BS: Dwindling BS section

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 07:38 PM

What has happened to those lively debates on just about every subject under the sun?

Have the actions of an unpleasant few really destroyed, or is it just passing through a bad patch?

Currently the MOAB is 89.6% of all that's here.

P.S. Elves please kill the OP. I hit submit too soon.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jeri
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 07:42 PM

I liked the discussions that WEREN'T "debates".
I suspect people got fed up with the obsessive assholes, who seem to have quieted down for some reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 08:31 PM

Do name names please.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: gnu
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 08:46 PM

NO! Don't name names! >;-)

Jeri has struck the nail on the head. As usual. She has given me sage advice and well deserved condemnation over the years. Although, I will say, in my own defense

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Padre (has anybody seen my cookie?)
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 09:09 PM

I for one am glad to see fewer posts in the BS section - because they usually WERE screeds from one point of view or another, followed by angry, often immature posts in response, leading the original poster to fire back, until the 'battlefield' was covered in thick, dank smoke . At one time, there was even an option allowing a reader to totally block the 'below the line' posts, and I gratefully used that feature.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve sans cookie (bloody iPad)
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 09:26 PM

Yes, name names. Especially name real names. Less of the pusillanimous "assholes and you know who you are" shite, if you don't mind. Some of us are assholes but we're a damn sight more open and honest than some of the accusers who (without irony of course - "Jeri" shall remain nameless, for example) are very happy to call others assholes from behind their protective curtain of anonymity. Yours sincerely, Steve (asshole-in-chief). :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jeri
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 09:44 PM

Does somebody need a hug?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: gnu
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 09:56 PM

Well, there it is for what it's worth. Long gone are the days when trolls were slayed by the wit of Spaw or the constant and undaunted logic of the stalwart or the vicious self-impaling of those willing to forego all decorum and wreak havoc at whatever cost for the very sake of decorum.

Spaw himself gave up and toddled off to greener pastures and, more or less, said "fuck this bullshit" as did many others in kind and in turn. And, as Jeri has alluded to, so did the trolls, as was advised in the oldest of "Welcome to Mudcat, here's some ground rules and tips" threads. Even the friendly trolls. Mudchat was destroyed by but a few nasties.

Hmmm... reminiscing about the good old days makes me weary.

gnightgnu

PS... it's been a slice. Thanks Max.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Phil Cooper
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 10:29 PM

I rarely have posted below the line. I don't come here to argue. I liked Jeri's post. When you see the same folks make the same points in the same thread time after time, it's clear nothing positive is being done. You won't change people's minds by telling them they're evil, stupid, and wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Mrrzy
Date: 29 Oct 14 - 10:54 PM

Well, what is interesting to talk about?

How about, when did the carrot ON the stick become the carrot AND the stick?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 02:03 AM

For what it's worth, in my humble opinion, the vociferousness of a limited number of right-wing, racist, sexist, fundamentalist, gun-loving, neo-liberal and Blairite "contributors" have made this place unpleasant - as similarly applies to "contributors" above the line whose purpose appears to be to deny or destroy the concept of "folk" music and song.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 02:29 AM

I miss the recipe chat and holiday talk - no matter what time of year it is, there's always some local festival or holiday and realted foods. Bat Goddess and I were big on those topics

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 02:47 AM

Room for some more categories Bridge? You might have missed a few. Armchair socialists, one world Tories who pretend to be right on...

Ah. That's better. A thread where you can point and laugh at pompous sanctimony. Like those who sneer and reckon they are above opinion yet curiously give it out. (Stand down Bridge. I'm onto other buggers now.). Those who can't spell "colour" or defend gun crime. One or two who advocate killing prisoners yet complain when called despicable by members of the human race. Those who rate good v bad by comparing imaginary friends. Those who claim it free speech to print lies in order to propagate hatred to whole sections of society.

These are the ones who complain about the BS section. Their complaint being that they find themselves challenged, and in the immortal words of Corporal Jones, "the fuzzy wuzzies don't like it up 'em.".

Nice to be back to a thread where no bugger wants a hug.
🐂💩

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 02:59 AM

Richard Bridge: "For what it's worth, in my humble opinion, the vociferousness of a limited number of right-wing, racist, sexist, fundamentalist, gun-loving, neo-liberal and Blairite "contributors" have made this place unpleasant......."

Yes!....An EXACT illustration of what fuels hostile exchanges....look at Richard's post :'right-wing, racist, sexist, fundamentalist, gun-loving, neo-liberal and Blairite "contributors'...when the people he is 'accusing' of those things, are NOT any of the above, and only painted that way, 'politically', and the proceed to be attacked....and very often because the ones attacking, subscribe to a VERY hostile, up-tight, view of a wider picture, that also incorporates common sense.

Richard Bridge:"....... - as similarly applies to "contributors" above the line whose purpose appears to be to deny or destroy the concept of "folk" music and song."

On this, I agree.....and depending on the varied definitions of 'folk'.
Nonetheless, I have repeatedly posted, that the angst in which some posters post, should be a tool, in composing music and writing lyrics... not for the 'subject matter' being discussed particularly, but for the essence of emotions, 'good or bad', that, in turn, can be caught in music...or even a musical phrase, or dialogue of emotions, contained within a single piece.

Methinks some of your tunes maybe be as single dimensional as your world view, through the spectacles of political chicanery!

Think about it for a moment....BEFORE you feel that uncontrollable urge to 'defend' your political identity...as if it were REALLY you, and who you are!!!!!!

PEACE!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 04:16 AM

Yeah but be fair Goofus. He has you weighed up...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 05:47 AM

I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who are ready to jump up and tell us what we debate and how we should conduct ourselves on an open and supposedly democratic forum.
That some of us should become angry at what is happening in Israel or Syria or Ireland or to racial and cultural minorities back home in Britain, and should occasionally go over the top in expressing our anger is, as far as I am concerned, a sign that the evils of our time do not go unnoticed.
While most of them are beyond our control, forums like these provide an out let to our anger.
Those who are not concerned, or do not want to think about these things, should feel free not to take part in these debates.
Last week-end in Waterford City, in the south of Ireland, a mob of three hundred assembled outside the homes of a number of Roma asylum seekers, kicking down doors and breaking windows and demanding they should be sent back to where they came from.
While I'm sure some people would rather be discussing 'numbered U.S. highways' or 'quotable quotes', some of us would be just as happy discussing other things - preferably without judgmental interference.   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jeri
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 08:37 AM

See, Steve, no need to name names.

Mrrzy, I always thought it was carrot OR the stick.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 09:23 AM

RE: BS: Dwindling BS section:

Many of them "dwindled" to Facebook... others with 'colorful' personalities (sometimes multiple personalities) have given up, died or been chased out. (and a couple banned outright)

Many of those old threads were filled with raucous humor, creative writing, interesting commentary on the world and silly non-sequiturs ... as well as the aforementioned opinionated assholes who could not seem to have an opinion without stating it in the most confrontational manner possible.

Me? I'm here because I've always been here. I liked the variety, and although I do peek into FB, I like this format better... (6 paragraphs required to explain).

I very seldom start a topic, preferring to add my **wisdom** (cough) to the musings of others..(the last time it went as I expected, with the usual suspects tending to drown out attempts at sincere discussion/debate with insults).... I suppose this thread will dissolve into the same pattern.

Also, some of the hot button topics have been done to death... guns, evolution, astrology (some of you missed the LONG bits on astrology), the Middle East (which still crops up over some recent events), 911 conspiracy theories...etc. What surprises me is that there are so few comments on the ongoing political issues- especially in the US, where mind-numbing issues of voter suppression and court-packing are making progress non existent.

Still, there's enough to interest me..(see Joe's thread on US 2 lane highways!) I don't NEED to explain philosophy & logic everyday... but can't always resist when I see obvious problems. I do try to keep my remarks 'polite', even when pointed.... and I have been criticized for NOT being more directly confrontational (as in 'just as insulting as others'.) Makes ya' wonder....

Whatever... I still read many of the music threads, and very occasionally add a bit as I used to do, although after 16 years, there are many here far more knowledgeable than me.

Now... I am going to start a topical thread with a time-limited photo... go see the Halloween thread

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 09:35 AM

I must say that I often avoid threads where the same names come up repeatedly. I find some of those folks very confrontational. I know they call it "debate" and "freedom of speech". But mostly it is just a lot of crusty old farts trying to saw sawdust.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: bobad
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 09:51 AM

Like flies to shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Mrrzy
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 10:22 AM

Yeah, the carrot is now the reward, the stick is now the punishment, but the carrot on the stick was neither of the above, it was a promised BUT NOT ATTAINABLE reward to motivate the stupid.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 10:51 AM

"See, Steve, no need to name names."
What a strangely self-righteous thread
Do you think I should ask and adjudicator to close it down or have we we developed a procedure where adjudicators are self-appointed?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 10:58 AM

I think the answer for those concerned either with a) the arguing on political threads or b) the diminishing of the BS section possibly due to a, is simply to make an effort to initiate more threads on topics that are interesting to you, or which avoid the possible negative err 'vibes' that you don't enjoy.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 11:52 AM

I need a hug...to resolve my frustration

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 12:23 PM

"Dwindling BS section" My first impulse was to respond with "We just don't do enough crap".

I've changed my mind. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 12:27 PM

▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭▭



Insert your own teeny-weeny unreadable little teeny-weeny letters......

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 12:28 PM

Try eating prunes. You'll never have to change your mind again.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 02:48 PM

i like a good discussion - i really never meet anyone prepared to argue from a right-wing or establishment/capitalist perspective in real life. however, every time something gets going on here there is always a descent to cheap abuse and personal attacks. (eg as a socialist why am i inevitably of the champagne sort or a 'trendy lefty' - when i never drink champagne (or wine at more than 6 poonds a bottle) and have never been remotely trendy since the rock against racism days)
something new on here may be a bit of honesty.
Q. why do you post on chat room sites?
Q. is it more interesting to make your own points or slag off others' points?
Q. are you lonely? are you an angry person?
q. would you like a hug?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Mrrzy
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 03:54 PM

Anyway, I've asked about the carrot on the stick to a lot of language fora (?) to no avail, so I thought I'd try here. There is a lot of strange knowledge floating around in the brains of the people here.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve still on the bloody iPad
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 03:56 PM

So name your own name, Jeri. I don't even know whether you're a boy or a girl. And I note you let go without demur brainless comments from anonymous gits with names such as "gnu" who diss people who disagree with his illiberal nonsense by referring to them as flies to shit. Good to know from your silence whose side you're on. Go and hug gnu. You and he/she need each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Gurney
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 04:18 PM

Steve, Gnu isn't anonymous! He's well-known here, and he can be for or against any subject, depending on his mood, as stimulated by previous posts. It IS the bullshit section, after all.

I'm also finding the BS section less interesting these days, partly because Little Hawk posts so seldom. I miss his whimsy, and the wry comments of posters like him.
Too many people who are erudite but not humourous, in my view.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 04:26 PM

At this point, people are known by whatever name they use here, it doesn't really matter if it is a real name or a moniker. Gnu is gnu, a lot of mudcat members wouldn't know who it was if he started to call himself Gary here.

If the mudcat account name changes, people would have to figure out who is posting, as has happened at times in the past when people decide to change the name for some reason or other.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 04:52 PM

Mrrzy:
Well, what is interesting to talk about?

How about, when did the carrot ON the stick become the carrot AND the stick?
I am not sure that there ever was such a change (except in some peoples perceptions). My understanding is that the expression was always "the carrot and the stick", referring to a carrot (on a piece of string) attached to a stick, which was in turn attached to the harness on a donkey (or mule). The carrot seemed close enough that the donkey could reach out and eat it, but it was just too far away. Stepping forward (to get closer to the carrot) would cause it to swing on the string, appearing to become even more attainable, and encouraging the donkey to keep trying to move forward.
Under such conditions the expression "the carrot and the stick" makes sense. Unfortunately, some rationalise the same expression as meaning two separate things, the carrot for reward, or the stick for punishment. Once this alternate view takes hold, some (who know the original meaning) may take to re-writing the original expression as "the carrot on the stick" to make the meaning clear.
As such, I believe the latter expression is merely a back-formation.


My opinion only :)

Cheers
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 05:14 PM

Sorry Maggie, but the mods are the problem.

Any subject should be up for debate, personal abuse should be stopped, too often it is allowed to pass by people like jeri who are more like cheerleaders than moderators.
He/she, rarely posts a personal opinion, or joins in debate, but regularly snipes from the sidelines.
Moderators have a duty to see that CIVIL debate can continue, regardless of their personal views.

You asked me to stop posting and I acceded to your request, by my views are firmly held and will be advanced when this forum is moderated as it should be.
Too many here have been driven away by the cursing and sneering of the "equality loving" Mr Mather ....when left to his own devices, he is a poor "draw".....don't you think?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 05:35 PM

Can't say I mind the dwindling nature of the BS section. The nastiness and bigotry there, has been an embarrassment. I think it has cared many people away, and has become dominated by bullies. I think that our discussions have a much friendlier tone on the Mudcat Facebook page, and I think it's an advantage that Facebook discussions disappear after a while.
I do hate it when people discuss songs on Facebook, because those discussions disappear; but the Mudcat Facebook page seems to be a good place for ephemeral things like concert and folk club announcements.
The trouble is, the BS and ephemeral things do draw people, and they are then available to give input on more permanent things like song research.
So, I dunno.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve on damned iPad but still undeniably St
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 05:40 PM

"Gnu" and his ilk will always be able to issue a blanket diss such as "flies to shit" of those who disagree with his extreme right-wing and illiberal views because he is anonymous. Whether some in-crowd here know who he really is nothing to do with me. Nothing like having to use your real name to make you think twice about posting ill-considered bilge. I occasionally post to the Gaughan forum which permits you to have a soubriquet (I don't bother) but which insists that your real name is available to every subscriber. The manners there are impeccable, the moderation is firm and there would be absolutely no room for the likes of gnu, akenaton, goofus and their like posting under their present guise and in such ill-considered ways. Not even you, Jeri. I didn't even know you were a mod. You don't act like one.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 05:42 PM

I am undeniably not a saint. Not the first time I've been truncated.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Unsaintly Steve
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 05:43 PM

That was me.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Janie
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 07:48 PM

Neither the Mudcat BS section nor me are as much fun as we used to be. Lots of reasons. Evolution and de-evolution.

But still here, fwiw.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Troubadour.
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 08:05 PM

"These are the ones who complain about the BS section. Their complaint being that they find themselves challenged, and in the immortal words of Corporal Jones, "the fuzzy wuzzies don't like it up 'em."."

Precisely the opposite of my reason for deleting my membership! I have never even suggested that there was anything wrong with Max's formula for the Cat!

"I very seldom start a topic, preferring to add my **wisdom** (cough) to the musings of others..(the last time it went as I expected, with the usual suspects tending to drown out attempts at sincere discussion/debate with insults).... I suppose this thread will dissolve into the same pattern."

I hope not Bill D, as I always relished your erudite and reasoned contributions to genuine debate.

"I think the answer for those concerned either with a) the arguing on political threads or b) the diminishing of the BS section possibly due to a, is simply to make an effort to initiate more threads on topics that are interesting to you, or which avoid the possible negative err 'vibes' that you don't enjoy."

Which is exactly my point C.S. When you are so much pursued by certain people, that you cannot post on any thread without the hounds following for the opportunity of debunking all that you have to say, the only answer to the trolls is to delete your membership and either bugger off, or, as I have chosen to do, conceal your identity under the GUEST tag.

While you remain identifiable, as I once was (with photo et al), the nasties never relent!

I can relate to Guest achmelvich, who seems to grasp what is wrong, though his stance diverges widely from my own.

