Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?

Subject: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: Grab
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 01:24 PM

Joe: Apologies in advance if you consider this inflammatory, and delete it if you want. But Shambles has specifically requested a thread to answer this question, and I guess I'm dumb enough to stick my head above the parapet.

catspaw49: Perhaps they are waiting for YOU to provide the answer as to WHY YOU ARE STILL HERE after being asked in plain terms by Max to leave.

Shambles: I judge that may be the subject for another thread and not for this one...However, as I am limited to this one thread perhaps you could start a new thread with your question clearly indicated in the title - and I may just answer it for you there.

Background:
Joe's description of Shambles' posting behaviour, and reasoning for his being on 'special measures'
Max's State of the Union address

OK Shambles, you think that something isn't being done right. Fair enough. You ask Joe and Jeff to change it, giving their reasons. They consider your request, but turn it down, giving their reasons. Discussion continues, but you fail to bring up an argument that they find compelling. The honourable approach at this point is to accept that the forum won't quite be what you want, and either (a) stay around because the good points outweigh the bad points, or (b) leave because you can't accept how it is being run now. And let's be clear what you didn't like: renaming threads, deleting spam or flames, and deleting a post without adding significant comments for why it was deleted. These are all standard features of every moderated message board. Mudcat is (as defined in its FAQ) a moderated message board, and it was a moderated message board when you joined.

That all happened in 2004. At that point, you launched a campaign of mass-copying/quoting your complaints across unrelated threads. By 2006, this had become severe enough to warrant the site owner, Max, requesting you to leave, and Joe restricting your posting. So the simple question is: why have you not realised that what you're asking for will never happen, and either stayed around and stopped hassling Max and Joe about it, or left the site? This place is not communally owned, and it's not a public space - it's a private site owned by Max, who's delegated Joe and Jeff to look after it, and which we use under the terms which they decide between them. So "love it or leave it" is very much the order of the day.

This isn't intended to insult you. As far as possible, I've tried to avoid insulting you (although I'm afraid I have snapped a few times, for which I apologise). I hope no-one else will use the thread for that purpose, either. But I am trying to get to the bottom of your reasoning. Unless you consider Joe, Jeff and Max to be so weak-willed that they'll cave in after massive repetition of the same request, it was clear back in 2004 that the procedural changes you requested were not going to happen (because they told you so, with reasons), and that your barrage of criticism was going to have no effect. So what is your purpose in staying here and doing it?

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 02:06 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Don't read guest posts
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 01:46 PM

Copy of deleted one-message thread that skipy started:
Subject: BS: The passion of Martin Gibson
From: skipy - PM
Date: 01 Aug 06 - 05:15 PM

light blue touch paper and retire.
Skipy


We delete all "Martin Gibson" threads. They cause too damn much trouble.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: Big Mick
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 02:11 PM

There ya go. Grab asks for a decent discussion and the subject just copy and pastes.

Leave Shambles. You have been asked to by the owner. Leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 02:18 PM

If he can't play nice, why not cowboy up and ban him?

Oh... that's right.....

So go ahead Shambles.... do what you gotta.... It appears there won't be any repercussions, other than some people here might not like you

Oh... boo... hoo...

Subject: RE: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: kendall
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 02:52 PM

The more you stir a turd the more it smells.

Subject: RE: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 02:55 PM

That was your succinct answer, Shambles?

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: Wesley S
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 03:00 PM

Clinton - Max asked you to leave also. Your reply ?

Subject: RE: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 03:03 PM

My reply...

"Ya... whatever...."

Max is often his own worst enemy

That was his response when he was given questions he was unable to answer.... Others and I in that thread went on to have a very good conversation, in spite of Max....

The difference is Shambles has been given his answer over and over and over again....

Subject: RE: BS: Shambles: Still here? and why?
From: Grab
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 03:10 PM

light blue touch paper and retire

Who's retiring where? I ain't Martin Gibson (you might have noticed, because I don't like either brand of guitar :-) and I'm here for the duration.

