 'fault' is that of whoever most misjudges reality.

However, what it does sound like is a pretty good description of a volunteer.

Why?
Especially considering "Whoever these volunteers may be and however many of them there may be." Isn't that nice...you don't know who they are and you've made up little personalities for them.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 12:52 PM

What it sounds like to me matters very little. I am often wrong and the fault is obviously with me. It is strange how the fault is so often with anyone who may hold and express a different view.....

However, what it does sound like is a pretty good description of a volunteer. If these volunteers are very last people that 'you' want deleting stuff' one could wonder why they are the very people that are doing this and yes this could sound incongruous to many. But they would also probably be at fault and as wrong as I am.

Whoever these volunteers may be and however many of them there may be.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Jeri
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 11:43 AM

'However, it was Jeri that said: Keep in mind that perhaps the LAST person you want deleting stuff is somebody who says "Ooh, let me do it...I WANNA do it!"'

Consider that if that sounds incongruous to you, it may be your own perception that's wrong. Consider that you may have invented personalities for people that aren't very close to reality. One wonders why.

Spaw, your earlier post makes much sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 10:00 AM

The anonymous types that are abusive or rude or just here to troll and flame are easily recognized and easy to ignore. If this group wasn't so damn verbal, it would be simple to rid the place of them.....but we just can't shut up and do it!!!

Many people have managed quite easily for many years to do what you find so difficult. They just do not seem to matter or generally to be much listened to. Look back over this thread alone and see all those who do this easily and as matter of course and simply request that this is generally encouraged. Why do you simply not listen to them? Why do you go on insisting that this is simply too difficult for you to manage?

These people do have the self restraint that you have found impossible for so long and the effect of their sacrifice is simply to allow the space for those (so damn verbal) who do find it impossible not to respond in kind - to do as they wish.....and still somehow attempt to maintain the high ground.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: catspaw49
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 09:50 AM

Shambles, I'd be more than happy to have Paw, Cletus, Buford,and the Reg Boys come over and clean your wall for you. They have plenty of chemicals left over from their failed porta-potty business, Crappers on Casters. Of course failing that they have also used Buford's whiz which is heavily endowed with the acids from Iron City beer. Let me know.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 09:36 AM

As I have said - I am often wrong. However me being wrong does not make everything else right. Posting simply to shooting me down will not change anything much - will it? I am at least putting something up to be shot at......

I think the general sense peoole are indicating in their posts is that your metaphor has a flaw in it-- it's not your board, it's Max's. For you to hope to advise about it would require you to be his peer- a board owner yourself.

I had thought that it was obvious that for the purposes of my story only, that I was Max. But I am often wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: wysiwyg
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 08:50 AM

Shambles, the "wall" you gave as a metaphor is now others' metaphor for the forum Spaw suggested you go start up. The "decorating" suggested is about us participating in it so you can see what it's like to actually run a board.

I think the general sense peoole are indicating in their posts is that your metaphor has a flaw in it-- it's not your board, it's Max's. For you to hope to advise about it would require you to be his peer- a board owner yourself.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Bill D
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 08:48 AM

Shambles...we have HAD that debate for several years.


You have made your point.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 08:28 AM

I will be asking for no volunteers for my wall. I was rather expecting some answers and a serious debate. As I have said, I am often wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 07:26 AM

As so often catspaw has said what needs to be said.

I think Shambles should get that white wall actually set up on his house, and invite us round to decorate it.

Subject: RE: BS: Poll - Stop Flaming and Abusive posting
From: Wolfgang
Date: 01 Sep 04 - 06:57 AM

However, it was Jeri that said: Keep in mind that perhaps the LAST person you want deleting stuff is somebody who says "Ooh, let me do it...I WANNA do it!"

Shambles,

when Jeri posted that you commented 'I shall keep this in mind' and I cited that sentence in your thread about minor lies. You've proven me right very soon.

Wolfgang