I have more respect for the poster who can disagree without a)Twisting the words I use, b) Claiming the right to always be right, and c) Calling me nasty names when he can't make me recant!

"I'm also finding the BS section less interesting these days, partly because Little Hawk posts so seldom. I miss his whimsy, and the wry comments of posters like him."

I agree Gurney, and a lot of posters in the same category. I am bored of those who can see no other viewpoint than their own.

"The manners there are impeccable, the moderation is firm and there would be absolutely no room for the likes of gnu, akenaton, goofus and their like posting under their present guise and in such ill-considered ways."

MAX, bless him, decided that he wanted the forum to be as free and unfettered as he could make it, and to some extent, we have all let him down very badly.

I had hoped that this might be an amicable discussion leading to a better BS section. Seems that I asked too much!

Mods, as the OP, please terminate this here!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 08:41 PM

Bill D: "Many of them "dwindled" to Facebook... others with 'colorful' personalities (sometimes multiple personalities) have given up, died or been chased out. (and a couple banned outright)..."

..and some of them are embarrassed to show their faces, because they used to champion our current administration....who has turned out to be....well, 'less than honest'??....but don't feel alone...almost every Senator who was catering to the 'so-called liberal' base, are running from Obama, to save their political asses!

True story.....
Makes you wonder with anticipation, that the 'so-calleds' will accuse those same Senators who are trying to save their seats(and asses), by distancing themselves from the President, of being 'Racists'.....

...and when the debates disintegrate into THAT nonsense, which it already has on many occasions, is why the B.S. Section has dwindled...those idiotic posts from idiotic ideologues, just drown out every bit of common sense with their uniform, uninformed roar!
.....now nobody wants to listen to them...or even have dialogue with them....they're lunatics!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 09:29 PM

No-one has let anyone else down badly. The baleful fact is that the internet is full of poisonous eejits spilling their testosterone over the planet in poisonous threads on poisonous forums, all because they can do so from behind a protective curtain of anonymity. Force every poster to reveal their true identity and, believe me, you would fix 99% of the internet social scene's problems. I haven't half heard some arrant bullshit about this. "I can't reveal my identity for professional reasons." "If everyone knew who I was, I'd be hounded and intimidated." Well I've posted tens of thousands of controversial posts over the last dozen years on umpteen forums on religion, sex, Israel, abortion, lousy bodhran players (which is all of 'em by the way) and God knows what else. I was in voluntary exile from one forum for years and I got kicked off another. I'm well known in my own little musical circle and I've written over forty articles in a music magazine over the last eight years. Yet not once have I had a poison pen letter or a threat or been subjected to offline hassle. NOT ONCE. The one forum I'm on that allows controversy that forbids anonymity is the one forum I'm on where the manners are always good. This forum has many good points, but it allows regulars such as gnu, goofus, akenaton and other such toerags to post their unthinking bile anonymously. It allows people who are not even signed up to post their bile as "guests" (what a bloody farce - really!). I could post here under several names and I doubt whether anyone would actually care. And you wonder why we get moans and groans about bad behaviour. We have moderators, so-called, who bollock people they happen to disagree with/make them uncomfortable, yet who allow sexists, racists, homophobes and Islamophobes to run riot, untrammelled, unchallenged.

The answer is simple. No anonymity. OK, have a pseudonym on the board if you must (Christ knows why you'd want to, though), but every other member has access to your real name. If you have some bullshit reason for not wanting us to know your real name, then just bugger off! No guests. You don't get to post unless you're a signed-up member. If your cookie's dead, you're dead as well until you fix it. That way you get a forum full of sweetness and light. If you don't agree with me, then stop bloody moaning about the "bad behaviour" of people you happen to not agree with. You're just asking for it!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 09:49 PM

Here ya go. With apologies to Dick Gaughan for not requesting permission, here's Rule Two of his forum:

2. No anonymous members.

It is a requirement of forum membership that you let the other members know who you are. There is not a single good reason in a forum of this kind for anonymity. If you are normally known by a nickname, by all means use it here; my birth name was Richard but the only people who ever use that are my parents (both dead) and my two sisters and their children. The no-anonymity rule is not here to check people's birth certificates, it is simply so that we all know who we're talking to and the risk of anonymous trolling is reduced. As said, by all means use a nickname on posts and as your username but please put your real name in your member profile and you will be asked to give it when registering.

"There is not a single good reason". And, if you don't like it, go elsewhere. And it works. The forum can get very controversial, but there's just one active moderator and she rarely needs to intervene (she's bloody tough when she does, though). Good manners prevail. If that's what you want, you can have it. But don't go all "laissez-faire-on-principle" then moan when it doesn't work.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Cthulhu
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 10:14 PM

So speaks "Guest from Sanity," one of the worst offenders when it comes to name-calling and twisting other people's posts. And stalking them in order to do so.

I agree with Steve Shaw. If a person has to use his or her real name, they tend to be a bit more circumspect.

"Careful! I know where you live!" keeps people a lot more civil.

Cthulhu

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 10:24 PM

importance of internet anonymity

take yer pick...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Janie
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 10:28 PM

Whew!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 10:28 PM

Steve.. just a little reminder...

I'll post the wiki entry rather than give a direct link...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redwatch

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 11:47 PM

GUEST,Cthulhu: "So speaks "Guest from Sanity," one of the worst offenders when it comes to name-calling and twisting other people's posts. And stalking them in order to do so."

Nonsense!..This is just more political driven drivel!..EXACTLY what I was just talking about!..Your accusations are phoney!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Cthulhu
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 01:00 AM

Nothing political about my TRUE accusations. It's a fact that all can see.   AND THEY DO.

Cthulhu

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 02:27 AM

Internet anonymous terms?

For starters there are three Muskets. Always have been. We all have the log in and wind each other up on the BS section by trying to keep the conversation as if it were one person. Ian started it and is often named, (it is usually Ian on the music threads though, although we all chip in with the absurd "what is folk" threads as they are more BS orientated than any other!). Out of interest, we know each other through the folk clubs over the years and in one way or another are in the same professional bearpit. I post as a guest sometimes when looking for musical answers.

There were four of us but Seaham Cemetry (sic) branched out as it were.

Interesting that Akenaton is so ashamed of his own bigotry he prefers to remain anonymous yet insists on calling Musket Ian Mather.

I suppose even nasty little creeps deserve to be accurate a third of the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 05:22 AM

Well I don't know what the rest of the membership think of the above admission, but to me it seems an example of the worst type of destructive trolling......as gnu is our resident expert on trolls perhaps he would like to comment?

Admin should be more consistent in what they allow, four people using the same handle to "wind-up" one another and the forum....hmmmm.

What about all the lies Mr Mather perpetuated about "Seaham Cemetery"? the person or "persons" who libelled me over the treatment of animals in my care!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 05:49 AM

Lies? Interesting use of the word...

This thread is about why BS is dwindling. Your unfortunate appearance makes further debate unnecessary.

Now bugger off before you manage your usual trick of introducing anal sex into the debate, like you usually do. Your unhealthy interest in the subject isn't nice for decent people to read.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve and his damned iPad
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:09 AM

There isn't a Redwatch any more and hasn't been for years. And why drag redness into this!

Here's the point. This is a music website that also allows wider-ranging discussion. Your presence here is entirely voluntary. If you feel at risk by revealing your true identity to other members, you're almost certainly (a) wrong, (b) egotistical. Maybe you're not as important as you think. So let's have a rule that each member's profile contains their true identity. If you don't like that rule, well you won't die by not coming here. My guess is that everybody already here would still be here. And a few other nice people too who are not here at the moment. Good manners would be de rigeur. Bad manners would be rare, such would be the improved ethos.

Take a look at that Gaughan forum. There's plenty about it I don't like and I'm an occasional contributor only. There are sensible people, hard-noses and downright bloody nitwits, just like here. And you can swear a lot. But there are no anonymous guests and there is no trolling and, in general, people are reasonably nice to each other even when they disagree. Supportive, even, when someone goes off half-cock. The moderator operates only occasionally and always with a light but firm touch. To a very significant degree, it's because anonymity is not allowed. We can have that if we want.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jack Campin
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:10 AM

"Akenaton" is really David Smith from Durham, an exterminator for the English greyhound racing business?

Figures, I guess.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:22 AM

Not even accurate. Akenaton is a Scottish greyhound trainer and building site labourer and despite his anonymous presence here, is known in the greyhound industry, including to Seaham Cemetery's wife, who also trains them. The three Musketeers, including Ian, have no knowledge or view on that subject. A quick google about the story when Mr Smith was convicted shows that police are investigating more greyhound trainers but that's about it. Joe Offer was originally taken in by Akenaton's mud slinging afterwards, but I believe Ian was given an apology afterwards by him.

But, as Akenaton wishes to remain anonymous whilst referring to other members by their real names and printing hurtful lies about whole sections of society, who are we to stop him eh? See above, he wants the three musketeers to be banned so he doesn't get so much challenge for his incitement to hatred. Such people don't like scrutiny.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:54 AM

I agree with a lot of what you have just posted Steve, but admin have my personal details, address etc, and I feel that is sufficient. Ian, one of the four muskets, says he has my details and has reported me to the police, my political party(SNP), and god knows who else, because he disagrees with my views. I take it that he has also circulated my details amongst his three accomplices.

This is the reason that a degree of anonymity is important, or everyone would have deranged ideologues following them around and wasting police time.
Jack mentioned Dave Smith, I am at a loss to know why.
All I know about Mr Smith, is that someone of that name runs the UKs largest greyhound forum....Greyhound scene.
The "muskets" apparently hate greyhound racing and want to see it banned.

The "muskets" have contributed many scurrilous lies to this forum, not only against me, but several other members.
I think its about time the gang were removed.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 07:06 AM

No I don't disagree with your views. I disagree with propagation of hatred, a criminal offence for all UK subjects. Your views are both irrelevant and on the whole, illogical and contradictory. I reported Mudcat to my ISP as websites that do not moderate incitement to hatred could be blocked if the actual culprits aren't stopped. I asked SNP if they were happy with a member stating on a website that Alex Salmond doesn't give a damn about equality and just put through equality legislation to gain few votes. Fair enough question.

By the way, this Musket has no view on greyhound racing, but adopts ex racers as pets. Different thing entirely.

By the way worm, my post above was inadvertently defending you. The truth is the truth, even if it gets you off a hook.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 07:13 AM

I am not a "building trade labourer", I am a stonemason to trade and have been in business since 1970 serving the community.
I am also a trainer of racing greyhounds.
Seaham Cemetery posted here that I was involved in the Seaham scandal which involved the killing of dogs of all species, but mainly greyhounds by one man.....I was not aware that his name was Smith.

I live hundreds of miles away from Seaham, have never met this man or had any dogs "killed" by him or anyone else, other than the vet attached to our local racetrack, on two occasions due to serious injury.

I asked Seaham Cemetery to provide any proof of his allegations, offering to resign immediately from the forum if he could do so, but to date I have heard nothing and Mr/Dr Seaham seems to have vanished from the forum.

I would also be interested to hear what Joe had to apologise to "Ian Musket" about......I thought it should have been the other way round considering how much "Ian Musket" had to say about Joe's "imaginery friend" etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 07:21 AM

I don't need any defending from people like you Ian :0)....with enemies like you, who needs friends!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 07:27 AM

Well, I am confused. All this 'naming of names' and admissions has only muddied the waters further. If there are really "3 Muskets", how is that different from others using regular pseudonyms? Can Steve Shaw convince some assortment of 'Muskets' to use definitive names at all times?

You must realize that for the first 3-4 or so years, there was very little trouble with trolls and anonymous sniping. Nicknames were just 'fun'... some used 'em... some didn't. Once Google found the site and swooped it up in their net, many people other than folkies discovered it and gradually folkies with **opinions** introduced topics far beyond music, and non-folkies searching for their favorite fights joined in.... and awaayyyy we went. It was then that Max decided the moderators were needed....to delete spam and keep SOME semblance of order.

In 1997-1999 or so, it was possible to read... or at least scan... almost every thread, but today that wold require a full time position.

Steve Shaw says:"We have moderators, so-called, who bollock people they happen to disagree with/make them uncomfortable, yet who allow sexists, racists, homophobes and Islamophobes to run riot, untrammelled, unchallenged."

That really is a distortion of the situation. The mods TRY to be fair.... but they are just as human as those they try to gently control. Steve's accusation misses the point about who gets "bolloxed". Opinions are tolerated... even minority opinions that most of us don't agree with... but vicious, nasty, hateful expressions of those opinions are subject to some sort of moderation. How the lines are drawn is the most frustrating problem for any moderator! Just how offensive does a remark have to be to be deleted? Those who call for for censorship of **opinions** they don't like can be far more offensive in tway complain than the subject OF their complaint! Personal insults using foul language to 'make a point' about someone's minority opinion causes 3 times the uproar as the original opinion!

As I have said before, I can't imagine how the poor mods could possibly delete or edit many of the 'problem' posts without making the whole thread confusing... and as all of you have seen, deleting often just leads to new thread complaining ABOUT the deletions and demanding "explanations". And any attempt at explanation just breeds MORE huffing & puffing!

Sheeesh... why do I bother? I will be away at a craft show for 3 days. I hope by Monday everyone will just be playing on the "fluffy bunny" thread and this one will be closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 07:47 AM

Bill. The Three Musketeers was an attempt to cut through some of the bullshit and outrageous crap that the BS section pollutes an excellent music source website with. If anybody takes some of the stuff here seriously, they should get a life because amongst all the recipe and well wishing threads, we also see oxygen for bigotry and hatred.

Some people, your good self included, try to reason with the unreasonable. Fine, but forgive me if I see that as mental masturbation.

Sadly, if Steve Shaw and others, us included, didn't have a pop, then the most outrageous shit would be in mudcat unchallenged and that, for an innocent bystander coming here, isn't nice. We see defence of terrorism if the imaginary friend is the right one, homophobia with a version of "the final solution" put forward as necessary, subjection of women, defence of firearm crime and even the odd bod reckoning there is such a thing as blasphemy. It isn't opposing views that are there issue, it's views that are hurtful to others, whether they be members or logging on for the first time.

Have a pop at trolls such as Akernaton and you see threads such as this one appearing.

Fascinating...

Sorry, but some people smile and turn away whilst others challenge. It takes all sorts.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 07:58 AM

Well I've been branded, along either other critics of the Israeli regime, a Jew-hater by a regular poster whose name is not known. I don't recall any big wading-in by the moderators then. Don't you think that that is stepping over the line, Bill?

Don't get me wrong. What I'm saying is that the current anarchic mess actually makes moderation impossible. You can post under multiple guises and you can post as an anonymous unsigned-up guest. Threads are plagued by the fact that half the time you don't know who you're supposed to be talking to. On the Bulmer thread last week an anonymous guest persistently badgered ME, without irony, as to who I was! I suspect it was more than one guest. Nothing was done. You sometimes end up with deleted posts rendering threads nonsensical. It's no good defending this setup then complaining about bad behaviour. The anonymity and all the jiggerypokery that goes with it is the reason for moderators tearing their hair and often screwing up. And no, it is not sufficient for just the management to have your details. I want to know exactly who I'm talking to, just like I do down the pub. The current rules don't accord me that right. So be it. But if you say something illiberal or just plain bloody stupid under anonymity, you're abusing the situation and I can't respect you. I'm only human.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw with iPaditis
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 07:59 AM

That was me again. Heaven forfend that I should ever post again as an anonymous guest! :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 08:24 AM

Come on Bill do you really want a section full of "fluffy bunny threads? :0)

You enjoy a battle of ideas as much as any one, and MOST of the time you remain civil even when you're getting your bum whacked.