You refused to answer this question on the "Deleted threads and posts" thread, on the grounds that it wasn't related to the thread, and you pointed out that the terms of your restricted access prevent you starting another related thread in which you *could* answer it. You requested that someone else start a thread, titled appropriately, in which the question could be answered.

So I'm responding to your specific request for a specific thread in which you could answer this specific question. I ain't implying anything, hinting at anything, or insinuating anything - the question I asked is the question I'd be interested in an answer to. I've even asked for people to cut out any personal crap so that we can get it straight. It doesn't get any clearer or more straightforward than that.

Just as a guiding principle here, be aware that the topic of the thread is not Joe Offer, or the Mudcat moderators, or the Mudcat moderation policy, or deleted posts/threads - it's your reasons for staying. (And ditto for anyone else drifting - topic is Shambles and nothing but Shambles...)

The result will either be that you answer it straight; or that you feed us a line which bears no relation to your actual reasons; or that you refuse to answer at all; or that you drift off at some tangent in spite of the note above. Whatever - whichever way it goes, the rest of us will find something out. The result may be that we find we've got more in common with you than differences, or the result may be that we find you've secretly despised everyone here for years. Either way, I'd like to know. I think many others here may like to know too, which is why it's a public thread (as requested by you) instead of a private message.

I actually have no personal opinion about the result. Last year an ex-friend went werewolf on our club and me in particular, calling us all manner of crap and threatening me with violence, so the prospect of finding that you hate my guts does not exactly fill me with dread. ;-) I'd just like to know whether posting answers to your questions, as I would for a rational discussion, is a worthwhile exercise, or whether I've been wasting my time and I should cut my losses now.

Graham.

Subject: RE: Editing Complaints: Still here? and why?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 03:21 PM

As Shambles pointed out, we routinely delete Martin Gibson threads - we also usually delete all threads that are critical of an individual. I won't do it on this one because the individual involved would probably make a stink, but at least I'm going to rename it so it's not quite so directly pointed at one person.
Shambles often does make valid points, and we do make an attempt to honor his suggestions when they are valid. He objects to anonymous editing - but the JoeClones are well-known and their actions are reviewed by Jeff, Joe, and Max - so that's hardly anonymous. He contends that we should annotate editing actions - and we do that whenever there's a need for explanantion. We don't post editing explanations when such explanations might be inflammatory - as is the case when "problem posts" are deleted. Most deletions are for mundane reasons, however. And we don't post explanations when the reason for editing should be obvious.
In general, I think what we do is quite reasonable. I suppose if we are known felons on parole who have a long history of misdeeds, then there would be a need for us to document and defend our every move. That's not the case.
Same with the charge of favoritism - it's something that certain miscreants have accused us of time and time again, but there's never been any evidence of favoritism in our editing. We really don't have a reason to show such favoritism - what good would it do us?
Some may disagree with my decision to rename this thread. There's no perfect decision in such situations, and I figured I had to do something since we have a general practice of not having critical threads directed at individual Mudcatters.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 03:57 PM

"Some may disagree with my decision to rename this thread"

*Shrug*
A rose, by any other name, has as many thorns

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 04:21 PM

And a thorn, by any other names, gets as many a rise.

Joe, thanks for the long efforts at making things run smoothly. You're batting over .900, which should be good enough for anyone.

A

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 05:50 PM

Well Joe, that's all well and good but let's put this back on track. Grab has it perfectly and I will restate it as the Shambolina often does:

"So I'm responding to your specific request for a specific thread in which you could answer this specific question. I ain't implying anything, hinting at anything, or insinuating anything - the question I asked is the question I'd be interested in an answer to. I've even asked for people to cut out any personal crap so that we can get it straight. It doesn't get any clearer or more straightforward than that.

Just as a guiding principle here, be aware that the topic of the thread is not Joe Offer, or the Mudcat moderators, or the Mudcat moderation policy, or deleted posts/threads - it's your reasons for staying. (And ditto for anyone else drifting - topic is Shambles and nothing but Shambles...)"

There is only one thing to post here Sham.....WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE?

