BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Oct 09 - 03:32 AM

Well, as I said, I intended to allow this thread to run a limited time, to give people a chance to say what they have to say. Now we're back to our usual policy of not allowing such discussions, because they always seem to end in animosity. I cannot answer those who believe there is some sort of conspiracy in our moderation practices, and that we intentionally play favorites. If there is such a conspiracy, I haven't noticed it. I can't really see a reason why there would be.

I think we do the best we can, within our tradition of free speech. We can't satisfy everyone, but we try to keep the peace with limited moderation.

G'nite. Thead closed.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: CarolC
Date: 31 Oct 09 - 02:25 AM

When conduct is left to be controlled by the societal pressure of the community, that societal pressure will conform to whatever the norms of the community are. If the norms of the community are ganging up on people and scapegoating them, that is the societal pressure that will control the conduct. I have seen many people, who don't conform to what some members find pleasing, not because their behavior was inappropriate, or because they were breaking the rules, but because people just found it unappealing (one example would be the poet who has been so abused by so many people), or for other reasons having more to do with esthetics than anything else, be literally hounded off the site altogether.

This is not a lack of rules or moderation. What it is, is two sets of rules - one written and acknowledged set of rules, and an invisible set of rules that are never posted or articulated, but are enforced with even more rigor than the written rules, and moderation by mob rule. This is clearly not working.

The solution to this problem is not necessarily more rules. The solution is to enforce the rules that already exist fairly and consistently. The solution is to not allow the mob run the show.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 31 Oct 09 - 01:31 AM

Right, kat and Janie-
- we're still part of Max's experiment in "civilized anarchy," or whatever it was called Way Back When. The idea was that this would be a largely unmoderated Website, with conduct controlled mostly by the societal pressure of our community. I see many comments above that set expectations that Mudcat be more tightly controlled, but we have survived quite well with minimal moderation for 13 years now. We are indeed a wonderful community, where people go out of their way to show concern for each other and to share themselves with one another. We're not perfect, but a lot of good things happen here.

With few exceptions, most people whose identity is known, behave quite well. Most identified people who post, can be assured that their posts will almost never be deleted or altered. If a post from a known Mudcatter is objectionable for some reason, it usually won't be deleted unless it is a personal attack and the target of the attack complains.

Somebody above said that if there were a thread on child pornography, that the thread and its participants would be eliminated - I'm not so sure of that. If it had been started by a visitor, then yes, it would be deleted. But most of the time, we do not make judgments on the content of posts, and do not delete or edit unless there are precedented reasons for doing do.

And despite what some may see as our negligent lack of moderation, we do pretty well. The stuff I complained about above, is nothing I would ever consider deleting. Still, I think it's worthwhile saying something about it, when it disappoints me.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: katlaughing
Date: 31 Oct 09 - 12:37 AM

Good points, Spaw.

It is ludicrous(sp) to me, given the parameters Max has articulated, that people hold the mods. responsible for the behavior of themselves or others beyond a very limited mandate.

Thanks for that, Janie.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Rowan
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 11:42 PM

Last night (Oz time) I was reading an article in New Scientist about the origins of spite in human behaviour. The gist of it seemed to show that those individuals who tried to increase their own rewards at the expense of others who 'played more fairly and equitably' were quickly brought back into line when a short bit of punitive behaviour (defined as "spite") was unleashed at them by the otherwise equitable rest of the group. The relevance of that article (early May, 2009) to this thread seems, to me, to be that individuals that the community regards as 'miscreants' bring their behaviour closer to the community's favoured norms when everyone sees that objectionable behaviour incurs visible retributive response.

To me, that suggests that Mudcat moderators could make their moderations more frequently and obviously public. Several posters in the thread have suggested such a move as a putative improvement at Mudcat, and others have suggested that this might remove favouritism in the treatment of particular 'catters. I can't say I've noticed anyone being treated more or less favourably that others but I might be too new (or too selective in the threads I peruse) to have experienced it.

Normally I abhor retribution as a behaviour but the evidence in the article was impressive. If it were canvassed I suspect that then we'd be entangled in quarrels about standards, real or imagined, and "rights". In the meantime I enjoy the vagaries brought to our community by the varieties of outlooks and individuals in it. And try to write in terms I'd be happy to see against my name in the Final Ledger. Assuming there is one, of course.