It is however a symptom of "liberalism" to brand everything which does not fall within its remit as "hatred and bigotry".
The people who use this tactic, like "Ian Musket" or any other of the quadruplets are very rarely specific as to what the hatred actually is, they just keep saying it over and over again without addressing WHAT in particular is hateful.
This is ideological blindness and is in itself a type of hatred, hatred of freedom of thought.

If they had their way we would be living in an Orwellian nightmare, however the new legislation in the UK, protecting freedom of speech and banning personal abuse and hatred will hopefully alleviate the situation.

)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Bill D
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:04 AM

Soon to be leaving.... one last comment.

Steve says:"I want to know exactly who I'm talking to, just like I do down the pub.

So do I.. but I don't own the place. Max IS the final arbiter, and he has stated his reasons for allowing guests.

Musket says/say: "Sadly, if Steve Shaw and others, us included, didn't have a pop, then the most outrageous shit would be in mudcat unchallenged ..."

No... go back & read 10,000 threads from 3-12 years ago. Really outrageous shit has always been challenged. I did a bunch of it myself on several topics. I argued with gun fanciers, astrology nuts, evolution deniers, those who tended toward proselytizing on religion, homophobes, ... and against zealots on both sides of the Middle East morass. But with very few exceptions I didn't become an issue in and of myself! I debated positions, not individuals...including several I know personally and see RT regularly! Most of these people understand that and we are able to discuss all sorts of other things RT and just share music or whatever.
There is a huge difference between suggesting... or even stating clearly... that a position is narrow, illogical, counter to facts, subjective...etc.... and labeling the person as a bigoted, hate-filled asshole! Various posters (need I really name names?)...mostly in the UK... seem to take the position that "calling a spade a spade" means being as vehement as possible in condemnation of views they find repugnant. Perhaps that attitude is cultural... but it ALWAYS serves to escalate the debate to simple name calling and causes the opponent to raise his defenses and complain about abuse. You accomplish NOTHING except personal...satisfaction? (I can't imagine).. for having "given them a shot".

Being a sort of pragmatic realist, I don't really expect this to change anyone's style... your belligerent responses to perceived stupidity is as deeply ingrained as the flawed beliefs you condemn. You defend and rationalize your behavior just as they defend and rationalize their outrageous thinking.
I'm not sure which is the biggest problem...but do know that it is far easier for a mod who is pressed for time to zap simple insults than to laboriously analyze a contentious position and censor according to some complex sliding scale of universal judgment. (whatever that is).

Fluffy bunnies..white or otherwise....

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:18 AM

there is really nothing so depressing about this forum than seeing a load of posts alternating between musket and akenaton. please guys, just keep your arguments to yourselves. to keep it up over such a long time makes you both appear crazy and obsessed with each other. honestly, no-one else cares.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:27 AM

" If you feel at risk by revealing your true identity to other members, you're almost certainly (a) wrong, (b) egotistical."

Maybe some of us are not so full of our own self importance that we need the rest of the world to know who we are...???

Freedom of choice ??? I choose anonymity.. simple as that.

I tend to be instinctively wary of the motives of those
who bullishly insist on demanding to know
other forum member's true identities....

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:29 AM

Well Bill I did say that I wasn't accorded the right to know who I'm talking to, andso be it. Check that out in my post. If I don't like the rule I can say nothing, say so and stay, or just clear off. You don't always get what you want, in the words of St Jagger.

So you don't like the slap-down method of confronting eejits and bigots. You spell out your own worthy philosophy on how to deal with them. Well, that might work with some. But I watched you for month after month failing to get absolutely anywhere at all with pete. In fact, he was taking the piss and you didn't appear to be seeing it. Dragging you round and round in circles of his making. Maybe my method doesn't get me anywhere with the petes of this world either. But at least I won't let him make a chump out of me. Your dialogue with him merely worked to perpetuate his idiotic ambitions and give him his oxygen under the guise of "reasonable dialogue with the respectable guy". You were his succour. I meant that spelling but a freudian slip would have been just as accurate.

And do try to cut the cultural-racist crap. We have loads of nice people here, just like you have there.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:32 AM

I know. Nobody cares about sections of society that they are not part of. Always someone else's problem.

No matter, Akenaton has a solution. Silence is his approval.

I don't try to reason with bigotry, I just wait for it to wither and die. In the meantime, confront it.

You know,,

Like those folk singers you all fucking revere...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:36 AM

steve - i don't think i am the pete (i'm from cockermouth)you are on about here but if i am i apologise. but is this another long-running squabble that i was too bored to notice or keep up with. whatever -thanks for the recommendation - i'm off to give the dick gaughan forum an explore.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:42 AM

I tend to be instinctively wary of the motives of those
who bullishly insist on demanding to know
other forum member's true identities....

You're misrepresenting me. For the third or fourth time (I forget), I know the rule and I work with it. I'm not demanding or insisting on anything. I'm suggesting something and I'm backing up my suggestion with argument. No need to go off on one just because you disagree. And why should you be so wary? Do the other guys in your band know your real name? Do you reckon that the other guys in U2 call yer man The Edge (or, if they're being familiar, just "The")? Do you sit around in the pub with a bunch of guys who you know by nicknames only? Blimey, that's what would make ME wary! And I didn't necessarily suggest even that nicknames should be disallowed. Just that your real name is in your profile for other members to see. Not the whole world, note. This thread is about making this a nicer place, sort of. Anonymity, one hundred percent, helps to make it nastier. That's just human nature at work. You see it all over the internet. Well, that and allowing unsigned people to post. That's just daft, is that.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:46 AM

Pete the wacko creationist is the pete I was on about. I didn't know he was from Cockermouth. One or the other I should think. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:50 AM

God, I feel confused. It's you from Cockermouth, not him (yeah, I know, no shit Sherlock). Anyway, it isn't you!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:54 AM

Going off on one ????

do you not sense the the cool calm serene relaxed tone of how I express myself here...???

..no high horses in my house...
I'm fairly ok at maintaining a reasonably moderate temperature under my collar...

At this stage in my life, I've really got to be very careful with my blood pressure....

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:58 AM

The starry one is a ruddy southerner..

One Mudcatter calls me Musket on the threads and Ian in the pub. (It's me typing now..) Another Musket called me Musket at a dinner party the other week, although I called him Musket too. Another person present assumed it was Masonic..

Come to think of it, that would be a better explanation than to say there is a wonderful folk music website that has a pseuds corner called BS where you can wind up weirdos and watch them bite.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 10:00 AM

Let's just agree then that in not one of my posts to this thread have I bullishly insisted or demanded anything! Misrepresentation is as cardinal a sin as calling someone a nasty name, you know.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 10:06 AM

"There is a huge difference between suggesting... or even stating clearly... that a position is narrow, illogical, counter to facts, subjective...etc.... and labeling the person as a bigoted, hate-filled asshole!"

Yes Bill, nice post, but I take slight issue with the point you make.
When you state that, " a position is narrow, illogical, counter to facts, subjective...etc"   It is important that you can back up that statement with a reasoned argument
The quads and other "liberal" ideologues avoid reason like the plague, simply relying on the hope that some of the mud which they fling sticks.
As I often say universal equality is a faith position.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 10:19 AM

'Misrepresentation' is not a tactic I knowingly indulge in...

How 'you' intended to express something, may not be how it ended up appearing to others...

'Innocent' statements are all too often miscommunicated and misconstrued;
leading to all sorts of daft arguements blowing up out of all proportions here in BS ..


"We all need to look at ourselves in full length mirrors from time to time... to see ourselves as others see us"

.. quoted, vaguely paraphrased from some or other well respected dopey old hippy philosopher
whose name I'm buggered if I can remember..

errmm.. or maybe it was from the "Kung Fu" TV series...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 10:29 AM

Ake,

You may take comfort in the false notion that the antipathy your anti-homosexual discourse inspires here is ideological but mine is just a visceral reaction to your inhumane intolerance.

And please don't cite any more of your statistics to me regarding a minor health problem that you use to make your bigotry seem reasonable. It's not.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 10:45 AM

I have met the Starry one. I do find his god-bothering (I don't think I've ever heard him sing a song about anything else) very hard to take.

Mither is fairly reasonable until he turns back into a Blairite or worse - a supporter of Thatcher's war on miners and unions.   His accusations that I am a champagne socialist are pretty stupid when you watch him brag about his wealth and pretend to have some left-leaning.

I use my own name. And the only problems have been with that which we do not discuss. I suppose they get corns on their knuckles from dragging them along the ground (while hiding behind internet anonymity).

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 10:54 AM

'wid some power the gift tae gie us - to see oorselves as ithers see us' - this is a (badly remembered) quote frae rabbie burns - i think.
however - no-one else needs to see this unless they really want to - and for now i don't think i can be bothered . good try to try to talk about this dwindling section but it turns out to be a great example of the problem and with no sign of a solution in sight.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 11:18 AM

Bridge is a wonderful wind up merchant himself. Considering Musket Ian is an ex miner who still has one bottle of champagne left. (Drank one when the bitch finally died and the other cheap plonk is waiting for Scargill to die.) I notice what's left of The NUM are chasing him through the courts again and trying to bankrupt him. Couldn't have happened to a better Trot.

Tell you what. I wish I were two bob behind a solicitor like Bridge... I've never been a Tory for that matter either. 😜

Naw, I swapped Socialism for champagne. Different thing entirely. True, I did believe in the New Labour philosophy when Kinnock set out to make them electable and to this day, I contend that the best way to deliver a social programme is to afford it in the first place. The Blair idea of bypassing and ignoring Parliament and disastrous decisions about The Middle East preclude calling me a Blairite though. (A photo of me shaking hands with him is no longer on display in the study. No ideological reason, just needed the space for photos of my Granddaughter.

If my take on life puts me at odds with a solicitor who carries a cross for those he has sympathy rather than empathy with, I'm cool and happy 😎

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 11:57 AM

WTF?:
why we often say WTF 

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 12:03 PM

Perhaps third time is the charm, this post isn't sticking.

You asked me to stop posting and I acceded to your request, by my views are firmly held and will be advanced when this forum is moderated as it should be.

Ake, no one asked you not to post. I suggested not responding to the attacks so they could be removed. Any attacks are generally removed quietly across the forum if it's possible to do so without chopping up the discussion, but if everyone piles on and responds, then removal is impossible.

"Moderated as it should be" - now there is a can of worms. If people would stop leading with their chins and picking the scabs off of wounds that can not be healed in this environment, the job would be a lot easier. You're speculating about moderation motives, and you're all fighting to get the last word. You know how that is going to turn out.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Mrrzy
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 12:11 PM

I use my nickname on the forum, but also a lot in real life. I have repeatedly asked some people who know me offline not to reveal details of my person, and am routinely and, to my mind, extremely rudely, ignored. How dare they, is what comes to mind. Are there netiquette rules about that?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 12:13 PM

Friday Oct 31, 2014. Wall Street Journal"


Brian Gaar …

I'd never interact with a stranger in person but give that stranger a computer and I'll ignore my family on Christmas to fight with him

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 12:15 PM

Asking him not to post isn't such a bad idea if his posts cause distress and upset when he lies in order to villify people whose only crime is existing.

Whilst ever he posts hate, it shall be challenged. It isn't difficult to understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ebbie
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 12:28 PM

Reading this thread brings to mind an old admonition often given to school children:

Never hit back! You are the one who will be seen.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Don Firth
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 12:32 PM

I am firmly of the opinion that people with multiple personalities should share them with people who don't have any.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 12:56 PM

in this day and age on a public forum it is just not safe for people to give their true names, addresses etc. Maybe moreso for women but not necessarily.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 01:06 PM

I'm keeping the personality that snaps knicker elastic at 40 paces for myself though if it's all the same to you Don.

The one that growls when I wake up is available to any bugger who wants it though.

Anyway. About to shower and change into my Halloween costume. That's another personality but reserved for tonight's party.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 01:13 PM

Halloween...

I've switched off all the lights in the front of the house and am now hiding at the back in the kitchen
having a quiet bit of cuddly saucy slap 'n' tickle with the mrs...

...we'll emerge around 8.00ish and then risk putting the telly and lights back on in the front room..

That's my true personality...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 01:17 PM

@ Mrrzy -- Your privilege of course to keep your ID confidential. But would it be a reasonable question to know how to pronounce your forum name? Is it like the river at Liverpool? Or...?

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Mrrzy
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 01:22 PM

Yes, exactly like the river Mersey. Or like mercy with a Z, if you prefer. And you can read that as "with a zee" or "with a zed" depending on where you're reading from.

Also shortened to Mrr, pronounced like Myrrh.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jack Campin
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 01:25 PM

I have repeatedly asked some people who know me offline not to reveal details of my person, and am routinely and, to my mind, extremely rudely, ignored. How dare they, is what comes to mind. Are there netiquette rules about that?

Behaviour - on the net or anywhere else - doesn't come any ruder than disputing with people and not giving your name. That's the attitude of people who stone people's windows in the dark.

If I knew your name I'd use it. As it is, I just don't take anything you say as being a communication from a real human being.

I don't expect to ever see you on Dick Gaughan's forum. I doubt we're missing anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 01:31 PM

"If I knew your name I'd use it. As it is, I just don't take anything you say as being a communication from a real human being.

I don't expect to ever see you on Dick Gaughan's forum. I doubt we're missing anything."

So are the more pompous sanctimonious members of that forum
known affectionately as 'the dicks'...???

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 01:50 PM

I once interviewed Dick Gaugan, about the time of his releasing his Different Kind of Love Song album, and asked if he felt his popularity and appeal as a musician would be wider if he were less political in his choice of songs.

The answer helps explain why I never got beyond hospital radio and although his answer wasn't broadcast, it was played at the Chrimbo party to my embarrassment.... What he didn't know as he lectured in his dressing room (Regal Arts Centre, Worksop) was that I was introducing him on stage and saying nice things about him in a few minutes... Years later, when he was appearing with Allan Taylor in Matlock Bath, I asked him about the night but he had forgotten it...

Interestingly, my own set thirty years ago was quite left wing political. Now, I don't think I sing anything, mine, traditional or others that could be classed as partisan political. Mainly lover's balls and best pint I ever had songs to be honest...

The point of that name dropping (he is a hero of mine musically) is that I find many people in the folk world fairly opinionated in the final analysis, so it isn't that these threads can be combative that is the issue, but surprised they arent even more so. Performers tend to have strong personalities, even if they try to hide them.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 03:11 PM

in this day and age on a public forum it is just not safe for people to give their true names, addresses etc. Maybe moreso for women but not necessarily.

Well I for one have not suggested that anyone should give out their address. As for safe, well I'm a sample of one, admittedly. I post controversially and provocatively at all times if I can. Without wishing to blow my own trumpet (I'd much rather someone else did that for me ;-) ), I'd guess, in all humility (honest), that I've accelerated the posting to this thread by about double. I've done it here and on a number of other forums for at least twelve years. You'd think that after all I've said about Israel that Mossad would be on to me by now. After all I've said about abortion and those wicked anti-abortionists you'd think I'd have had death threats (they are evil bastards after all). Actually, my phone was bugged in the 1980s when I was an active CND member! But my true name is Steve Shaw and I live near Bude and I would not go ex-directory even if you held a knife to my throat. No-one to date has threatened me or lobbed a brick through my window, and I say what I want to say. I like that. Yes there are nasty people around. But I never suggested that all our real names are flaunted for all to see. Just that they are in our profiles so that other MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD can see who they're talking to. Just like you do down the pub. Stop pretending that there's anything "social" about talking to people you know only as gnu, Sanity, Hawk, Ake, Teribus and so on. Yeah, even Jeri, Musket, achmelvich and punkfolkrocker. There you go. Saying what I think, hang it all.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 03:25 PM

Steve - equally...