Spaw

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 07:36 PM

I think this has become a personal attack. I may disagree with the Sham, and I may think (as I do) that his posting can (not always does)become an abuse of bandwidth.   I may even think that sometimes he should exercise self censorship but this thread looks like persecution.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 07:40 PM

I judge that may be the subject for another thread and not for this one...However, as I am limited to this one thread perhaps you could start a new thread with your question clearly indicated in the title - and I may just answer it for you there.

I did indeed say that - and the question was once clearly indicated in this thread's original title.

However, that title has been changed and this thread renamed but this does not change this thread's object (or its motivation).

Graham do you really consider your 'background' summary of events in the first post to be a complete or a fair one? In any trail - there is usually an attempt to show both sides of any dispute and the accused usually has someone to speak for them. It is perfectly clear that dispite the evidence - you do not consider me to simply be a victim of personally motivated and selective censorship action.

Would anyone consider it possible for me to have a fair 'shake' in this thread and under these circumstances? Whatever answer I provide to the question will not prevent the 'usual suspects' calling for my blood or at least my expulsion - will it?

So what is your purpose in staying here and doing it?

All I am trying to DO is freely read and contribute to the public discussion forum on the basis that I have been doing for many years.

Graham - you tend to concentrate on the strange idea that I really expect turkeys to be in favour of voting for an early Christmas.

All I expect is to be able to hold discussions with my fellow posters on any subject - including the issue of censorship. To enable posters to be informed of the true nature and level of this and to be able to openly debate this.

Posters who wish to take part in this on-going debate are welcome to and those who do not do not have to. Those who do not like the fact that Max still favours such open public debate on our forum - are welcome to go elsewhere - where they can place as many restrictions as they wish - rather than finding ways of trying to prevent this debate and post only to judge the worth of the participants.

Like most of us - I have many views and suggestions. I do not expect Max or anyone else to agree with all of these. Max is of course welcome to make his views and suggestions on his own website. But would you think that he would expect me or any other poster to have agree with all of these either?

Max can of course stop me from contributing at any point. He has not chosen to do so and I hope that he will not. Perhaps the 'usual suspects' will finally respect Max's wishes in this. It would be sad if Max felt forced to do this - as the only grounds would be the reaction and intolerance of a very few of my fellow posters.

There I have answered the question - and I am quite sure the same posters will still be making exactly the same judgements. Hopefully some may not.......

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Peace
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 07:43 PM

I don't mind flashbacks to the 1960s. Hell, I don't even mind flashbacks to the disco era--and a few folks here must remember that. But now I'm having flashbacks to last month. This kinda thing could really screw a guy all up. I don't even DO drugs anymore. Faaaaaaaahhk!

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 07:53 PM

Confucius say "person who prove to be a thorn in other persons side make also thorn in own side" In other words..anyone who rocks the boat for others also rocks their own boat.......If one considers rocking the boat a good pastime then others have to wonder about the masochistic tendencies of such a person....How much hurt does the attacker feel when constantly under personal attack and how does such a person 'control' or change such a cycle?. Generally they go blindly on trying to prove a point that may not be a point at all! Then it all comes down to individual power...who has the power to do what or say what?
Food for thought eh?
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: GUEST,number six
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 08:20 PM

Albert Einstein's definition of insanity ....

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

sIx

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: bobad
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 08:27 PM

That's good sIx, I'm beginning to feel that way over in the Gaza thread.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 08:57 PM

"anyone who rocks the boat for others also rocks their own boat..."

What a load of crap

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Aug 06 - 04:20 AM

Max can of course stop me from contributing at any point. He has not chosen to do so and I hope that he will not. Perhaps the 'usual suspects' will finally respect Max's wishes in this. It would be sad if Max felt forced to do this - as the only grounds would be the reaction and intolerance of a very few of my fellow posters.

Are we to believe, as you seem to suggesting, that Max has had a change of heart and now welcomes your campaign?

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 05 Aug 06 - 05:50 AM

So Clinton Hammond....how many times have you rocked the boat for others and had absolutely no comeback from it?