Keep up the good work, Joe.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: catspaw49
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 11:24 PM

But having said that......let me add this bit as well.

Perhaps all of you who are strongly and rightly wishing to oppose the BNP might learn from some of the things that have happened here. I think the BNP has. They have probably seen how successful the Klan has been in employing non-violent tactics of their own over the last 25 years. Its true. What became a huge problem here was those who came to Klan rallies to protest the Klan were goaded into starting the violence.   Since the Klan acted entirely peacefully and made their illogical and bigoted views sound completely sensible, the protesters came off as raving idiots instead of the other way round.

I know you all probably won't bother but if you really want to see an effective combatting of groups like the BNP and Klan, go read a history and the current activities of Mo Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: catspaw49
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 10:40 PM

Probably worth mentioning that MLK also employed non-violence in the south working for civil rights. However, it is also a fact that those same tactics were a failure in the northern cities where Malcolm's ideas worked better although more violently.

That's another one of those subjects which would make a good thesis (like the lock-step paths of big time TV wrestling and big time TV religion--(;<))).


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Janie
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 10:04 PM

Jeri,

Not sure I am correctly understanding your post when I take it that you are expressing an opinion that Mudcat is going to hell. Don't want to beg to differ if that is not what you mean.

Clarify please?

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Jeri
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 10:00 PM

Joe, Gandhi was Victorious because the people he opposed had faces and names and consciouses (or at least understood public shame). It won't work on invisible, anonymous (maybe not so much) terrorists. You might feel more righteous as the place goes to Hell, but it's still going to go to Hell, no matter how happy your own personal conscious is about it.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 09:58 PM

Skarpi, I hope you realize that Joe Offer was not responding to your post! {{{{hug}}}}

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 09:53 PM

From what I've seen of Folk Against Fascism, Jack, I think they're doing a very good job. I don't have a complete picture, but I've been impressed with what I've seen.

But I'll say what I said again: think of the tactics of Gandhi. If you haven't read a biography of Gandhi, do so. It will change your life, and it will make you a more powerful person. Nonviolence and integrity in the face of evil, is the most powerful weapon ever conceived.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Jack Campin
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 09:38 PM

This represents the BNP's tactics: David Copeland

Those who use bullying, Brownshirt tactics to oppose the BNP, are deplorable.Those who use bullying, Brownshirt tactics to oppose the BNP, are deplorable.

So which of us are you accusing of carrying out nail bombings? The people who set up Folk against Fascism?

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Janie
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 09:22 PM

And one could say the same of Dr. Martin Luther King.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 09:17 PM

There were many who chose violence in the crusade to achieve independence in India. Gandhi refused to go along, and made concessions to the British instead of resorting to violence. He was branded with all sorts of labels, and excoriated as a British sympathizer.

But he maintained his integrity.

I think the same is true in the face of the challenge of the BNP. If we follow the difficult path that Gandhi followed, we will prevail. If we choose abusive tactics, our victory may be short-lived.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: michaelr
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 09:04 PM

Crap! I meant to say, of course, that I prefer to have nothing to do with military or church - not justice and integrity!

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Tinker
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 09:03 PM

Sometimes truths show up in the darndist places. Used the quote below alot with my kids when we had to discuss behavior. It was a great cartoon episode that had good and evil going head to head in a baseball game. You can call someone for bad behacior but that doesn't justify using it yourself. Just my two cents.

"When good cheats evil wins."

"The Real Ghostbusters"


Tinker (who stays away from religion and politic threads)

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:56 PM

Sorry, "past my bedtime" [the name our anonymous guest chose this time], but you posted under a false name and a (relatively) untrackable IP, so your post was deleted.
Too bad you don't have the guts to post under your own name. Trouble is, you've posted under so many names in the past, that you've compromised your ability to post in this thread at all. Please see restrictions in the first message of this thread.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: skarpi
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:54 PM

I wrote this messages , becouse I thought that people would like solve this problem, but it does not matter what is written , nothing else matters then the anger witch has taken place here in this thread .
I thought Ideas was needed , comon folks ideas lets all thing
about ways to solve this , mine may be stupid and unthinkable who knows. You can talk about this to the end of the world and you would get any result .