If you know someone by name, do you really know them ?

do you know what evils they are truly capable of...???


quote - probably paraphrased from a Marvel comic...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 03:48 PM

Well, here we are again....the wannabe 'political activists' when confronted with real facts, just go into a semi-literate name calling tirade against those who actually present facts.....the activists only have their 'pie in the sky' delusions, that they united with others of like-ilk, to call names trying to diminish those who present facts.

Akenaton has been repeatedly been praised for his patience with dealing with such antics, from the deluded dolts of political correctness...but factual fantasies.....dream on...you are NOT going to change FACTS with propaganda and talking points!.....nor will some of you abandon your hatred and bitterness that you get from getting NO traction(except from other like minded air-heads), in turning fiction into fact.
Sorry...it's not working.....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 03:57 PM

let me be more clear then. There are Members Of This Board that I would not give my name to and find to be pathological. Likewise I am sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 04:15 PM

GFS, using "cherry picked" statistics (that you seem to confuse as "FACTS") to make an over-reaching conclusion against a group of people is hardly anything a logical (or considerate) person would (or, should) promote or applaud. If you are intentionally doing so, you do yourself a diservice.

I suspect you are " better than that", and just got carried away in one way or another. Hopefully, I misunderstand the intent of your last post.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 04:42 PM

"Cherry picked statistics"????
WTF!.....Please explain that remark.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,iPaddy Richter Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 05:13 PM

If Goofus's real identity were known to us all (he wouldn't bloody dare to reveal it for reasons we all understand but which will come out a bit different from him: I'm guessing that it will be "his professional career as a counsellor" - bwahahahaha!!), he wouldn't post the bollocks that he does. One tends to think that one might rest one' s case.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 05:33 PM

You've been lucky, I think, Steve. I once, quite innocently, in a relevant newspaper correspondence, quoted Macaulay to the effect that the Puritan hatred of bear-baiting was not because it gave pain to the bear but because it gave pleasure to the spectators.

I came home to four [count them! 4!] death-threats on my answering-machine -- one from a guy claiming to speak for an organisation called "Animal Rights Extreme", who assured me I would be 'eliminated'. (But, would you believe?, the silly bugger forgot to leave his name!)

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jack Campin
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 05:52 PM

[Gaughan]
I find many people in the folk world fairly opinionated in the final analysis, so it isn't that these threads can be combative that is the issue, but surprised they arent even more so. Performers tend to have strong personalities, even if they try to hide them.

Gaughan's forum isn't just Gaughan clones. There is a pretty wide range of opinion on it, but both dissimulation and abusiveness towards other members are verboten. It's not as active as it used to be but it's worked pretty well for nearly as long as Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Don Firth
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 05:58 PM

Mark Twain's ranking of degrees of misinformation:

"There are lies, damned lies, and ... statistics!"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Amos
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 05:59 PM

THere was a time long ago when the dominant tone of the Cat was one of enevolent inclusion, fueled by the love of folk music but also protecting open dialogue both serious and whimsical on a world of other topics. When things got tense between opposing viewpoints it was routine for someone to inject a healthy dose of levity. The big difference was, that while people batted all kinds of ideas back and forth, they rarely resorted to the kind of ad hominem sarcasms which are prevalent in threads below the line today.

As Bill Day points out, it is a very different thing to dispute someone's logic or data, than it is to assault there personal character or inherent nature. Some of the more vitriolic posters here are so accustomed to insulting and being insulted that they probably think it is normal discussion.

It's not. It is essentially a form of prepubescent banter, resorting to the most primitive and unthinking of styles in order to defend some bizarre and distorted sense of personal rightness which has long since lost any real merit or need for defense.

I would challenge the respondents who frequent these hallowed halls to try an experiment--to post regularly on the Cat for a month without a single instance of insult or ad hominem slurs. It would be a most enlightening experiment if any of the usual suspects had the curiosity and spine to conduct it.

I am not aiming these remarks at any individuals, but at a practice of communication which has sadly darkened the atmosphere of a once-homey and friendly discussion site.

A.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:17 PM

You wouldn't know a cherry picked anything. You seem more fixated with bum picked issues.

Sorry, just picking up on an Akenaton post.

Eyup Steve. Knowing names or nicknames is still knowing. I have known a bloke called Loll since 1987. I was back in my old local the other week as my eldest still lives nearby and had a pint with him. Still have no idea what his real name is.

Anyway, back to the Halloween disco. I hear Barry White playing.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw, once more iPadded up
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:29 PM

Well Amos, your first paragraph happens to be the exact description of the Gaughan forum. And do you know why? Well, it's precisely because anonymity is not allowed! Do go and have a look. Actually, I'm pissing myself off somewhat here as that forum is, in many respects, not at all up my alley, and I don't want to keep sounding as though it's the be-all and end-all. But see past the usual quota of eejits, ne'er-do-wells and rampant Scotophiles (shit, that's me banned!) and you'll find a polite forum but one in which saintliness is not held to be a virtue. As I've been saying, over there you do know who you're talking to, though there's no feeling at all that you're somehow broadcasting your personal data to the whole planet. It's a complicated place replete with redundant and semi-redundant sub-forums but it works. And it works because you are, in the final resort, not anonymous, and because you must be signed up before you post. Simple really.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve and that confounded piece of Apple iSh
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:39 PM

I detect some gentle disagreement here, Musket, but c'est la vie innit. But just consider the advantages: Akenhateon must be seething because you and I are failing to act, ranks closed, in the quartet style he so loves to see. There's a good side to everything yeah!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve iPaderewski
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:45 PM

You heard Barry White, huh?

If Isla St Clair married Barry White, divorced him, then married Bryan Ferry, would she be Isla White-Ferry?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve, iPaddington unbearable
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 06:54 PM

Well Michael, I don't believe in the concept of contributory negligence. But you act like a twat and get death threats. I act like a twat and don't. Perhaps there's acting like a twat and acting like a twat. Just sayin'.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ebbie
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 08:47 PM

Guest/mg: "There are Members Of This Board that I would not give my name to and find to be pathological."

?? Most of us 'Cat posters remember your name and that would be doubly true for the members of the board, if by that you mean the Clones. Because nothing online is private, no one is safe. Might as well accept that.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw iPadding but not quaking...
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 09:18 PM

No-one is safe? Well I could always be mown down by a London bus just by stepping outside. But I still wish to step outside. As long as you don't post idiotic stuff or succumb to a phisherman or tell us all your PIN number I reckon you're as safe here as anywhere else. Even if we all know your name. Which doesn't mean completely safe, of course. I suppose we could just live in a convent or a monastery. That could be quite safe, though some of these Mother and Father Superiors, you know...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 10:12 PM

Steve - nope, not persuaded.. still not gonna tell you my name...

but... my eyes are blue, and my hair was brown,
I live somewhere between Bude and Bristol
and I never have, or ever will, vote tory......

..and previous bands I played guitar in might just have attracted attention
from over enthusiastic jobsworth covert surveillance agencies
due to the singer's very public lefty political activisms..??

..if that helps you feel a little more at ease in my company....???

..oh, and I live dead opposite a flat full of B*P supporting skinheads
who no doubt have access to the internet,
and are probably far more sophisticated at tracking, monitoring,
and hunting down their 'enemies'
than many here might give their sort credit...????

A little over cautious paranoia goes a long way
in helping prevent parcels of burning dog shit being posted through one's front door...????

Not had any bricks put through the windows of this house yet though.. fingers crossed...

Last time, back in London, was quite traumatic
because the brick narrowly missed our brand new big telly.

I'm no way near as fit or fast as I used to be if it ever came to 'fight or flight'..

So I'll continue to err on the side of caution if you don't mind

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Janie
Date: 31 Oct 14 - 10:38 PM

From: GUEST,Troubadour. - PM
Date: 30 Oct 14 - 08:05 PM



....Mods, as the OP, please terminate this here!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,#
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 01:14 AM

Oh, yeah.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 02:15 AM

To be fair you would be rather unlucky to be knocked down by a London bus in Cornwall. Of course, as you stagger to your feet from the first one, another two in quick succession finish the job off.
😇

The only time I heard Dick Gaughan tell a joke was when he stated that if the English want their independence let them have it.

You know, looking around I'm not sure the BS section is dwindling after all. Plenty of threads that don't have silly or outrageous comments that need challenge. Granted, when some of us chip in, our following trolls do what they do best and follow us but most threads when they degenerate tend to drift into extensions of recipe threads or Mike biting.

It's only when pete brings Jesus to the party or the worm manages to slip in a bit of anal sex that threads get weird. After all, the Jim v Keith roadshow hasn't entertained us for ages.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 03:15 AM

Musket: "After all, the Jim v Keith roadshow hasn't entertained us for ages."

...as well as you???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 03:30 AM

Funny that you didn't address the following trolls aspect Goofus. You missed out there....

👹

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 05:24 AM

Steve: Can't wee where writing a letter to a paper making a perfectly valid point is acting like a twat. But I suppose to real twats like those 'Extreme' people the rest of us are twats at that.
.,,.,.

'most threads when they degenerate tend to drift into extensions of recipe threads or Mike biting.'

Ian -- What is 'Mike biting'? No mosquitoes round here at this time of year.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 06:23 AM

You say that, Musket, but one day, just before setting off from work, I was having a natter with another teacher. Probably about Ofsted or something. Anyway, he sez something like Ofsted finding us brilliant was about as likely as getting run over by a London bus in Bude. Twenty minutes later I was driving through Bude (you bloody know what I'm going to say, don't you...), and guess what was parked in the industrial estate...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: DMcG
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 06:29 AM

Two weeks ago we came across a London bus in Salzburg Austria. That's the problem with mobile icons: they get to be more common elsewhere than the original (especially if you mean Routemasters)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 06:36 AM

Mike. Try not to wee when writing letters to newspapers eh? Many letters are getting piss poor these days as it is.

Although one I read last week made me smile. The guy wrote that the internet was down for a couple of hours so he went downstairs to speak with his family. They seemed like nice people....

Steve. Was it a routemaster?

Cards on table. I live a few hundred yards from a trolleybus museum and yes, here oop North, We have London buses driving past our house on open days. (They have branched out into old diesel buses too.) I keep trying, unsuccessfully to retire and one thing I promise to do is be a volunteer there, playing with the oily bits.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 06:37 AM

I don't want to know your bloody name, punkfolkrocker. All I'm doing is making suggestions for curbing the alleged bad manners and trolling. As it happens I was a bit of a leftie in the golden seventies meself (Blair Peach was a mate of mine in Teachers' Rank And File and the ANL -remember him?). I'm a bit more of a Prosecco and Tesco Simply Garnacha socialist these days but I still like to stick me bonce above the parapet every now and then - under my real name! Yeah, I know we don't all live in inner cities. We sometimes prattle on about the Big Principle of free speech. Nothing curbs free speech more than the fear of speaking out. Of standing up to be counted. That's when you know the terrorists have really got you.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 06:41 AM

It was one of those with a big hole at the back with a pole for the bus conductor to swing on as he laughed at your miserable attempt to run along the street to catch the bugger up.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 07:50 AM

We have London buses driving past our house on open days.

Such as this one I assume, Musket?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 09:15 AM

A pedant may spot a difference but the one on the right is familar. Obviously, no trams or trolley buses outside the museum road though.

Of course, and especially if M'Unlearned Friend Bridge is reading. My fascination with buses only extends to museum pieces. Not today's buses. Can't be doing with cohorting with the proletariate what?

🚎🚌🚍

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 09:23 AM

Steve - Blair Peach ?, bloody hell,... that names's a memory jogger...

I can see I've got a fair bit of google reading and reminiscing to do this afternoon..

ANL / Rock against racism was a massive life changing catalyst
for some of us provincial small town A level students..
Right just afer me and band mates were already starting to get politiced through doing
Govt & Politics 'O' level courses..

Reminds me, might still be a near unbroken run of 1970s NMEs in me mums attic..
That's something for the social/cultural historians to drool over...

Names - the daft thing is parents gave me and sibling Biblical names
even though they were young post war idealistic lefties
and refused to get us christened on principle....???

My wanky/wonky sense of absurdist humour must be passed down in my genes....???

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfailedspeller
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 10:15 AM

'politiced' ??? obviously meant to be 'politicized' - thought I 'd corrected that... oh well....

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 11:11 AM

Musket: "Funny that you didn't address the following trolls aspect Goofus. You missed out there...."

Well I was being polite....I wasn't going to single you out.

I guess he thought that if he accuses someone, that it hides the fact that he is what he accuses others of being!!

Old common political hat trick, eh, Ian?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 11:18 AM

A hat trick is what I expect of a Sheffield Wednesday striker.

Allegedley..

Otherwise, very droll, troll.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 11:52 AM

'most threads when they degenerate tend to drift into extensions of recipe threads or Mike biting.'

Ian -- What is 'Mike biting'? No mosquitoes round here at this time of year.

..,,.,

repeated from previous thread, as not answered yet.

I think I should be told...

≈Me≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:00 PM

Mike baiting ?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:04 PM

I reckon he has posted the most self explanatory post ever.

I didn't necessarily want you to answer your own question but thanks anyway.

😂

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:06 PM

Just read this from top to bottom and I can see why postings are down in this section take look at youselfs.
Been a member here many years especially, when good DIscussions took place rather than name calling like children. Many kept there identity secret but those who where not bothered went to gatherings sat in pubs talked about and played music and all where know by their mudcat i D . just because you put a real looking name up does not make you real!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:14 PM

Oh no!!..Another politically based avoidance of giving a straight answer!!

Avoid an answer...change the question, attack the person asking, or raising the question, and then attack them (falsely) of being some sort of racist or bigot....old, old and tired and worn out, 'so-called liberal' tactic.

I think the referendum on the phony version of what is being passed as 'liberalism', in the upcoming elections, in the U.S., should tell you something about how sick and tired the public has gotten over the stupid political bullshit, the people have finally gotten to....and the narrow minded blockheads still don't 'get it'!

GfS

P.S. Stop scratching your head, pretending that you can't see why....

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:21 PM

Musket, your posts are becoming more gnomic & incomprehensible than ever. Who are the 'he' referred to & the 'you' addressed in your last one? On what topic?

You really can be the world's most unconscionable boring·old·fart when you so resolutely set your mind to it.

To avoid misunderstandings: that was not intended as a compliment.

Either afford rational answers to direct & rational & perfectly comprehensible questions, please; or go away and play with yourself -- in any sense of that phrase you may care to comprehend.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:23 PM

Oh...and check this out....three days before the 'election' that will shift the balance of power away from the Democrats, and other 'so-called liberals'....and not one thread about it......

Interesting!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:24 PM

My dear Goofus.

Don hasn't posted on this thread so why are you here?










One trick pony...

What's the weather like in Dumbfuckistan?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:27 PM

Once again ---


Ian -- What is 'Mike biting'?


ANSWER!!!!! ANSWER!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve iPaddy fuddyduddery
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:42 PM

Mike biting is what amplified harmonica players accidentally do when they're slightly pissed.

The great thing I've noticed about the interwebbie thang is that there is no obligation to answer silly questions. I've also noticed that the more times you ask for an answer the less likely it is you'll get a sensible one. In other words, knock it off, Leo. You're a mane in the neck.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 12:58 PM

A LONDON BUS in Austria......perhaps it got left behind from a " summer holiday".....

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 01:01 PM

yes i remember the anti-nazi league, rock against racism and blair peach. i also remember 'the leveller' - a grainy but interesting left magazine at the time (not to be confused with an ex-poster on here) those days were the only time in my life when it has been trendy to be a lefty. i'm still a lefty but have never been trendy since. it's quite worrying to think how much time i now spend in the 70s and early 80s when music was good and society was fairer, people had decent houses and the politicians weren't all identical. i'm becoming a melancholic old bore - waiting for my grandkids to come along and ask 'and what did you do in the thatcher wars?' whatever i did then it has to be better than what we do now - waste time squabbling on the machine, signing sodding e-petitions and complaining about being let down by labour and the guardian

peace, love and revolution

pete barnes - if you insist and if it matters...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 01:10 PM

@ Steve·the·Officious ····························


Grr·ROARrr·Rrr!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 01:33 PM

no comment

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 01:42 PM

Whoz you? Well, there is a test:


what's your real identity? 