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 Aug 06 - 08:04 AM

Nope, GUEST, what he is implying is that Max only posted what he did under pressure from "unnamed fellow posters". This demonstrates several things. First, it shows that this nutter doesn't know Max. Max will not do anything that Max doesn't see the value in. Second, it shows a lack of respect for Max's intellect. As if Max doesn't have the ability to discern who is valuable. Third, it demonstrates the depth of Sham's problem. He is in complete denial. Even though the overwhelming majority of posters have said it, even though Max did respond per Sham's repeated requests, and all have said he is way off base, and even though Max said he should go; still he finds some other reason to justify his position.

Time for you to go, Shambles. You have demonstrated an inability to function in this environment. Your presence is disruptive to the discussions that make this a viable and interesting website.

Please leave, sir.

Mick

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 05 Aug 06 - 11:27 AM

"As if Max doesn't have the ability to discern who is valuable."
The past, the number of good posters Max has allowed to be driven away by unresolved Mudcat problems that every single message board in the world suffers and over-comes says differently Mick.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 05 Aug 06 - 05:59 PM

Clinton Hammond..you seem to have either missed or ignored my comment on your "What a load of crap" statement...could you please answer it?
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Grab
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 06:46 AM

Fair call on the renaming, Joe.

Graham do you really consider your 'background' summary of events in the first post to be a complete or a fair one?

If I didn't, I wouldn't have posted it...

Re-reading, "campaign" may be a loaded word, as it may imply a reason. Let's leave aside your reasons, and simply agree that you have done this, persistently, for two years. There is ample evidence for this, at least.

It is perfectly clear that dispite the evidence - you do not consider me to simply be a victim of personally motivated and selective censorship action.

Please provide the evidence.

As of late 2005, Joe *did* insult you. By that point, you'd been doing this (mass copying and quoting) for over a year. No limitation on what you could do was imposed on you until 18 months after you'd started. I'd like you to show how this was personally motivated, because I don't believe anyone had personal motivation to dislike you until long after you'd started doing this, thereby *causing* the dislike.

Graham.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 07:09 AM

Are we to believe, as you seem to suggesting, that Max has had a change of heart and now welcomes your campaign?

And this is not judged to be a loaded question?

What I stated were the simple facts.

I am just a long term poster trying to continue to post views which have changed very little since first being attracted to and being welcomed to air them on to our forum. A discussion forum, which has been set aside for the public contributions, on Max's website. For there is no campaign on my part, for Max to welcome or not.

But whether Max welcomes it or not (and that is a matter for him to publicly explain or not) - there does seem to be a campaign led by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to selective impose restrictions on my posts. It is my attempts to try and continue in spite of this personally motivated censorship and to bring this to the attention of my fellow posters - that are being judged as excessive. This would have not been the case had the attempt to selectivly judge and limit my posting not first been made.

It would appear that their is also a campaign - openly lead and encouraged by some of our known 'moderators', (like Mick, kat and Jeri who now would appear to feel they have some right to judge the worth of their fellow posters and invited guests) - to prevent me from being permitted to post at all..........And who do not now consider such a campaign against any single poster, to be an abuse of their trusted and privileged roles.   

And who would not appear to respecting Max's position in NOT currently preventing me from posting.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 07:55 AM

When Max suggests that you leave, Shambles, I don't think there's much of a question as to whether or not he welcomes your endless complaints. He has already publicly explained why he finds your contributions tedious and distracting. You just choose not to hear him.

Jerry

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 11:25 AM

Joe: Apologies in advance if you consider this inflammatory, and delete it if you want.

Do you really think that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team would judge that he would now need your permission to do exactly as he wants, to yours or anyone else's contrubution? But you seened to have overlooked the fact that you gave permission in advance for him to delete this thread - not for him to rename it.

And why would you think that he would require your agreement for having done just that. And for his attempt to justify his departure from his own rules - by pointing the finger of blame at me for this and further encouraging this witch hunt......?

As Shambles pointed out, we routinely delete Martin Gibson threads - we also usually delete all threads that are critical of an individual. I won't do it on this one because the individual involved would probably make a stink, but at least I'm going to rename it so it's not quite so directly pointed at one person.

I have consistently requested a return to where all posters are posting an equal terms.