Date: 30 Oct 09 - 04:03 PM

is it possible to have : Registration required!
and is it possible that every other day the system could scan
for words like ( Fokkings ) words or even every day and if it can find it , it will take out threads and automaticly make them off limits ?
I mean could the system cross exam the words , sorry if my english is not good .

nihh I am just wandering about this all .
this may well not be possible ?

all the best from the snowhouse in Iceland
Skarpi Iceland


this will be the last of me in this thread ,
all the best Skarpi

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:54 PM

The story of fire fought with fire....and of one ffirefighter's survival because he did exactly that, whilst his comrades took to the hills, and perished...written by James...

James Keelaghan 'Cold Missouri Waters'

Maann Gulch Fire Tribute - with James' song...

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: artbrooks
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:51 PM

Sorry, but what happened at Abu Ghraib was an entirely unauthorized abuse of prisoners, done by poorly-trained Army Reservists who were badly supervised by other Army Reservists. It was neither semi-covert nor an official policy.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: michaelr
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:47 PM

No, Joe, I'm not saying that either the military or the church should be disbanded. As a person who chooses to fight for justice and integrity, you may claim the moral high ground over me, who prefers to have nothing to do with either.

I'm ready to let this topic rest now.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:29 PM

There's also the difference that with Abu Ghraib it seems pretty clear that what happened there was in line with a semi-covert official policy of terrorising and maltreating prisoners, and the problem was that it came to light because of clumsy local application.

What has happened in the church has been a culpable failure to identify and prevent abuse, and flawed efforts deal with it internally, together with institutional attempts to conceal such failures from the outside world, and from congregations.

..................

A possibly pedantic point. "You can't fight fire with fire" is what I'd call a very treacherous metaphor. When it comes to fighting actual fires, fire is often one of the most important tools that are used.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:14 PM

Janie
That was nice and a thoughtful, and a well thought out approach. Good advice for any of us.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:11 PM

Hey, Janie, how can anybody insult you or Bill because of your identification with a group? The two of you are one of a kind (individually and separately) [or two of two kinds]. What group can we label you with, "eccentrically philosophical Kansans and generic Southerners"?

-Joe-

---

Get your comments in, folks. I plan to close this thread sometime tomorrow.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:02 PM

Ah, Michael, Michael -

You are absolutely right - and you are profoundly wrong.

You present a very good analogy. There is no doubt in my mind that the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo scandals are proof of deep-seated corruption in the leadership of the U.S. Military; and I have no doubt that the child molestation scandal is proof of the deep-seated corruption in the leadership of the Catholic Church.

So, do you propose that the U.S. Military be completely disbanded? No, you can't - even I as a pacifist, acknowledge that we have to have some sort of organization for national defense.

Same thing holds true for the Catholic Church - the management may be profoundly corrupt, but the Catholic Church has been the seat of the Catholic Faith for two millennia; and the Catholic faith is my faith, it is part of who I am.

In both cases, abandonment is not a realistic choice - the only choice is to stand and fight for what is right. And if I stand for justice and integrity, then I think that those who share that value should support me, and not condemn me for failing to run away from the problem.


-Joe-

P.S. I do not acknowledge the primacy of the Pope or the authority of any bishop or priest over me. I consider them to be my equals (and sometimes, I tend to look down on them).

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Janie
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 08:00 PM

I'm like you Bill D.   I don't look for opportunities to feel personally insulted. As far as I can figure out so far, I haven't been harmed by that attitude. Perhaps some insults have sailed over my head (or under my radar) - suits me fine, because it works for me.

I also don't look for opportunities to be personally insulting. I ascribe to the Rogerian notion of "unconditional positive regard" for other people. This is a value I have chosen because in my experience it is much more likely to be effective. I'd much rather be effective in changing the attitudes and irrational beliefs of a racist, than in asserting my moral superiority over that "evil low-life." I try to challenge illogical beliefs, but respect the personhood of the individual who holds that belief.