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: olddude
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 01:57 PM

What a fucking pathetic excuse for a thread this is now you see why people leave. Is there anyone with common sense to close it. I guess not. Boy I miss spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 02:21 PM

That's right!....Get your identity figured out by your local cartoon!

Political hacks....aren't you tired of them yet???...I know!...try the 'War on Woman' hoax some more....or try to say that the reason people don't like Obama is because of his race(s)...God forbid if you say the reason you don't like him is because of his incompetence and general failed policies, whether it be domestic OR international!!

See, if you criticize him for anything, the REAL racists will accuse you of being unfair to him and racist....even though the ONLY reason they voted for him was because of his race(s).

Now who exactly are the racists????

If Akenaton expresses health concerns, in regards to homosexuality, he is automatically branded 'homophobic'....how childish is that???

If Keith posts about Israel, it could only mean one thing...he must be anti-Hamas!

The stupid and oft ridiculous claims that the 'so-called liberals' that somebody MUST be a victim, and that they are the only champions of the underdogs, is nothing but delusional myths!....

....and they aren't even honest enough to see it for what it really is, and wise up...(and why not?...everybody else sees the bull-crap. They target a group, trying to convince voters that if they don't agree with their fraudulent assessments, of victim-hood, then you are labelled a bigot or something else equally as stupid!

..Speaking of STUPID.....try looking in the direction of those who blindly blather forward, pointing fingers, calling names, and trying to demonize those who are using common sense....common sense...??..you know, that thing that political ideologues can't seem to get a grasp of!

GfS

P.S...and the 'Dwindling BS section' has suffered from the bozos who coral themselves together into one boring chanting chorus of old talking point puking, and mess up the forum!....and the people who they should have been listening to, complete with substantiating, factual links, have gotten tired of talking to the intellectual and moral equivalent, of eight year-olds....with dyslexia!!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 02:35 PM

LOL-What a ""splat" that last post was gfs.

Do you ever look back and read some if your classic, one of a kind, posts, and try and figure them out? Its kinda like abstract paintings, where the the so-called "artist" just throws paints randomly at a canvas.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 02:47 PM

https://www.facebook.com/159444960774066/photos/pcb.832481630137059/832481226803766/?type=1&theater

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 02:55 PM

Ed, What part didn't you get??
maybe the fact you didn't 'get it' is because you're waxing political...and therefore being dumbed down!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 03:05 PM

A good one gfs. :)

Have you ever considered using your stellar talents for professional comedy?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,BrendanB
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 03:17 PM

Haven't been around for a while. What a hoot this thread has proved to be.   So Musket is a conglomeration is he? That explains his careers as a miner, an entrepreneur and senior NHS official - all at the same time. I just thought he was a self-obsessed monomaniac, now I assume they all are. (Purely as a matter of interest, which one of you has a mouth like the lining of a sewer? Just askin'.)
Now then, this is really difficult. I find that not only do I agree with Steve Shaw but I am impressed with the courteous and reasonable way in which his posts are couched. (I would have said that even if I wasn't going to Cornwall next Summer and hoping to find some sessions!)
To those who believe that BS is in its death throes, relax and calm down. There are a lot of people who contribute terrific posts to this section, .Bill D, olddude, gnu, Joe Offer,(me!) and others. Fundamentalist God botherers and guest from sanity aside, most posters seem to be opinionated but sane. Things grow, they change, they develop. If BS becomes too obnoxious, eschatological or offensive it will wither and die. At the moment it seems to be in rude (sometimes very rude) health.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,BrendanB
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 03:22 PM

By the way, the B stands for Buckley. I do agree with SS. (Oh, that was unfortunate in a teutonic sort of way).

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 03:23 PM

The resident Goofup keeps saying the same thing over and over. He could save time and effort if he just had a rubber stamp made.

He's a one trick pony. And that one is dumber than a loud, smelly fart at a formal banquet.

Cthulhu

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 03:31 PM

A good post Cthulhu.
It makes much more sense than gfs' second last one.
;)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 03:33 PM

GUEST, 01 Nov 14 - 12:06 PM

Took a look to see who you are. Good to see you and welcome back!

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,BrendanB
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 04:30 PM

I meant scatological, obviously. (Avoid reading theological studies over the weekend, it's bad for your controversy muscles.)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Janie
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 05:37 PM

Well, the BS section may be getting shorter, but this thread sure isn't. One of Us Cannot Be Wrong

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 07:08 PM

Cheers, Brendan!

As for that longer post of goofus's, it's nice to see him come off drugs for twenty minutes in order to post. Didn't help him much, but hey...

Now look at here, y'all. My sentiment is not that we should all be suddenly revealing our real names. That is not the world in which we currently exist on mudcat. I fully get that. I'm lusting after a rule-change whereby we all put our names in our profiles, not necessarily up front on the forum. Once that kicks in we'll all feel differently. And we'll all be nicer to each other. As nice as me now!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Nov 14 - 10:01 PM

I wouldn't be any nicer than I already am....

'nice' is my default personality...


In fact if I used my real name, I might just be a right miserable aggressive ****

You're much better off with punkfolkrocker, he's almost likeable...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 12:44 AM

Ed T: "It makes much more sense than gfs' second last one."

Hey...One man's ceiling is another man's floor.
Sorry some of the self proclaimed smart guys can't seem to decipher it... your head may be shaped like a light bulb..but you ain't very bright!...either that, or you are playing stupid...BTW, no fair cheating!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw nice iPad guy?
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 04:08 AM

I think I'm very nice too. But I can't be sure, so I'll settle for "nice b*ast*ard" for now. That should cover it.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 05:01 AM

Fook me. Three personalities and Brendon still gets a bit wrong, that doesn't apply to any of us. No matter. Ian does post slightly more than his 33.3% and only he opens PMs. The bits about where we are coming from, our knowledge of some subjects etc is, as Steve says, not hiding. If an astrophysicist states something about dustbin collections and a dustbin man does, you need to give weighting to the source of the two comments. Of course, when someone prints confusing bullshit on a subject you happen to be a bit of an expert on, you then get called for bragging when you point out why you are in a position to be more definitive. (As opposed to being right. You have to live in Hertford in order to have the self assurance to be right every time.)

A bit like brass. People come on saying its everybody else's fault they are a failure, but anyone who has a bob or two is scorned. Interestingly, such nuggets come out as replies yet are seen as boasts. No matter. In the words of Ian Hislop when challenged about his lack of Twitter and Facebook, "You don't have people on the Internet, just mates and cunts."

Sorry to Mike for not posting for a while. It is a waste of good groundbait to leave the river bank after scattering it. Especially when the fish seem to be biting.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 05:03 AM

Look, I think what draws people to this section of the forum, are other members views on controversial news items, or social issues.
Mudcat BS, can be a terrific debating platform, it's full of intelligent and well educated people, and it used to be a place where discussions ran to thousands of posts on many different subjects.
If we confine ourselves to Fluffy bunny threads or jam making recipes, the section will surely die, for lack of intellectual stimulation.

The advent of "Team Musket" some time ago, signalled a new departure.
I think everyone was aware that more than one person was engaged in a campaign to close down discussion of subjects which THEY thought should not be up for debate.
When it started, I and others warned that it would undermine the forum, excellent contributors like Little Hawk were driven away, as they did not wish to engage with aggressive bullies.

Little Hawk was right, because the tactics of the group were allowed to continue, right up until a few months ago when one moderator in particular started to get a handle on what was happening.
The strange thing, is that these people see no contradiction between their avowed support for "universal equality"...and their frequent denigration of women, older members, and people whom they designate as being of lower intellect.

The behaviour of a section of the membership has been disgraceful in giving tacit support to this abusive trolling....mostly aimed at me but also to anyone who offered any support to my right to post views validated as far as possible by official figures.

I can handle the curses, the death wishes, the libellous claims about cruelty to animals, the snide references to my sexuality, and all the other tactics employed by "Team Musket", but many have not been raised in as tough a "school" and few now have the strength to air views which may run against the predominant view of the membership.


Follow this course, and you end up with Fluffy bunnies and jam making, for breakfast lunch and dinner, "Team Musket" will vanish, leaving an emasculated forum......job done!

Personal abuse is always wrong on this sort of forum....we are ALL intelligent people.
Multiple personas, used as a tactic to troll and silence debate should never be countenanced.....Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 05:03 AM

But nice bastard who puts otiose asterisks in and then spells the word out in full...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 05:08 AM

Bloody X-posting! That in answer to Steve's last, of course

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 05:41 AM

There is also the other point children, you don't read anyone else's post apart from your own and the child you dislike, consequently all discussion is shut down,then there is the repeating of the same diatribe over and over again. Do any of you know how a discussion works. Listening considering and replying like a grown up,not name calling and sticking your tongue out, then when not happy calling for mummy to delete posts.
Grow up

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Keef
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 05:56 AM

Censorship is like a Chinese takeaway.
You have a plate-full and then an hour later you feel like having some more.
(Please note, the above post contains racist stereotyping and should not be read by anybody)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 06:05 AM

Akenaton. "We are all intelligent people."

If that were true, it would just make your bigotry all the more distasteful and disgusting. Society makes allowances for ignorance but never malice or aforethought.

Propagating hatred and intolerance isn't opinion, it's personality disorder.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 06:49 AM

""Hey...One man's ceiling is another man's floor.""

I get the hint, your feet were on the ceiling, not the floor when you typed that pos. Is it medication? If so, I trust safe, legal stuff.

If you have the capacity to contribute that, why not try an attempt to post material that makes a bit more sense than the nonsense in the post I refered to? Putting up posts that make sense to only you (and possibly your devious, somewhat-slanted and one-issue mudcat buddy) would do more to get your actual message across than the latter, if that is your goal-though I an not convinced that this is so?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 07:05 AM

""If we confine ourselves to Fluffy bunny threads or jam making recipes, the section will surely die, for lack of intellectual stimulation.""

I get the proposal. Every thread topic on Mudcat should be limited to one issue-why homosexuals should not be provided an equal place in society. Threads on any other topic would make-way, at will, to promote your personal theories why this is so.

For colour, and the certain interest of others, threads will be overtaken by continious back-and-forth nasties, stimulated by your insistance to bring this one issue into every thread topic, including recipes for brown sugar fudge (easily accomplished by taging onto the fudge angle).

An interesting proposal-but, we are almost there now?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 07:30 AM

?????!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 07:49 AM

:)))

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 07:52 AM

I would also say that many people see the only purpose of a discussion to be to convert the other person to your view or to win an argument by demolition of their point of view. However the value often lies in extending your own understanding or clarifying your own thinking.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 07:53 AM

Tsk.. Has the worm being trying to introduce his puerile interest topic again?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 08:02 AM

Ed, I am certainly concerned about the concealment of male homosexual STD rates, but there are many other issues which are adversely affected by "liberal ideology"

In the UK a couple of years ago, the lone voice of Mr Farage spoke out on the idiocy of unregulated immigration.
he was roundly demonised by many here and by the whole of the British media for his views, but he stuck to his guns, putting forward reasoned arguments against un regulated immigration. He was branded a bigot, a racist for even suggesting that EU rules on movement of labour were unworkable due to the state of the UK infrastructure.

Today every UK political party subscribes to his views to a larger or smaller extent and many of the UK electorate would like to withdraw from the EU, as we find it difficult to control affairs within our own country due to EU legislation.

My stance here, speaking as a socialist, is against the more idiotic excesses of "liberal ideology" rather than homosexuality per se.
Mr Farage's views are not connected to race or colour in any way

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 08:06 AM

""I would also say that many people see the only purpose of a discussion to be to convert the other person to your view or to win an argument by demolition of their point of view. ""

"Many", as noted above, may actually be a minority on a few thread topics?

Frequently, on heated thread topics, I suspect there is little anticipation of converting those on the other side of the discussion to conversion. However, there may be an anticipation, often unwarranted, that gullable thread observers (if they exist) might be converted?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 08:15 AM

DMcG...Don't know who your remarks were directed at, but I have no wish to convert anyone, simply to explain how my views are constructed.
If others would do the same instead of name calling and making unfunny "jokes", perhaps we would have a more interesting and peaceful forum.

Of course, the reason people like ED and "team Musket behave as they do, is that they have NO argument which holds water.
What they have is a "belief" in universal equality, while supporting a system built and dependent on extreme inequality. :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 08:22 AM

""simply to explain how my views are constructed.""

Oh yes, thats why the anti-homosexual rubbish is stated ""over, and over" on threads, regardless if they are on topic or not. Give me a break! You fool noone but the gullible by such nonsense.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 08:27 AM

DMcG is quite right. My inner thoughts and viewpoints are often altered by what I read in many threads here. It may not always show straight away, of course.

I should like to ask akenaton to refrain from making any more references to "Team Musket" unless he is prepared to give us a list of the supposed team members. Failing that, the term stands as yet another example of his idiocy. As does his supposition that Farage is not a racist and that he himself is a socialist.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 08:29 AM

My remarks were not directed at anyone in particular. I was just reporting on my own experience where attempts to have a discussion end up being the minority of the posts on threads with the rest being little more than abuse and not even necessarily directed at the main participants in the discussion. In one of the recent threads on evolution for example far too many posts were of the character.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 09:07 AM

Well Steve, There is Ian Mather, he posted his name as guest.
There is Seaham Cemetry the libeller
The other two are known only to Ian, so perhaps you should ask him.
Personally, I believe they are alter ego's, but I have no proof of this.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 09:20 AM

I dare say there are more than three people who would like to see bigotry dead and buried, and not able to pollute debates.

There is a line, and not a fine one either, between views and propogating hatred. I have views that may not be everybody elses, and that's fine both ways. But to treat others as not equal?

About as nauseating as it gets.

Whats more, there is not a single Mudcat person who defends him, so why is he even bothering telling us what he thinks? I don't respect the views of bank robbers when it comes to money, I don't respect rapists when it comes to talking about abuse, so why on earth should a hate filled discrimination merchant think decent people are interested in his fixation with anal sex, let alone his support for closet racists? (He claimed on another thread to be a member of a liberal, socialist leaning political party that brought in more equality legislation than any before it for that matter!)*

Sick puppy.



By the way, this is Ian typing.



*SNP, running the kitchen cabinet in Scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 09:36 AM

And here's me thinking I was in the bloody team. Maybe I've been a bit too quiet recently about my co-messiahdom. Need a striker, Musket? Naturally, I model my technique on the lamented Luis...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 11:06 AM

Yeah, you are on the Messiah team still. After all, you are our glorious leader, so I can't do much about it anyway. Although the co Messiah Emeritus with gnomish attributes is having a break from Mudcat, I am sure he is following the faith strongly.

Mind you, it needs a striker with a bit of bite in him, but not ex Liverpool eh? Not doing so well without him though I see. We snatched a draw from the jaws of victory at Charlton yesterday.

A bit about the various Muskets. Ian Mather is one and the others post as guest + name in the music threads occasionally. One is gay, as should be obvious, one lives in Scotland, all are interfering in NHS healthcare in one way or another, although only one is employed in The NHS. (As I'm not him, I can say as a quack.) The three musketeers were four but one broke ranks when his wife put two and two together allegedly. Presently in Sierra Leone as a military medic, so no wonder we don't hear much these days. Got an email a few days ago. (Playing at a folk club with his Dad shortly for that matter. We used to be in a band or two back in the day.)