This would then protect all posters from any personally motivated and selectivly imposed special treatment and it would protect all 'moderator/posters' from any accusation or suspicion that they were doing this and abusing their trusted and privileged role.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 11:41 AM

"When Max suggests that you leave..."

He demonstrates fully, just what a passive-aggressive wimp he really is....

You want someone off your message baord? Ban them.... full stop....

Grow a frigg'n sack.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 11:41 AM

When Max suggests that you leave, Shambles, I don't think there's much of a question as to whether or not he welcomes your endless complaints. He has already publicly explained why he finds your contributions tedious and distracting. You just choose not to hear him.
Jerry

It is interesting how selectivly all the critial comments and where they are directed - in Max's recent public post are viewed by the 'usual suspect'. I hear him very well - others do not appear to. The 'usual suspect' certainly do not seem to think any of Max's criticism is aimed at them. I will copy and paste the relevant parts here - and posters can judge for themselves......

Subject: From Max: State of the Union Address
From: Max - PM
Date: 11 May 06 - 10:43 PM

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?>snip<

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 12:12 PM

Aaaaawww... Whaaaaaahh!   Why should -I- go?!?! Booo hoo hooo... He said all these other people should go too!!! *whine* *suck*

Why don't you cowboy up a little 'Shambles'.... go downtown and pay a quarter and buy yourself a better life than you currently own, and put it to good use.... All you ever do on Mudcat is show the poor pathetic little population here that you're sadder and more pathetic than even they are.....

I'm starting to suspect that "Shambles" is just Max, well and truly trying to put Mudcat finally out of it's misery so he'll be quit of the whole thing in such a passive-aggressive soppy, little-wet-girls-blouse way that no one will ever be able to criticize him for it....

"Oh no... -I- didn't shut it down.... it was THE POSTERS who ruined Mudcat..... I was FORCED to walk away.... "

If he had half a sack, this place wouldn't suck half as much as me ALLOWS it to

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: GUEST,Observer
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 12:32 PM

I fondly remember the days when the music part of Mudcat was informative,
and the BS part was light-hearted and fun...

Now it's in shambles....

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Jeri
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 12:52 PM

I said it in another thread, but I really do think you're pushing it, and you're well past the point where even Max wants to try to tolerate your spamming. Conditions at Mudcat are becoming such that Max is going to have to find a way to limit trolling, flaming, and disruptive blather, whether it's from those who surf in from other sites after reading "Mudcat is a good place to act like a jerk" or from our own members who just don't know when to stop.

If we go to members-only - and I believe it's inevitable - one of the reasons will be you, Roger. People who don't or can't respect a flexible, soft boundary, are going to make a rigid, cold fence a necessity. I can't say I'll miss way things are now. I DO miss the way things were, before the place was one big battlefield.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 01:10 PM

Ya gotta admit, all this serious pondering takes a toll on the brain, especially after a hard night drinking Margaritas and singing. I dunno if I can handle it; it is just so ponderous, ya know. Ponder, ponder, ponder!!! :D It's downright ponderous!!

A

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 01:20 PM

You spent too much time at the Ponderosa, Amos?

Jerry

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 01:36 PM

People who don't or can't respect a flexible, soft boundary, are going to make a rigid, cold fence a necessity. I can't say I'll miss way things are now. I DO miss the way things were, before the place was one big battlefield.

Amen to that, Jeri!

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 02:05 PM

"If he had half a sack, this place wouldn't suck half as much as me allow it to " Clinton

What a moment for a typo, Clinton! :)

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 03:26 PM

Moody Blues, 14 weeks at Number 1 (in GB) from January 1965..


Since you gotta go, oh you'd better
Go now go now, go now

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 03:38 PM

Nice evasion, Shambles... care to answer my question how you can state that Max needs to say publicly how he feels about your endless postings, when he has already said it.

Perhaps it is too much to expect you to actually respond to a question without cut and paste?

Jerry

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Grab
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 03:49 PM

Do you really think that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team would judge that he would now need your permission to do exactly as he wants, to yours or anyone else's contrubution? But you seened to have overlooked the fact that you gave permission in advance for him to delete this thread - not for him to rename it.