People are complicated. I try to respect that. If a person experiences my interchanges with them as being respectful of them as an individual, they are more likely to seriously consider my own differing view as having at least as much validity as theirs. Who knows, they may even, over time, change their belief? (And since I do not have a corner on the market on truth or reality, sometimes I change or modify mine.) My experience and observation regarding overt racism (and with most hardcore "isms") is that they are based on fear and a misapprehension (sp?) and miss-identification of the actual source of the threat. Often I understand the threat to be a bogeyman (like I said, I'm hard to insult,) but can accept the fear the other experiences is real. That is, to be clear, they truly, really, are experiencing intensely fearful emotions to a perceived threat. Fear is more difficult to tolerate than anger for most people, so people have a tendency to consciously experience the anger emotion, and the fear is more unconscious.

For myself, I prefer to respond to a person with racist beliefs in a manner that could possibly result in a change in their perspective. I will rationally challenge their beliefs, but will do my best to respect the person. Sometimes it works.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: michaelr
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 07:49 PM

Joe, I have great respect for you, and I really don't want to appear to tar you with a broad brush, or to turn this into a fight (although "I thought you were smarter than that" does ring just a bit condescending). Let me just respond to your statement that "There is no such policy, stated or unstated. What was done was an aberration".

That is the same argument ("a few bad apples") made by the US military and numerous government officials when the tales and photos regarding prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib/Guantanamo/etc. were made public. I'm afraid it doesn't wash. Such criminal behavior would not have been possible on the scale it was perpetrated without implicit condoning by the management, i.e. an unstated policy. The same is true for what's been going on in the Catholic Church, and to me is a clear symptom of systemic internal rot.

You also said, "The statement also makes the very clear implication that ALL members of the Catholic Church have condoned the child molestation problem".

No, it does not. I'm sorry you read it that way, but it is not at all what I was saying. I'm sure that most people (of faith or no) abhor these practices. It's the church's management that has condoned the problem by systematically shielding the offenders from dismissal and prosecution.

Virginia Tam, you wrote: "Expecting someone to disengage from an organisation due {to} problems with a minority is bit like expecting people who can't abide any (even trace) amount of pollution to move to another planet. Isn't it better to stay in and work to fix the problem?"

The pollution/another planet analogy is hardly apt. Rather, following your line of thought, should folks not then try to reform the BNP from the inside, instead of turning their backs in disgust?

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 07:44 PM

Jack, I meant exactly what I said. Those who use bullying, Brownshirt tactics to oppose the BNP, are deplorable. They are no better than the abomination they oppose. Same thing applies to those who kill or terrorize or bully in their so-called "pro-life" campaign.

And you, sir, are one who has used those tactics in your misguided and misinformed attack on Sing Out! Magazine. You should be ashamed of yourself for what you did in that thread. If you had an ounce of integrity, you would go to that thread and post an apology, and send a copy of the apology to the editor of the magazine.

Tactics like that are wrong, no matter how righteous the cause; and I think it's time to speak out against such tactics.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: artbrooks
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 07:33 PM

Is there something wrong with being opposed to the brownshirts of the BNP?

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 07:18 PM

...the wrongheaded reaction to 911- a lot of people saw friendly criticism of the USA as treason or worse.

Maybe I'm blockheaded, but that wasn't how it came across to me. As I experienced it, the people who saw it that way on the Mudcat were pretty few and far between. Lots of arguments about going to war, but that's another matter, and the advocates of war were as likely to be British as American.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Jack Campin
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 07:18 PM

Joe Offer wrote:
the anti-BNP brownshirts

That is WAY over the line.

You owe an apology to the people you meant by that.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 07:18 PM

Paul, what you say shows real wisdom. The fight for justice and integrity must continue. But I think most of us here feel more-or-less the same way, even though we may disagree on the fine points of some issues. I'm an activist, and I have fought my entire life for justice and integrity and tolerance. I've always found that most folkies share my ideals - but at Mudcat, we sometimes forget how much we have in common.