We all play guitar. We all scratch our balls. We all like beer and good wine. We all see how gormless the BS section of Mudcat is, despite the best efforts of some to be serious about it, and we all feel it can give a bad name to an excellent music resource. Hence insisting on taking the piss out of those who have a less than nice approach.

No problem with shared membership then. As I said, apart from recently winding Jim up over his rather silly folk definition, only Ian posts as Musket above the line. We all have our iPads and iPhones linked into the same NHS VPN, making shared membership easy as IP addresses are set by the national server. (Anybody using their NHS computer to post possibly has the same IP..)



Regarding the worm. Ian Mather was, like Steve Shaw, a member name, not just a guest as the worm likes to have people believe.

(Is he still here? I don't want to get my shower yet just in case.)

Back from gardening anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 11:16 AM

Steve, I take exception to your view that I am not a socialist.
I can of course see flaws in socialism, but all my life I have viewed the Capitalist system as an evil, which requires to be removed.

One cannot support the retention of Capitalism and claim to be a Socialist....IMO.
"Ian Musket" and ED, your posts are simply abusive rhetoric,

add nothing to the discussion and make no sense.
They infer things which I did not say nor think.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 12:53 PM

ok ... confessions time...

"punkfolkrocker" is also a corporate identity, just like musket,Take That, and One Direction..

One of us is a jet set playboy not so minor member of the British Royal Family:
one of us is a Protected Witness in the Witness Protection Programme:
one of us is either a Secret Agent, Super Hero, or Super Villain
depending on the particular point of view of allies & adversaries
from the comlpex treacherous world of double-dealing international / interplanetary conflict & political intrigue...

.. and the much less interesting one who grew up on a west country small town factory fodder council estate..
who is basically just standard issue irritating comedy-relief side kick, confidant, and tea boy to the other 3.

So you should now understand why all our real identities need to remain shielded from public disclosure...

NOTE: Secret identity names may by necessity be fake.
Or if real, quite likely to be 'open secrets'
due to occasional careless revelations & unmaskings to femme fatales
at times of life threatening stress and danger:
and unfortunately thanks to google & youtube, not too difficult to identify
if ever subjected to over-intrusive media speculation ?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: pdq
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 12:59 PM

The BS section may be dwindling, but of BS itself, there is an ample supply.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 01:02 PM

Your reputation and posting history on Mudcat is more accurate then your selective memory Ake. While it is easy to strike out at those who remind you of it, as you often feebly do in each attempted defense, it does little to erase the well-earned anti homosexual brand you garnered.

What often puzzles me is how you complain of people "picking on you" ( and, only you) , yet you come back consistantly with the "same old-same old" to generate more disgust from many. A death wish maybe? Or, possibly a case where "negative attention is better than no attention"? Most only know you on BS by the predomionately anti-homosexual posting fixation you put forward.

Maybe you are a kind compassionate, sensible guy in real life-maybe not. But, IMO, you put forward the opposite face on Mudcat? Given that, nothing can be ruled out.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 01:07 PM

bollocks... I forgot to list the Time Traveller..

He says the mudcat BS golden age 20 years from now will be so frighteningly nasty and thrillingly entertaining,
that no other pugalistic bloodsports will compare...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 01:08 PM

winding Jim up over his rather silly folk definition
.,,.,..,

Purely as a question of fact, as the topic has been obsessively and self-regardingly revived by the forum's resident #1·bore·and·pain-in-the-arse:-

Jim's definition of folk was accurate. It was those otiose and meretricious arselickingly populist alternatives which were more·than·rather 'silly'.

≈Michael≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 01:30 PM

"winding Jim up over his rather silly folk definition"
Wot Mike says - not silly, long-term established
It really is time you learned the difference between "winding up" and attempting to kick into submissive silence - one needs a little skill and thought, any thug can do the other, as you have more than displayed here.
I've more-or-less steered clear of this debacle, which resembles a bi-partisan football fracas more than an intelligent debate - it goes a long way way to doing the holier-than-thou's job for them.
It is somewhat entertaining to see our resident homophobe complaining about bad behaviour though - 'worth nine guineas an ounce' as they used to say about Camay
Back to your muttons lads, don't let me interrupt you.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 02:43 PM

Punkfolkrocker.....A classic, now that's what I call wit.
Laughed out loud.... :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 03:31 PM

Homophobes who think Nigel Farage has the right idea cannot be socialists.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 05:06 PM

Well for a start Steve, I am no "homophobe" and have yet to meet any socialist who sincerely believes unregulated immigration to be a good thing.
I have no reason to believe that Mr Farage is a racist, though politically he and I are polls apart.
He was demonised by the media and Their "liberal" acolytes for questioning UK immigration policy, something that all political parties and a large number of the electorate now agree with him about.

Steve, you really should try to develop some sense of objectivity regarding political matters. Read, listen and learn, then make up your OWN mind on issues social and political.....don't be one of the sheep.
You may not have reached the dizzy heights of "Team Musket", but you certainly have potential.....im afraid to say. :0(

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 05:39 PM

Steve Shaw being one of nature's fluffy marshmallows?
That picture seems odd to me.
But, who am I to know?
I will leave that assessment up to the celtic folks with more direct "sheepsie" experience.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 06:29 PM

Wannabee Pharoah, you have a limited number of topics of rant. Your primary fixation seems to be homosexuality, who you suggest putting in concentration camps to stop them spreading AIDS (well, close enough). Your next is racist bigotry, see your spewing of hate about Romanies. I have repeatedly asked you to say what sort of economic or political order you are FOR - but in the round all you do is say you want to destroy capitalism. Then what? Life as in Mad Max films? Anarchy? Grow up man.   

If you are a socialist you cannot possibly support UKIP. They are documented to support "flat tax" (which is regressive and hits the   poor harder than the rich) and privatising the NHS (which hits the poor more than the rich) and abolishing most benefits (which, etc).

You are more confused than Mither, the miner who supported Thatcher's war on miners, and brags about his wealth - and pretends to be a socialist too.

In fact, you are nearly as mad as Goofball, who'd be perfectly at home with any of the many nutters listed here - http://www.publiceye.org/research/directories/dem_grp_undermine.html

Or almost as much a fantasist as our resident god-botherer, busily playing with his imaginary friend.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 08:47 PM

No, you're not a "homophobe" who doesn't believe in "gay marriage". You're a homophobe who doesn't believe in gay marriage.

I've often thought of the political spectrum as being a bit like one of those split-ring washers. Imagine the gap at the top. The best lefties are at top left, right next to the little split. You go all the way round anticlockwise, via softie left, via Brownites, via Blairites (we're already at about four o'clock), LibDems (three o'clock), Cameronites (two o'clock), the Monday Club (one o'clock), Farage (ten past midday) and the BNP (thirty seconds past midday or less). Then just think of who Farage and the BNP try to appeal to - the working-class lefties, especially the poor, the out-of-work, the disabled, the badly-housed, the exploited, the poor sods who work every hour God sends for £6.50 an hour less this less that who can't afford the rent on the lousiest bedsit in town without taxpayer intervention - cheers for that, Asda, Tesco, Marks 'n' Sparks and all the rest of the real benefit cheats - who are just the good side of that tiny gap at the top. Easy pickings for the far right. Low-hanging fruit, as they say. Just entice them to jump that little gap with hollow promises about curbing immigration (which they can't and won't and never do) and slashing benefits to shirkers (who hardly exist), benefit cheats (rare) and disabled people (probably their fault anyway, probably all just fat unfit boozy useless gits). Don't bloody blame Costa or Amazon or Vodafone, of course, who have armies of accountants to ensure they pay little or no tax. Or mega-rich foreigners who buy up millionaire mansions in London as "investments".

Where are you on that spectrum, ake? Why, you're with Farage! You've jumped the gap!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 09:08 PM

I go away for 2½ days and there are multifarious elucidations of personality analyses and awkward revelations about bus routes and letter writing habits...and "things too fierce to mention"....mostly done with wit, if not with taste. For all its ramblings, it even reminds me of repartee of days gone by.... and only a few low-key insults. Wow.... things are either picking up or backsliding in new & untraveled paths- and I'm not sure which I wish for.


(and *I* spent the last two evenings reading learned analyses the life of and seldom read and not widely known poetry of Charles Ludwig Dodgson. That man was more fascinating than any of us here!)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 14 - 09:14 PM

Fascinating indeed. So fascinating that one feels he might have been fairly thoroughly investigated for more than just his poetry had he lived today.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 03:26 AM

Well apart from Bridge's comment that I supported Tha*tcher, which is up there with him being a paedophile, this rant about BS is achieving its aim, a nice waffle about BS.

Punkrockfolker is lying. The bloke in the witness protection scheme is signing contracts with us today. Or he would if he existed. I don't give my log in to any old bugger, just friends. That's possibly why there are only three of us.

One nice thing about BS, if there is one, is how easy it is to go fishing. I might write a folk song about it and dedicate it to our tit trousered grumpy old men.

Did I just read that the worm reckons he isn't a homophobe? That's possibly because he doesn't have the intelligence to understand what the term means. Reminds me of a daft twat in my old local pub who, when hearing the local GP practice put on extra clinics for chronic conditions and invited him to it. "I've got diabetes, that's all. It isn't chronic. I don't feel poorly."

A bit like the narrow interpretation of folk expressed by people so important in the folk field no bugger has heard of them eh?

😹

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:10 AM

The time traveller in our corporate entity / boy band knew you were gonna write that...

...he had a bloody good laugh about it 3 weeks ago on his way to buy a brand new Telecaster
for only a few quid back in 1951............

On the way home he popped in to have a word with young John Lennon aged only 15.

Check out your Beatles LPs now to see if the phrase "tit trousers"
is turning up in any of the songs....???

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:17 AM

Silly boys! Of course I don't support UKIP, hardly anyone in Scotland supports UKIP. It is almost exclusively an English phenomenon.
BUT that does not exclude them from being correct on one or two policies (that is where you all go wrong, you are blinded by ideology)
Mr Farage has been validated in his view that unregulated immigration from Europe is destructive. We do not have the infrastructure to support the influx of immigrants and have a huge pool of untrained and desperate indigenous young people who deserve a future.

Regarding "homophobia", being opposed to homosexual "marriage" does not make one a "homophobe". To suggest that this is the case is ludicrous.
Richard, surely some mistake, I have never met nor know anything about Romanies.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:21 AM

Sure it does.

"They keep you doped with religion, sex and TV
Till you think you're so clever and classless and free,
But you're still fucking peasants
As far as I can see."

Sounds like some of our coffin dodgers.

I would have added "When I'm sixty four," but McCartney reckons he wrote that one on his own. A bit like Peggy Seeger going around saying she wrote a lot of the songs credited to MacColl. Maybe true, but don't forget the ingredients of the aura surrounding success.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:22 AM

I'm really enjoying this!:0)   You have a rare talent punkfolkrocker!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:31 AM

I'm enjoying this.

"I'm not a homophobe. I'm opposed to homosexual "marriage."

Or I would enjoy it if it wasn't so hurtful to married people. You've been married worm. How would you like it? A marraige between two men or two women is every bit as equal as yours and mine. Period.

By the way, it's marriage, not "marriage." Snivelling little shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:46 AM

Well there you go Bill, that's your "peace" theory out the window.
Appreciate a delicious piece of irony from PFR and you get a typical reaction from one of the "Muskets"!

"Team Musket" delight in taking the piss, but as "Ian Musket" says, "They don't like it up 'em.......the cold steel" :0))

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 05:26 AM

{Yawn}

One person who I never take the piss out of is you. I want you silenced whilst ever you propagate hatred.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 05:41 AM

Sometimes I read Popgun's posts, mostly not coz they are so excessively self-regarding and [in particular] so ballsachingly boring. But this last one made me smile. The idea of such a notoriously peaceful, loving, benign and philanthropic person as old Popgun accusing anyone else of propagating hatred is really rich indeed.

BTW, has anyone any idea what he is on about, going on&on&on about my newsagent and his nephew? My newsagent is Wilburton Post Office, Cambridgeshire. I haven't been there lately, as they deliver very efficiently & I pay them monthly by post. I have no idea whether any of the proprietary family has any nephews or not. Not really that bothered, but vaguely intrigued as to which stick the silly little person can possibly have got hold of the wrong end of this time.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 06:03 AM

Popgun? Hoo dat?

Hateon, you spent months going on about gypsies being tramps and thieves, rapist and drugdealers.

You say you don't support the idiotic establishment shill Farage and then repeat his xenophobic views. Get a grip.

Mither - you supported and still support the Thatcherite wars on the NUM. You may lie that you are a socialist, but you're as much a socialist as a lover of bacon is a vegetarian. You've decided which side you're on. It's the side of the "haves".

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 06:07 AM

Charles Ludwig Dodgson

Ludwig?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 06:09 AM

Was there just a suggedtion that Ludwig was ludicrous?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 06:11 AM

Funny fucking socialist "The eight speed box in my BMW is excellent and seamless whilst the sports auto box in Mrs Musket's Mercedes hunts more and isn't quite up there yet." Sounds more like Bonzo no dick than a socialist really.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 06:23 AM

He says that to a member of The NUM who was on strike zzzzzzz. Like the vast majority of my colleagues, I blame Scargill, Capstick and co every bit as much as the government of the day. When you get called "the enemy within" by a sitting Prime Minister, then and only then will you be fit to lick my boots.

By the way, when was I ever a socialist? I'm a dirty rotten stinking capitalist, as you well know. A bit like Scargill when he exercised Tha*cher's right to buy on a flat in London but forgot the tenant was the union, not him. The money he made on it is still, in the words of Father Ted, "resting in his account." He refused to budge when they wanted it back too.

Naw, I'm an amateur compared to your criminal hero. No matter, he daren't show his face in Barnsley these days. Too many poor fools seeing the penny dropping.

I'm not on the side of the 'haves." Like you, I just happen to have. I'm just not as hypocritical about it as you though. Did you keep your Conservative Party membership card duck? For nostalgia sake?

Still, at least you are as daft as a brush. Thats no sin. Me? I have never voted anything but Labour. Ever. Can you say that?

Michael.. Do I have to remind the girls and boys? Surely you can't be proud of when you were saying all Muslims are potential terrorists and I pointed out that the nice old man at the newsagent may be Muslim? Remember what you said? "Yes, but he may have a nephew and not know what he is doing."

This after invoking some distant family Jewish connection I recall. Any idea how similar your comments were to those of Germans in the '20s and '30s?

Right.


Bollocks.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 06:25 AM

Untrained and desperate indigenous people, eh? Are you suggesting that we "train" immigrants ahead of "indigenous" people? So who's indigenous where? Me? Thoroughly English chap from Lancashire, born 'n' bred, etc.? Definitely!

Except that my maternal side came here from Ireland in the late 19th century (we were still doing great old Irish family gatherings when I was a little lad). And my dad's side... Never really looked into it, but any bets on "Shaw" having Irish roots...

Your sloppy and unthinking use of " indigenous" marks you out as xenophobic and racist. As for your simplistic view that Farage has got one or two things right, in particular with regarded to immigration from the EU, you seem to be forgetting the massively wider issues that breaking EU laws would trigger. The spike in net immigration is recent. Going from past experience, it will continue to rise and fall. But you think Farage's populist and racist nonsense should hold sway, regardless of irreversible consequences for this country for decades or centuries down the line. You really don't have a clue, do you. Farage and his crew just love suckers like you.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 06:36 AM

Oh, yes. Remember now. Thanx 4 reminder, Popgun. As it happens, I think my newsagent family at Wilburton Stores are Indian, but have never asked them. And my point still seems a fair one. Do you know everything your nephew gets up to? My mother's first cousin once did a three-er for something or other; I forget what -- it was about 60 years ago... But the relevance is that most families have their black sheep. In a Muslim family, that black-sheepery might well, in current circumstances, take form of going off to join IS, mightn't it? Don't you read the papers? What's so phobic, or even unreasonable, in pointing out that irrefutable fact?