He doesn't need my permission at all. Being me though, and knowing what the rules are on Mudcat, I thought some initial comment to Joe was relevant (and polite) - this comment being on the theme of "yes I know the rules, but this is at the subject's explicit request, but even so if you delete it then I'll fully understand".

And, in case you haven't noticed, you still haven't answered the question in my very first post. The only answer I've interpreted from your posts so far, is: "I'm staying around and continuing with my complaining, regardless of two years of answers from Max and Joe saying that my complaints will *never* be acted on and that I am making a nuisance of yourself, until Max decides to permanently ban me from the site". If this is your considered opinion, then I guess we know where we stand. If your position is something different and I'm misinterpreting you, then let's hear it. If I'm misinterpreting your position then I will apologise, but that only holds *if and only if* you can tell us your position on the question: "Why are you still here?"

Graham.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 04:01 PM

Me... we... whatever....

Mudcat curretnly is hardly worht the powder to blow it to hell.... I blame myself, and all the other posters, but especially Max and Jeff and all the Mods/admin....

THEY are the ones that choose to allow the posters to turn it into what it is.....

THEY run the place.... Thus they are responsible for what goes on here.....

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 04:45 PM

All you ever do on Mudcat is show the poor pathetic little population here that you're sadder and more pathetic than even they are.....

Says Clinton with 9500 posts? Does that make me only half as sad with 4800? :-)

Mind you, Roger with over 11000 would leave an awful big hole...

(No offence, Clinton, just struck me as funny!)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 06:10 PM

Nice evasion, Shambles... care to answer my question how you can state that Max needs to say publicly how he feels about your endless postings, when he has already said it.

You had not asked a question for me to evade. And now you have asked me a question that you have already provided the answer to.

The answer is that I did not state this. This is what I said.

But whether Max welcomes it or not (and that is a matter for him to publicly explain or not) - there does seem to be a campaign led by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to selective impose restrictions on my posts. It is my attempts to try and continue in spite of this personally motivated censorship and to bring this to the attention of my fellow posters - that are being judged as excessive. This would have not been the case had the attempt to selectivly judge and limit my posting not first been made.

Cut and paste will remain a very useful tool for discussion- it is not a disease to be stamped-out..................... I also said this.

Max can of course stop me from contributing at any point. He has not chosen to do so and I hope that he will not. Perhaps the 'usual suspects' will finally respect Max's wishes in this. It would be sad if Max felt forced to do this - as the only grounds would be the reaction and intolerance of a very few of my fellow posters.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 06:24 PM

Perhaps the 'usual suspects' will finally respect Max's wishes in this.

Shambles, if you believe Max's wishes should be respected, let me remind you that he said you should leave. Instead of practising double standards, please set us a good example.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 06:40 PM

Shambles, if you believe Max's wishes should be respected, let me remind you that he said you should leave. Instead of practising double standards, please set us a good example.

Let me remind you that he also publicly asked, and I think this included me but it was addressed to another: Joe: Do I need to separate you two?

Unless Max has expelled the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team without informing us - Max has not yet felt the need to carry out this threat. After all this time - I hope he does not feel forced to do so...........

Like most of us - I have many views and suggestions. I do not expect Max or anyone else to agree with all of these. Max is of course welcome to make his views and suggestions on his own website. But would you think that he would expect me or any other poster to have to agree with all of these either?

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 06:49 PM

Joe wasn't told he should leave, shambles. You were. Besides that, I believe Max was reffering to the trouble you were causing Joe.

Anyway, you not Joe have told the usual suspects to respect Max's wishes and I'm am suggesting you practice what you preach. I repeat:

Shambles, if you believe Max's wishes should be respected, let me remind you that he said you should leave. Instead of practising double standards, please set us a good example.

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 07:18 PM

Don't read guest posts

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 07:27 PM

A link for Shambles

Subject: RE: Complaints about editing: Still here? and why?
From: John O'L
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 07:29 PM

If Max wanted Shambles and Clinton out they would be gone, just like Martin is.

All you lot are trying to tell Max what he wants. If I was Max I'd find that insulting.

Shambles has answered your question. Twice, at least.