I come to Mudcat partly for solidarity and support, and sometimes I find unfair condemnation instead.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 07:16 PM

Joe, that is a good 'un, and, possibly, a good one to end on.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Paul Burke
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 07:05 PM

Hah Joe, you think you won over Bush... we thought we'd won over Thatcher's Tories in 1997. And we are comparing Obama with Blair. I think you're partly right and partly wrong over the nastiness on Mudcat. Nastiness isn't new- remember those two guitars? And I preserve on my computer copies of PMs from certain members who like to pose as models of tolerant open- mindedness, just for fun.

I've posted here opposing crude antiFascism. On the grounds that it doesn't work. I sometimes think you (personal attack) have something of the mindset of the ACLU - allow them enough rope, they'll hang themselves. Probably true, but they'll also probably hang us first.

Over the Catholics, you're a child of Vatican II, and see Christianity as a community. Don't forget that the fundies hate you as much, if not more, than Muslims. You're the Whore of Babylon. As for child molestation, it's not exclusive to any organisation, but any organisation that hides it as an internal matter deserves a thumping when it leaks out.

I do think Mudcat has split badly in recent years, but the reason in my (absolutely unchallengable) opinion was the wrongheaded reaction to 911- a lot of people saw friendly criticism of the USA as treason or worse.

And Mudcat still has its good side of caring and supportive people who will rally round and give a leg up to the lonely, despairing or lost, and that is what a real community does.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 06:48 PM

I cannot see how questioning, or challenging past actions of the "Catholic Church" organization" and shameful (and I submit ant-Christian) practices of some priests and people in positions of authority (and policies that allowed it) are anti-Christian?   

Most of these folks do not disrespect Catholic ttheology followers. I also submit that the same goes for any similar despicable situation or actions involving any Christian religeon (or individual in authority) from any organized religeon, Christian or non-Christian. I am a Christian, and respect all religeons. I do not have any special place for Christian wrong doing.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 06:47 PM

Well I haven't been here very long. But I've nevertheless successfully totalled three members from the UK that were prior PM'ers, but have left out of frustration with the situations they have encountered here..

Nothing at all to do with either Christianity or the BNP, and none of them have left in a big fan-fair either. My take is that they were of a similar mindset to me in fact and I'm pretty easy going IMO.

Oddly enough when I first began posting, I received an unexpected PM from another UK member saying it was nice to meet me, and that they sometimes left Mudcat to get a breather, due to how oppressive it could feel here...

Just saying like! Hope it helps... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: skarpi
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 06:37 PM

thats what I ment Amos :)

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Amos
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 06:36 PM

I want to see Mudcat as a home for good spirit, good listeners, and rational and creative thinking.

Hear, hear, hear, hear.




A

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: skarpi
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 06:33 PM

many Europeans are still blaming us for George Bush and his dirty little war.

Joe At least here we DONT blame you the people of this war ,
there are two men who that made that dirty war , one is Bush and the other witch many people will forget is Tony Blair .
And I am not an European , and I never will be .

Joe thanks for good words up there .

sorry I came in again
kv Skarpi Iceland

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 06:23 PM

Hey, Villan, I just got Internet service back, and I've been stewing over things for a day and have a few things to say....

Except for my brief time at the library yesterday, this is the first time in 24 hours that I have been able to view this thread. AT&T says my Internet connection is fine, and Netgear says my modem is fine - but all I can usually load is the title and first three lines of Web pages. Maybe my service is improving - it took only three minutes toload this page..... [but when I finally posted this, I had GREAT Internet service, and the AT&T technician was wonderful]

I can't say I really mind the term "Murkan" or "Xtian," although I can't really see a reason for using the latter instead of "Christian" - and I do suspect that the terms are sometimes used with the intent to annoy or belittle. When that's the case, I don't think it's healthy - but I can't find clear-cut instances where that is the case. When I was in the U.S. Army in Berlin, we referred to our counterparts in the next room as "Brits." We used the term with esteem, and they appreciated it. I suppose there are times when the term is not understood as an expression of esteem - but when I use it, it's always respectful. It recalls the first time that I had everyday experience of "Brits," and they were older, wiser, nicer, and far better German linguists than we were.