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 07:00 AM

So choice of car denotes your political views now? You know what they say about Volvo drivers.... (Too expensive for me anyway Bridge. When I got my last car, I did look at a Volvo D70. Specced up to the same list price as an equivalent BMW and even after the huge discount they give on them in order to sell them, the Volvo was far more expensive on a PCP. Why? Depreciation.)

Mike. I know what my nephew is probably doing. Ramming his arm up a cow's arse. Mrs Musket has two nephews though, and watch out, they live about six miles from you. I doubt they are terrorists though. Their Mum reckons they are little terrors at times but toddlers can do that easily.

Perhaps a Muslim black sheep can be denoted as supporting Sheffield Utd? Or perhaps wearing a loud shirt in a built up area? Making a mental leap to terrorism can only be forgiven by your advanced years and the senility it provides. If you were of an age where we take your opinions seriously, you'd be up there with Akenaton.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 07:57 AM

So all these young men who went off to join IS, for whom the form their welcome home should take is currently so much being canvassed, are white sheep, are they, Pop? Or maybe they're not Muslims at all but just pretending? Or do you really never read any papers or watch any news?

Never mind where I am up -- what's it like down there in the sand where your head seems to be permanently fixed? Never mind about my advanced age which so obsesses you -- time you started to think of growing up a bit maybe, Sonny-boy... My oh-so-senile intellect can run ◯s round your pathetic illogical apology for a cerebellum any day of the week.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Rob Naylor
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 08:24 AM

Steve Shaw: Don't bloody blame Costa or Amazon or Vodafone, of course, who have armies of accountants to ensure they pay little or no tax. Or mega-rich foreigners who buy up millionaire mansions in London as "investments".

Bit of an insult to Costa, there, old chap. Costa's a British firm, started in London in the early 70s (incidentally by a couple of Italian immigrants) with HQ in Dunstable. It's now a subsidiary of Whitbread, but as far as I know it always paid, and still pays, full corporation tax as a UK company.

I believe, if it's companies that use fancy accounting techniques to remit revenue to foreign jurisdictions with more favourable tax rules that you're highlighting, then Starbucks would be the coffee emporium that you should be referencing.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 08:24 AM

And what about those Christians who are in prison for armed robbery eh? What about the atheists who steal from old people?

And as for the Fulham fans who don't renew their TV licences.. Bastards.

You could fucking weep, reading some of the disgusting shit on here. Perhaps I got it wrong. It isn't a folk website after all, its a white supremacy website. No Muslims, no gays, no normal rational people.

A pity then that most on here seem rational.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 08:56 AM

Whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout

like a bloody brainless parrot.

Whataboutery is notoriously the argument of fools.

So a guy is in Wandwsorth for holding up a bank. Oh, well, that makes it perfectly OK that "Islamic State group militants have lined up and executed at least another 85 tribesmen in Iraq's Anbar province after accusing the tribe of retaliating against them", does it? And when they've finished there they can come back here for a bit more of the same, even if Uncle Newsagent might not like it.

You drivelling ½wit!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 08:59 AM

Fucking Nazi

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 09:04 AM

*sigh* Yes, Steve....typing while I was half asleep...

Charles Lutwidge Dodgson... and he might have been investigated for other things, but a hundred years of scholarship found no good evidence.

Now I'll just settle back and watch the verbal jousting...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: bobad
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 09:26 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket - PM
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 08:59 AM

Fucking Nazi

***********************************************************************************

And there you have it in a nutshell folks.......the answer to the question.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw grovelling
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 09:55 AM

Bugger. Absolutely right, Rob. I did mean Starbucks. Apologies to anyone even remotely connected to Costa (whose emporia I frequent and enjoy as it happens) who may have seen that. :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 09:56 AM

Tsk. Has Michael been upsetting me again?

Hang on. I'll just check. Yep.

The proof being, whenever blaming people for being born to Muslim parents, poobad weighs in.

And there you have it in a nutshell folks.... The answer to the question.

Of course, you could always assume the website is better when homophobia, Islamophobia and religious bigotry flourish and those who find such filth objectionable keep quiet?

Your move.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 10:44 AM

*sigh* Yes, Steve....typing while I was half asleep...

Charles Lutwidge Dodgson... and he might have been investigated for other things, but a hundred years of scholarship found no good evidence.

That is not in the post you put up here, Bill, so what exactly are you trying to say?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 10:45 AM

I decline to 'move' against, or compete with, one whose chosen mode of dispute is "fucking Nazi".

Such places self as an unworthy opponent of no interest to contend against.

Adieu, thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 11:08 AM

Adieu my arse, Michael. You can't resist it (the thread, not my arse).

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 11:09 AM

*sigh* Yes, Steve....typing while I was half asleep...

Bah! There's no justice. £$@#%& Shaw gets credited with my correction to Bill D's mistake.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 11:59 AM

Yeah, but in terms of being succinct, accurate and unambiguous, it seems to have performed its duty if it stops you vilifying sections of society based on their choice of imaginary friend or traditional culture, (increasingly, their parents' choice.)

Tatty Bye.




(Just covering your arse Co Messiah.)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Mrrzy
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 12:07 PM

Still lurking. This is enlightening.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jack Campin
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 12:23 PM

most families have their black sheep. In a Muslim family, that black-sheepery might well, in current circumstances, take form of going off to join IS, mightn't it?

It might. Then again they might be accepted for doing it. We have been here before: a hell of a lot more British Jews have gone to fight for the Zionists in Palestine (in some cases, killing British and American military for the cause) than there have been Muslims goijng abroad to fight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahal_%28Israel%29

Did these sick fuckers get treated by British Jewry on their return as the psycho bigoted killers they were? Maybe sometimes, but it certainly wasn't their usual reception.

There are currently about 100 British people in various Zionist armed gangs in Palestine, and about 500 British people fighting for IS:

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-britons-fight-israel/18448

There are about 10 times as many Muslims as Jews in the UK, so that means, proportionately, twice as many British Jews as Muslims go abroad to kill. Currently British Muslim psychos are a numerically larger problem, but over the decades since WW2, they have been vastly outnumbered by British Jewish psychos and are only just starting to catch up.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 12:30 PM

Right... no justice at all from one who hasn't recovered from a long weekend... but I can offer an apology for the silly error.

More coffee... that might help

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw scratching head
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 12:34 PM

This whole Bill/Snail/me thing is getting bloody confusing and there hasn't even been a mention of evolution not being true yet! When will Popper popup?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 12:49 PM

Sorry Richard, but you have made a mistake; I know very little about Romanies/Gypsies, other than they appear to have a colourful and interesting culture.
There are no Romanies in this part of Scotland and as far as I am aware very few in the rest of the country.

What I referred to were Scottish traveller families who took advantage of their "special status" to set up a fortress in their purpose built encampment, from which they ran drug dealing and money lending to local addicts and young people.....the business was enforced at knife point....I have personally seen the results.
Like the Bradford child molesters, the police were afraid to touch them lest they be accused of discrimination, homophobia racism or any other terms you so love.

Finally the fortress was closed under the pretence of "refurbishment" and the families rehoused where they could be closely monitored.


I will accept your apology in due course.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 12:50 PM

Proving evolution to be absolutely true beyond all doubt...???

easy.. the time traveller in team punkfolkrocker will put it on his 'to do' list...

.. after he's completed his more pressing project of peeping through the bathroom windows
of famous beauties thoughout history.........

That's gonna be one mighty impressive photo blog........

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 12:57 PM

After the Rev. David Sheppard had dropped a catch off his bowling - You might keep your eyes shut when your praying, Vicar, but I wish you'd keep 'em open when I'm bowling.
Fred Trueman (1963)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 01:03 PM

"Like the Bradford child molesters, the police were afraid to touch them lest they be accused of discrimination, homophobia racism or any other terms you so love."
So we just have your word for it because the police are too afraid to speak up - !!!!!
Of all the persecuted groups, the last community to have any protection from the police because of fear of public opinion is the Travellers - utter and complete bollocks.
Socialist my arseum - did that nice Mr Farrago tell you to put this up?
Socilaist my arseum
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 01:11 PM

What I really love is when those who get caught out for being little shits try to wriggle out of it and back pedal, and it just makes them look even more disgraceful..

Funny old world.

At least I know I'm a twat.

🙈🙉🙊

🐮💩

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 01:16 PM

"Persecuted groups".....no Jim, the people who were doing the "persecuting" were the people who were dealing drugs and slashing those who were unable to pay.
I am a local here, I move in circles where I get to know exactly what is going on, and this is no fabrication.

Of course I don't think that all travellers behave like is, but the "special minority status" provides the opportunity for criminality.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link.
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 01:32 PM

Nice one punkfolkrocker.......the first bit , that is.      Well I suppose the second bit might be sort of nice.....but not very virtuous !.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 01:32 PM

Talking about being "caught out"......which musket is it this time?
It would save confusion if you added a distinguishing extra handle. :0)

"Libel Musket" has already been taken...:0(
"Foul mouth Musket"?????
"Misrepresenting Musket"
"Lying Musket"
"Fraudulent Musket"......sigh ....decisions decisions :00

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 01:58 PM

Howsabout Musket who can live with his conscience.

I'm not a crook. I don't propogate hatred. I am not cruel to dogs. I certainly don't "move in circles"

Have you noticed who is agreeing with you?

That's right. Nobody.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 01:59 PM

Your claims are no different than those I have been listening to from The BNP, The National Front and every right wing extremist for the last thirty years - that is the level of your 'Socialism' - pretty much as 'Socialist' as when you suggested mass-murderer Anders Breivik should be listened to because he "as making an important point".
Of course there are criminals among the Travelling community, just as there among any other cultural or ethnic group, but there is no evidence whatever to suggest that the proportion of criminality among Travellers is in any way greater than any other
There are i the region of fifty thousand Travellers in Britain - the idea that such a small number of historically persecuted and despised people are powerful enough to frighten the police or judiciary into not doing their duty is right wing propaganda in the extreme.
It is the stuff that sent half a million of them to th Nazi death-camps
Which particular 'Socialist' tendency do you claim to adhere to exactly?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 02:03 PM

Steve Shaw
there hasn't even been a mention of evolution not being true yet! When will Popper popup?

Well pete with the stars in his eyes hasn't been taking much part in this thread and, as far as I know, Popper never said evolution wasn't true. It's not the sort of thing he would say. He did, at first, think that that the Theory of Evolution didn't qualify as a valid scientific theory but was persuaded otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 02:04 PM

Jim.....get a grip, the point I am making is about the "special minority status" legislation, not about travellers in particular.
It could have been any group protected by this idiotic legislation.

But I think you knew that....didn't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 02:11 PM

For most of my life I have been a member of the Communist Party.
How many communists do you think ended up in Nazi death camps?
We were first in the queue, you numpty.

Sorry for name calling Jim but very occasionally I get a little annoyed.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 02:50 PM

"BS dwindles, while Musket ascends"

What a neat looking headline it would be?
:)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 02:56 PM

"For most of my life I have been a member of the Communist Party."
I know a lot of communists - some of my family wre, many of my friends were, notably the Jewish ones I knew (and nearly married into) in Mancheter
I never met a single one who despised immigrants, gays and Travellers the way you do (not to mention "liberals").
"It could have been any group protected by this idiotic legislation"
And this could come from any extreme right-wing tub-thumper.
The are people in or society who need protection - from the likes of you - particularly of the minority kind.
The nearest you get to being a 'Socialist' is your leaning towards National Socialism - a different bunny wabbit altogether.
By the way - you told a porky
You said you only had objections toward gay marriage - not true.
You are one of the most prominent "gay plague" scaremongers on this forum.
You have described homosexuality a chosen aberration, "unhealthy", "unnatural" and "curable" - married or single.
Stick to your guns lad - you'll never be taken seriously if you don't!
Long live "idiotic legislation" - it keeps the jackals a bay.
Jim Carroll
I assume your support for Breivik is taken as read?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 03:00 PM

well snail, I seem to remember you asking to be shown some....if I am remembering correctly.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 03:07 PM

Sorry pete, but if Steve, who claims to be a scientist, can't understand the point I don't think there's a chance that you will.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 03:28 PM

Musket can't ascend. Already at the top.

This gets better. The worm reckons he was a member of the communist party. Now he's a member of Scottish National Party, or so he claims. I particularly love the bit about being first in the queue at the Nazi concentration camps.

I wasn't aware they killed their kindred spirit...

No matter. At least he has the luxury of being able to marry whoever he wishes as a British subject. Thats equality for you. Of course, if he really is a member of SNP, he supported the concept of marriage, regardless of gender.

Lying little criminal scum.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:08 PM

"...if Steve, who claims to be a scientist"""

He is? I understood he was an educator, who at one time taught some level of science-but, I could be mistaken. What's with that, Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw B.Sc ARCS PGCE with bar
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:13 PM

I don't claim to be a scientist. I have a certificate somewhere. Pity Popper's not around. He would falsify your inaccuracy. I wish he could falsify achytony and ung. Not pete. He falsifies himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw (grade 9 'O' Level RE and proud o
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:19 PM

That's right, Ed. Science teacher for 25 years and team leader on the biology 'A' Level examiners' panel, University of London, 1990-92. But don't tell anybody.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Truncated Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:21 PM

...proud of it! Think I might have accidentally answered the Jewish section instead of the Catholic section - and that's the truth!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:25 PM

"You have described homosexuality a chosen aberration, "unhealthy", "unnatural" and "curable" - married or single."

Lies and disinformation Jim.
I have never to my knowledge described Homosexuality as a "chosen aberration"....I have said that I am undecided as to whether homosexuality is a perversion or not.....I have been waiting for years for someone to provide evidence that it is not.
Male homosexuality is certainly unhealthy.( see STD figures)
"Unnatural".... not a word I use in this context, did you mean perversion?(see above)
I certainly have never said it can be "cured", although some people revert to heterosexuality after being homosexual for a long period.

If people wish to have male to male sexual intercourse, that is their business and they take responsibility for the great risks involved.
However legislation to make such an obviously dangerous and unhealthy behaviour part of mainstream society by redefining marriage to accommodate it, is the business of everyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 04:36 PM

Which is why it is an equal status available for all.

Bigoted scum


Male homosexuality is not unhealthy either, despite your peurile twisting of facts.


Why can we put people in the moon, invent technology that was beyond comprehension even ten years ago and have a communications network that makes the world smaller, yet still allow bigotry to survive?


About time it was cold in the grave.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: The Sandman
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 05:20 PM

After the ball which Raman Subba Row had dropped off Fred Trueman's bowling had gone for four-Subba Row: I'm sorry about that, it might have been better if I had kept my legs together. Tmeman: Aye, it's a pity your mother didn't!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 07:00 PM

"Lies and disinformation Jim."
You it is not - at one time or another, all I have described has been part of your argument
You have put it forward s a personal choice and presented homosexuals as misfits - perversion, aberration - semantics - it's all prejudice-generating
"although some people revert to heterosexuality"
Yes - you have used that as an argument, and have refused to comment on the fact that a far greater number spend their lives as heterosexuals (mainly from pressure put on them by a people like you) and then, decide to bite the bullet and 'come out'
All people need to take responsibility for their sexuality, whether the consequences are unwanted or unmanageable pregnancies or sexually transmitted diseases - why single out gays?
You fail to respond to my comments about your prejudice towards immigrants, Travellers, "liberals" and those in need of State protection from bigots like yourself, so they stand, making you as I described, a tub-thumping, right-wing bigot.
If you are a "socialist", as you described, your socialism if contrary to one of it's basic tenets 'Internationalism' - "Arise, you starvelings...." and all that - which makes you, you guessed it, a National Socialist.
Your silence on your support for Brievik, 'the patriot who gunned down 80 odd young Norwegians to highlight a cause not a million miles for your own, confirms that that was not "lies and disinformation" either.   
"Time to go to sleep now, little man, you've had a busy day" as the song aptly says.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 07:03 PM

I suppose snail, that in the normal run of things, I should not intrude into your elitist edifices of eruditity, but , blow me down, there I goes, taking the mention of my name as an excuse! .
but I don't mind a put down, and I don't suppose any theory about the far gone past is provable.....or that I need letters after my name to make such observations.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw sans letters after name
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 07:29 PM

Too right, pete, letters mean nothing. But you demonstrate gleefully to the world once again that you don't know what science is. Theories are never provable. That's why they're theories.

