Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum (threads combined)

Subject: RE: Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum (threads combined)
From: Bert
Date: 29 Jul 06 - 11:20 AM

Joe,

Everything that has been posted since the threads were combined should have already deleted by you under YOUR OWN no hijacking rule.

---

The "no hijacking" guideline applies to music threads and other serious discussions, not to threads started with blank messages for unspecified purposes. The "no highjacking" principle is enforced by disdain, groans, and other expressions of communal displeasure. You have expressed your displeasure repeatedly. Now get over it and start your threads over again if that's your pleasure.
-Joe Offer-

This WAS a music thread Joe and if it had been left alone by the over eager editors it would surely have sunk ignominiously off the screen long ago. Get off your high horse and do the right thing and fix it. Bert.

Subject: RE: Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum (threads combined)
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Jul 06 - 01:16 PM

If Gargoyle refreshes a dozen Shatner threads, and Bert starts five "feefifofum" threads and an "intentionally blank" thread, and Guest starts half a dozen online gambling threads, and Shambles keeps a dozen complaint threads going, and the politicoes flood each other with 700-message copy-paste propaganda threads, who's going to bother to come to Mudcat for folk music?

Perhaps those who post on the musuc-related section and are still blissfully unaware of all of your concerns and the restriction you impose to deal with them. And many more tolerant posters than you.

As you do not now share the tastes of your fellow posters - perhaps it is you who should find or start another forum - rather that feel you have some right to impose your tastes upon others....

Subject: RE: Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum (threads combined)
From: JennyO
Date: 29 Jul 06 - 01:42 PM

As you do not now share the tastes of your fellow posters...

Thought you'd slip that little bit of your particular brand of 'logic' by everybody, did you? Have you now appointed yourself to be "your fellow posters"?

Well just for the record, Joe shares the tastes of this fellow poster. And if I had to choose who I think should leave, it wouldn't be Joe. So you don't speak for everybody - a fact which you are very good at ignoring.

Subject: RE: Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum (threads combined)
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 02:23 AM

I think ALL Song Challenges should have an appropriate prefix - since those two words chew up much of the subject line, how about

"SC: "

???

Subject: RE: Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum (threads combined)
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 06:35 AM

Can you believe how much verbiage these guys can post to protest the deletion of blank messages?
-Joe Offer-

The view that some of our 'moderators' now appear to have of our discussion forum could well be summed as the judgement of 'how much verbiage these guys can post'?

The answer is that whatever the amount of (or in this case the lack of any) verbiage - any 'moderators' role is simply to enable the verbiage - NOT to use as much verbiage in return in order to justify the imposition of all this judgement and to attempt to further devide posters in public appeals for support for all this.....

Subject: RE: Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum (threads combined)
From: jacqui.c
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 09:04 AM

I'll go with JennyO.

Subject: RE: Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum (threads combined)
From: lesblank
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 09:30 AM

My suggestion is to pen up Bert and Shambles in an old silo and let them live out their climateric years attempting to "one-up" each other. When they are sufficiently spent, throw in Lizzie Cornish for a few weeks -- then we would all be better off !!