At 9:46 PM (Mudcat time) yesterday, Katlaughing asked if there were recent examples of anti-Christian prejudice. Two messages later, at 9:55, Michaelr proved my point by posting this, a very good example of what I've described as the Conventional Wisdom (attempt at diplomacy noted):

Thread #124666   Message #2755372
Posted By: michaelr
29-Oct-09 - 09:55 PM
Thread Name: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread


Far be it from me to engage in Joe-bashing, but I'm compelled to gently point out the following:

I am quite sure you're no pedophile, but you do identify as a member of an organisation whose (albeit unstated) policy it has been for a number of decades, if not centuries, to shelter and protect sexual predators and abusers of children. If it was me, I would have cut all ties to said organization a long time ago, and I certainly would not admit publicly to being a member.

Best regards,
Michael

Michael, I thought you were smarter than that. There is no such policy, stated or unstated. What was done was an aberration, and the overwhelming majority of Catholic lay people, priests, religious, bishops, and popes are mad as hell about it. Yet I have to admit that some of those in management positions may have covered this conduct up out of fear or denial, even though they detest the conduct itself. Such is the nature of organizations - managers like to believe they are flawless, and they tend to cover things up when they aren't. I suppose we all are guilty of covering up our shortcomings at times. But I don't believe in the management of the Catholic Church - or in the managers of most organizations. I think managers tend to be corrupt, even though I might believe passionately in the goals of their organizations. Even Cesar Chavez disappointed me when he became a manager.

Now, you may think that this isn't so bad, but how would you feel if you lived your life in a Catholic tradition that you love and think of as part of yourself; and if you worked passionately for a lifetime to right the wrongs of your church, only to be told time and time again that you are to blame for the problem and you should be ashamed to even be a member of that church? The not-so-hidden implication is that those who stay and fight are obliged to turn and run instead of staying to correct the problem. The statement also makes the very clear implication that ALL members of the Catholic Church have condoned the child molestation problem, and that is an absolute lie. And this is repeated at Mudcat, over and over again. If it were said once, it wouldn't be a big deal - but it is said so often at Mudcat that I can rightly say that it has become the Conventional Wisdom. As a rule, the loudest voices among Mudcatters condemn all Catholics for the child molestation problem, making no recognition that it exists and hasn't been resolved in many, many institutions - and that the vast majority of Catholic deplore this atrocity. But in a church with a billion members, we're bound to have some serious problems.

And the same thing goes for the Brits who class all Americans with George Bush, ignoring how so many of us American Mudcatters fought so hard against Bush and Cheney for so long - and ignoring the fact that we finally won our struggle. Despite the fact that we threw the right-wingers out, many Europeans are still blaming us for George Bush and his dirty little war.

Maybe we "Murkans" should start blaming the British for the BNP. After all, the BNP stands for British Nationalism and Patriotism - albeit a very distorted view of these values. But the child molestation and fundamentalism and Bush/Cheneyism are all distorted views, and the entire group should not be blamed for the distortions of the few. But at Mudcat, blame is the name of the game. I suppose it's the rule for all "social networking" sites, and for much of what passes as journalism nowadays. I guess I just hoped Mudcat would be better.

As an American who fought hard against Nixon and Reagan and Bush/Cheney, I thought I could look to my British fellow Mudcatters for solidarity and support, not for condemnation for the very thing I've fought so hard against. And the same goes for the evils in the Catholic Church that I've fought my entire life to correct.

---

And now on to the BNP. It's obvious that the anti-BNP extremists just don't understand that those of us who disagree with their abusive tactics, DO agree with their opposition to the BNP. It's like I said about people like me who are pro-choice, pro-life, anti-abortion Catholics. I agree with Barack Obama that abortion is a bad thing and that the number of abortions needs to be greatly reduced by reducing the need for abortion, but I don't think abortion can be ended by coercion. But the anti-BNP brownshirts call me pro-BNP, and the "pro-life" extremists call me and Barack "abortionists." In both cases, I agree with the goals, but not the abusive, coercive tactics of the extreme proponents of these causes. Irishenglish defined my point of view quite succinctly:

I get your basic point-don't fight fire with fire, regarding the BNP.