Cue Snailieboy to come in and confuse theory with truth. Oh shit, I'm bloody trolling now... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 07:39 PM

Steve Shaw
I don't claim to be a scientist. I have a certificate somewhere.

Nevwer seen your certificate Steve. I can only go by what you say on Mudcat and anyone who can't grasp basic concepts like falsifiability doesn't come over very well as a scientist.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jack Campin
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 07:48 PM

[quote]anyone who can't grasp basic concepts like falsifiability doesn't come over very well as a scientist.[/quote]
Falsifiability is not a scientific concept, for any science. It's a buzzword from Popper's philosophical system, which has never been taken very seriously outside Anglo-American academia and journalism, and is rapidly headed for oblivion even there.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw, with sword of truth
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 07:56 PM

"You can only falsify that which is falsifiable, such as scientific theory. You can't falsify truth which is beyond science, for example, the truth that evolution happens. You can't even falsify almost certain untruths that are beyond science, such as the existence of God. You'll be fine once you get your realms sorted out." [Barney Rubble, 4005 BC].

Has the Gastropod breeding season finished yet? Is it true that you both have to do everything to each other both ways?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,The unfalsifiable Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 08:05 PM

Haven't seen my certificate since 1972. It's probably in my mum's attic covered in batshit. And I can't show it to you anyway. Last time I accidentally left a sheet of A4 in my garden a bloody snail ate it.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Sol.
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 08:28 PM

What a horrible thread.
It answers its own question.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 08:48 PM

Wannabee - catch 22. If those you vilify are Romanies (or gypsies), they possess the protected characteristic of "race" under the Equality Act. If they are not, then they do not possess it, so are not protected by that legislation. You really don't get it, do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 03 Nov 14 - 09:10 PM

""What a horrible thread.
It answers its own question.""

Not for the faint-hearted, best to pass it by, Sol.
BTW, it dic garner a fair amount of posts, hardly a "dwindling sign" at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 01:27 AM

Musket: "Musket can't ascend. Already at the top."

Suicidal, and proud of it!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 03:11 AM

Remind us of how you claim to be able to "cure" being gay Goofus. The worm is struggling in the face of logic (and Bridge) so could do with some moral support from another moron.

Funny thing, all this talk about certificates. I had to find my certificates the other week. Never had to show them anywhere before. Eventually, the former Mrs Musket found some of them in her drawer with hers and passed them on, whilst reminding me that one important one I got after we split up was shredded as part of a leaving present from a girlfriend. I wonder if certificates are falsifiable? According to that Internet thingy they are... The real one will take ages. It is in two parts from two different places, one here and one in sausage, hairy dead pig and rotten cabbage land, although Heidelberg sounds much nicer.

It's this wonderful knack I have of winning friends and influencing people.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 07:42 AM

Jack Campin

Falsifiability is not a scientific concept, for any science. It's a buzzword from Popper's philosophical system, which has never been taken very seriously outside Anglo-American academia and journalism, and is rapidly headed for oblivion even there.

That's very interesting Jack. Could you give me some pointers to the new thinking?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 07:50 AM

I hope everyone is suitably impreassed by the scientific precision of Steve's last two posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 08:49 AM

Impreassed? Should I be impressed or arsed?

(See thread on buzz words. Assed would have been better but perish the thought of speaking like a mule.)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 09:00 AM

By logical deduction we now know that at least one of the Muskets never makes typing errors.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 09:23 AM

Jim.... You are becoming so abusive that I'm sure you would qualify for "Team Musket"
"Your support for Breivik can be taken as read"

Jim that is a brilliant piece of misrepresentation

Firstly, it gives the impression that I support Breivik...which of course I don't, then goes on to imply that I do not disagree with your statement.
I am sure Bill has a word for it..:0)

What I Actually said was that Breivik was obviously a madman and the policies pursued by various governments motivate madmen to carry out despicable acts.....I do not and never have supported the slaughter of innocent young people......but I suppose you already knew that.

Set you alarm clock a little earlier if to wish to make disingenuous statements regarding my views.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 10:11 AM

If this Musket slips in a typo, I assure it will be Freudian.

A bit like yours.

Nice to read an abusive little shit like Akenaton reckoning others are abusive. Also nice to see he likes to blame governments for criminals. Who made you what you are worm? Was it when your saviour Salmond came out in favour of extending equality for all in marriage?

By the way, I doubt even Jim "I can start an argument in an empty room" Carroll could ever be accused of making disingenuous statements regarding your views. It needs a forensic psychiatrist to work out how your seedy little mind operates.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 10:52 AM

Musket: "Remind us of how you claim to be able to "cure" being gay Goofus."

Well, being as YOU made that up...and have been harping on me about something YOU made up, perhaps YOU should substantiate that I ever made that claim!
Typical 'SO-CALLED LIBERAL' gibberish!

GfS

P.S. Maybe while you're at it, you could substantiate the 'so-called liberal' accusations of the mythical 'War on Woman' bit of nonsense, along with most other accusations of 'bigotry' and 'racism'....that your ilk makes up, to accuse others of, trying to get political traction!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Falsifiability is not a scientific concept,
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 12:30 PM

Falsifiability is [...] a buzzword from Popper's philosophical system, which has never been taken very seriously outside Anglo-American academia and journalism, and is rapidly headed for oblivion even there.
That's very interesting Jack. Could you give me some pointers to the new thinking?

There is no definite label for it all, but a lot of philosophy of science has been influenced by postmodernism, or ideas related to it. Thomas Kuhn more or less started the movement; I studied briefly with Paul Feyerabend, who was perhaps the most influential of that lot. Feyerabend knew more about the history of ideas than anybody I've ever met, and he had a colossal store of examples of science operating in total disregard of Popper's ideal - instead, scientific systems try to maintain themselves by finding ways to coexist with conflicting evidence. Imre Lakatos (in "Proofs and Refutations") has a nice case study of how this works in mathematics; he called the process of sidelining inconveniences "monster-barring".

Feyerabend had more time for Popper than I ever did, but then he knew him personally and I didn't. Popper got into weird new-agey-religious bollocks with John Eccles towards the end of his life, about how the soul and brain communicate via quantum gobbledygook. I suppose he had some way of persuading himself that that was compatible with his earlier positivist doctrines. I heard Eccles talking about it once and he just sounded senile.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 01:06 PM

I've dropped the 'team punkfolkrocker gag' - I got bored with it.. it's just me now...

This thread is far from 'dwindling' as far as I'm concerned,
it's reawakening memories for me..

Bloody hell.. "History of Ideas"
- I was accepted for a social psychology / hist of ideas degree at Bradford Uni back in 1980ish,
but decided to go somewhere else because of girlfriend problems...

That was one single most drastic life changing decision.....

I've probably still got the text books she lent me to get through the interview
before we split up...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 01:18 PM

I must confess that when "popper" was first mentioned, I thought it was a lighthearted putdown of muskets lack of substantial firepower !.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Jack Campin
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 01:30 PM

That was me a couple of posts back, using a new computer and a browser I'm not familiar with.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 02:12 PM

"But are there philosophical problems? The present position of English philosophy - my point of departure - originates, I believe, in the late Professor Ludwig Wittgenstein's doctrine that there are none; that all genuine problems are scientific problems; that the alleged propositions or theories of philosophy are pseudo-propositions or pseudo-theories; that they are not false (if they were false, their negations would be true propositions or theories) but strictly meaningless combinations of words, no more meaningful than the incoherent babbling of a child who has not yet learned to speak properly." 
― Karl Popper, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 02:25 PM

Good old Ludwig! I have always considered that pretty well all the maunderings and lucubrations subsumed under "Philosophy" are just inflated solipsistic statements of the obvious delivered in increasingly portentous tones...

Is that not so, Socrates?

≈Micrates≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 02:45 PM

Late teen/early 20s years, we had to read up on all that philosophy bollocks
just to impress the knickers off smart college girls...

That and playing electric guitar usually clinched it....

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 03:59 PM

Doubt is not a pleasant state of mind, but certainty is absurd. (Voltaire)

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 04:55 PM

mythical 'War on Woman' bit of nonsense,

There is a pronounced anti-woman bias in a great deal of proposed government policy and legislation lately, and you're blind if you can't see it. The legislation dancing around women's health care and birth control access and control over one's body in the advent of unwanted pregnancy is an abomination.

This thread is becoming the perfect illustration of why many people don't bother to posit non-music questions at Mudcat.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 07:46 PM

"This thread is becoming the perfect illustration of why many people don't bother to....etc...etc..."

or....


"This thread is becoming the perfect illustration
of why a minority of lively robust creative intelligent transgressive adult minds
should be [grudgingly] tolerated and left to their own devices within the boundaries of BS playpens;
subjected to minimum interference from over-sensitive judgementa souls
who still drop in despite being fully aware of the potentially aggressive atmosphere,
for no other reason than to post petty chiding complaints ...???"

well.... it's just another way of looking at it...😉



Personally, I don't come here simply to talk and listen to folk I'm already entirely in agreement with..
That can just become stultifyingly dull.
Disagreeable, obnoxious personalities, can provide far more positive and challenging mental stimulation...💥🔥🎆💡💭✔

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 08:48 PM

"...inflated solipsistic statements of the obvious... "

I could debate that, but the argument takes awhile, and would no doubt include some of the very terms you decry... ☺

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 04 Nov 14 - 11:44 PM

The term "bollocks" would be quite brief, Bill. I should not decry it, but should take your point instantly on board!

OTH & Alternatively, I could urge that your putative animadeversions would be likely to contain no little and more than somewhat of petitio principii!


〠 right back 2U

Best regards

≈M·the·Incorrigible≈

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 12:30 AM

"Remind us of how you claim to be able to "cure" being gay Goofus."

I heard it too.

You are busted.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 03:16 AM

For him to be busted infers he had credibility to begin with.

Do keep up.

A pity pete isn't engaging more in this thread, (other than thinking questioning the logic of rational people somehow makes him look good.) As an alleged biblical scholar, he could write the book on falsifiability.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 03:19 AM

Heard it??? 'Mr. Anonymous Guest'???...Not from me! You heard it from a made up story, embellished from several posts, that I posted, which NEVER claimed that I could cure homosexuality...however, I do KNOW, that homosexuality is not genetic, is behavioral, and does NOT have to be permanent...or take it from an EX-homosexual Not having any choice is the kind of bullshit that propaganda is made of!....and how the 'so-called liberals' LOVE fraudulent propaganda!...They make it up, and delude themselves that it is indeed true!
Delusions can certainly be, by their very nature, intoxicating!
Whether you favor homosexual 'rights' or not, is really not the issue..being lied to, about it IS...and far more dangerous!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 04:57 AM

About as nauseating as akenaton and full of the same dangerous lies and shit.

Had a bad experience some time in your life Goofus? Want to talk about it?

Well no fucker's listening.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw, spelling cop
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 05:53 AM

The word is spelled "animadversion", Michael. Those who choose to use longer words when shorter ones would do, take care. Please don't take this as censure or criticism, by the way, Michael. Oh, look - I seem to have used two much nicer words for it than your one!

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 06:14 AM

"In Wingnut land, a lib-rul is defined as anyone who disagrees with 'em!"

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw winging it
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 06:29 AM

What has Prince Charles got to do with this, Ed?

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 06:47 AM

Jack Campin (I presume.)
Feyerabend had more time for Popper than I ever did, but then he knew him personally and I didn't.

Love it. These are old arguments. I'm still not sure why you claim that falsifiability is "is rapidly headed for oblivion".

Also a bit confused by your reference to [Popper's] earlier positivist doctrines. Popper was an opponent of positivism.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,The true Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 07:06 AM

Maybe Popper falsified himself, Snail.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: TheSnail
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 07:17 AM

Yet again we are left speechless by the precision of Steve's scientific analysis.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 07:45 AM

The word is spelled "animadversion", Michael.

.,,.,.

Oh what a
bore
You are to be
Shaw

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 08:27 AM

I think and believe that foul abuse in place of argument as practised by the likes of Musket dissuade decent people from joining n debate.
Hence the dwindling BS section.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 08:58 AM

You can fuck off too.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:01 AM

Whilst we are at it, who are the decent people Keith?

You mention my foul abuse. What about your support of terrorism in Palestine by Israeli militants? When have you ever criticised Akhenaton for homophobic hatred? Did you choose not to read what Goofus just put? What about Michael's broad brush attack on Muslims?

Yeah, we decent people put up with a lot really...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:18 AM

It is interesting to note the self-righteous tone of those posters who disapprove of the bearpit atmosphere that sometimes prevails on some of these threads (such as this one). Yes, people say things on the internet that they would not say to people's faces but that does not mean they are not thinking those things. Forums like this may be no more than social interaction with the gloves off.
A number of posters have criticised the Muskets for mistaking obscene abuse for argument. Such protesters have a point, but the impact on me (and, I suspect, others) of Muskets' posts is simply to ignore them because, while they may have a brain, evidence of any form of critical thinking is in short supply in what they post. This has the effect of undermining the credibility of what they say and, in turn, could enhance the credibility of those they attack. It may be possible that such self defeating behaviour will die out because of this. This thought leads me to wonder whether this process could be analogous to evolution...now then Steve Shaw......

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,BrendanB
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:20 AM

Sorry, that last guest was me.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:25 AM

"" Despite his meandering maneuverability, his strategical susceptibility, his infantile indefatigability, and his tendency towards tactical trability, he still remains."" Quote, The Worlds End

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:36 AM

Yeah but if you don't understand through poor mental capacity, ignoring is a good option Brendan.

Your post does indeed enhance the perceived credibility of the likes of Akenaton.

Your family must be very proud of you.




Its the "up your arse" stupidity and sanctimony of those with nothing to be sanctimonious about that makes posting irresistible. There may be one in every village but we appear to have a commune in the BS section.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw prick pricker
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:37 AM

Oh what a
bore
You are to be
Shaw

Heheh. Nothing so amusing as the pompous pricked...

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:39 AM

""Dogs are wise. They crawl away into a quiet corner and lick their wounds and do not rejoin the world until they are whole once more."" Agatha Christie

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:46 AM

Note the quote was "and lick their wounds" , not "their balls".

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Musket
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 09:59 AM

I have noted before that my dog has no balls, thanks to the vet.

That doesn't stop him from licking them.

Everything you ever needed to know about religion in a sentence.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 10:05 AM

""I have noted before that my dog has no balls, thanks to the vet.""

Thats why I added he note, recognizing your sensitivity about such a personal loss.

Subject: RE: BS: Dwindling BS section
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Nov 14 - 10:22 AM

Oh, Musket is just pissed that the dogs are trying to lick their own balls and not his, but alas ans alack, the dogs find that Musket doesn't have any either....that's why he will not engage in any real discussions and only nags those who do....then he avoids any real exchanges....just fantasy drivel....which, if you go back and read his posts, proves the very point!..He is quick to slur anyone who doesn't go along with his delusions, but refuses to answer their questions back to him...somewhat a cross between the annoyance of a mosquito and a gnat!

GfS