What I'd like to see in the face of controversial issues, is the best of Mudcat, not the lowest common denominator. I hate to see the loudest screamers prevail, even though that's the case over so much of the Internet and other media - I want to see Mudcat as a home for good spirit, good listeners, and rational and creative thinking. Mudcat is a music site - I'd like to see songs written to oppose the BNP, and I would hope those songs could be rational and witty and insightful - just like the discussion should be. I'd like to see an end to name-calling and bullying and rash generalizations and scapegoating. I'd like to see a healthy dose of humor in every discussion - clever humor, not the nasty sort. I'd like to see gentle integrity prevail over oppressive aggression - at least here at Mudcat. And I believe that most people at Mudcat ARE people of gentle integrity, even though they may fail sometimes and slip into the Conventional Wisdom and rash generalizations that I complain about.

I'm sure that a few people will think of me as a hypocrite for saying all this, since I had to take rather harsh measures against them because of their conduct caused long-term problems - at least three of them have posted in this thread. I notice one simply reeks with sarcasm. I can understand why his feelings were hurt, but such is life. He did nothing wrong, but what he was doing was causing a serious problem.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: SharonA
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 06:19 PM

Sinsull and jacqui: It was July 3rd, 2006 when Big Mick sent me a PM -- an olive branch after a long-forgotten verbal dust-up on a long-forgotten thread -- saying that he lived (at the time) in the same metropolitan area as I, and offering to buy me "a cuppa coffee", get to know me and swap some songs.

I am still waiting, even after several attempts to arrange a meeting when I had a gig near his stompin' grounds.... so if I'm truly at the top of Mick's to-do-on-the-East-Coast list, I'll believe it when I see that list -- and him!!!!! :-D :-D :-D

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Rasener
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 06:00 PM

Agreed Skarpi

The topic has run its course.

Not sure if anything has been achieved other than people being pretty nice to each other.

However give it a week and something else will explode :-)

Thats Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: skarpi
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 05:50 PM

this is not goin anywhere ,
I am out of here
kv Skarpi Icland.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 05:15 PM

Well bar this LC:

"And now I'll leave all those with The Christian Agenda to argue over big C's and little c's..and which means what..

I'm not 'a Christian' nor anything else, but I have tremendous Faith, something that's always been inside me, just 'there'...but I tell you what, this ol' world could sure do with a Jesus right now, or a Buddha, or a Mohammed..

And the Americans and Canadians are pretty darn cool....whilst the Bloomin' English are hellbent on being as bitchy and bogminded as they can possibly be, because we have become a culture of spite, where put downs score points..."

I could give you a big fat English-arsed hug! Because I personally think Mudcat works pretty well considering it;s a ferment of so many different countries and cultures. Of course I was barracked a bit by one of the resident Xtians over my use of a word to be readily found in the OED, but never mind - I was just pointing out that Christian is as christian does!

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 05:06 PM

Does anyone think that part of the reason the Brits' children are spewing up their souls on our city streets each night, bankrupting the National Health Service on the way, may have anything to do with a country who has denied it's people faith, making all feel that believing in Christianity is 'kinda weird, man'....

Our children have nothing to believe in. Their religion has gone, their culture has gone, their history is belittled, they're made to feel that they've been horrible to the entire world and now have their just desserts.

Is it any wonder that they now worship Simon Cowell.

Jesus? Simon Cowell?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.......

"Pass the Budweiser, mate..." burp...

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Rasener
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 04:59 PM

I think anybody that does not live in America, should be banned from joining Mudcat.

That'll sort it out.

We Brits won't have to put up with your whinging about your presidents and future presidents and religion etc etc.

You then won't have to put up with us in the UK going on about the BNP and religions in our country.

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: SINSULL
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 04:49 PM

A serious response to Joe's opening post. I am an ex-Catholic for many reasons but have no animosity towards anyone who sincerely practices a religion. I hope that my posts have reflected that. If not, I apologize. In a way I envy those with a belief system to guide them. I constantly have to revise my own rule book and it is tough.
Mary

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 04:47 PM

If Christians/Catholics are all like Dan, then let the whole world take on Christianity right now, because, heck, can that lovely man show many people on here the *right* way to feel about your fellow human beings.

Personally, I think someone should tell the Pope about him....let him take over The Vatican, because heck, would Dan get a few changes made, for the better!   :0)

He is kindness personified, and I very much hope that he comes back to Mudcat soon.

As for those who choose to join the BNP, then tell folks on here they've done so, well...er..what do they expect to happen? I mean, do they think there's going to be a few pats on the back and choruses of "Oh, well done, dear!" The very fact that the lady in question came on here to tell folks was questionable in itself.

It is no good joining the BNP thinking that they're all about 'being English', 'cos they ain't.

It is no good saying that Nick's a really good chappie, 'cos he's nuts..and he's a Dangerous Nut at that. (Apologies to all Nuts out there who may be deeply offended, but he's King Nut and it has to be said folks!)

Helloeeeeeeeeee, Youtube has been Nutty Nick's downfall, because every time he says 'I NEVER said that!' we all fall around, as we're watching him saying *exactly* that to his KKK buddies, or his Non-Holocaust Believers....I mean any woman who can want to stand beside a man who not only says that, but then says 'Oh, I don't know what made me say that' has to be more than sixpence short of a shilling..

Sorry kid, but you have sooooooo joined the wrong party! Unless of course, you're a racist, a person who hates those who 'don't belong here', have the wrong colour skin, believe in the wrong religion, have the wrong surnames or dress damned funny, eating smelly food....in which case, you have soooooo joined the correct party, and I'm sure you'll have LOADS in common with King Nut and his BNPy Buddies. After all, Nutty Nick even has God on his side, with his very own Nutty Vicar and Church. How cool is that, your own Nutty Vicar!

As to those who explode over the BNP and all who sail in her, using the f word very liberally...well, good on them!

And of course, there is one person in particular for whom I have the greatest admiration, because unlike those in the KKK who have set folks on fire for being the wrong kind of folks, he actually goes into any fire and rescues all *people* in there, regardless of race, religion, colour or creed.

So if he tells 'em all to fuck off, with bells on, good on him!

Hell, we so need more people like him who aren't bloody scared of scumbags.

And as for all those who fall over sideways in shock over his anger at the BNP...oh, come ONNNNNNNNN!   Grow up, guys.



What's wrong with Mudcat?

Nothing, Joe. It's absolutely bloody wonderful!!!!! :0)

It is one of the few places where freedom of speech still pretty much goes...and all of those who want more moderation, of fer fook's sake, go and live in Orwellianville and stop trying to control others!

This place is bloody marvellous!   And I LOVE it!!

I also like that nurse who prayed for her patients, because hell, I expect she knows that The Devil has arrived inside the NHS, trying to turn it into the National Hell Service, which is why my 95 year old ex mother in law was told that she'd have to stand up and wash for the rest of her days because they'd not give her handles for her bath as she was considered too healthy!

Yeesh!

And I tell you what, some deeply kind souls took the trouble to ring up and write in to her, even sending her £20 in a sweet anonymous note...so yes, there are still christian people out there, who care about others....

And now I'll leave all those with The Christian Agenda to argue over big C's and little c's..and which means what..

I'm not 'a Christian' nor anything else, but I have tremendous Faith, something that's always been inside me, just 'there'...but I tell you what, this ol' world could sure do with a Jesus right now, or a Buddha, or a Mohammed..

And the Americans and Canadians are pretty darn cool....whilst the Bloomin' English are hellbent on being as bitchy and bogminded as they can possibly be, because we have become a culture of spite, where put downs score points...

Well, sod the put downs...bring back the kindness!

And THAT reminds me....

BRING BACK DAN!!

Spaw, go find him, immediately...and tell him he's missed and loved by us all. And *that* is an order!

Long Live Mudcat! :0) xxx

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: SINSULL
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 04:46 PM

Canadians are a sneaky bunch - tossing worthless coins into our tolls and then using our roads anyway.

I am neither Christian nor christian and certainly not Murkan.

Subject: RE: BS: The problem at Mudcat? Moderated thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Oct 09 - 04:43 PM

But my impression is that the kind of posts that got Joe lamenting that "the Conventional Wisdom at Mudcat is that Christians are evil" (mistakenly in my opinion, though I can understand why he felt moved to write it) have been at least as likely to come from Americans.

What can be called the fundamentalist mindset is not always confined to people who claim to be religious.