BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST,bbc
Date: 23 Feb 16 - 07:08 AM

The preceding posts illustrate well why many of us are no longer active on this site.

Best, always,

bbc

---

Said posts have been deleted for bringing up the usual accusatory back and forth. It would be wise if people would stop always harping on the same topics and move on with their lives. ---mudelf

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Feb 16 - 03:40 AM

Steve Shaw says: This is an odd place. But I can't understand why decent and sane people can't at least agree that everyone should have a single, consistent, unique user name. And that unregistered or unlogged-in people should not be posting.

Be careful what you wish for, Steve. That was a policy that was made and enforced by Joe Offer for over ten years. Those who violated, had to say ten Hail Marys, a Glory Be, and the Lord's Prayer....

Max, Mudcat's owner, made the current policy that is more friendly to anonymous posting.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 23 Feb 16 - 03:22 AM

"This is an odd place. But I can't understand why decent and sane people can't at least agree that everyone should have a single, consistent, unique user name. And that unregistered or unlogged-in people should not be posting. The fact that those things are allowed to happen quite likely creates an ethos here that attracts the bloody lunatics. There are plenty of examples of forums on the web where good practice is not only carried out but also enthusiastically embraced by almost all members. Letting anonymous cowards post here is akin to a death wish. Example above."

Steve, I've been telling 'Da Management' precisely that for years. I've given up, it's a waste of time and effort because they don't (he/she doesn't?) LISTEN! Chill man, you're never going to change things.

I mostly just lurk nowadays but, when I'm moved sufficiently to post, I try to only engage with logged-in members, although my resolve does occasionally fail me! I also refuse to become embroiled in the drawn-out 'yah-boo you' childish playground bollocks that The Usual Suspects take such delight in, and which I believe has been largely responsible for turning what used to be a great forum into a pile of shite. I have considerably more self-respect than that. If I find myself getting dragged into that kind of drivel, I just bow out - I'm very comfortable in my own skin, I'm happy with the size of my dick, and I don't need to 'win' stupid childish squabbles on Mudcat to prove my manhood.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 23 Feb 16 - 01:44 AM

What a lovely gathering of twitching fish

Sincerely,
gargoyle

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST,bbc
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 09:32 PM

Acme, it was, originally, created by my son, David (a computer whiz), & maintained by me, after Max's April Fool's Day joke. At the time, we were building a mudcat community. Then, it, sort of, all fell apart. In addition, Facebook was becoming popular & there wasn't really a need for it. It was a grand time, though!

Barbara aka bbc aka Beebs

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 09:31 PM

I think we overuse the term "stalk". If you post frequently on similar topics to your adversary your paths will often cross. Don't fall for it just because akenaton bleats about being stalked. If you really believed it you'd do something about it. People who believe passionately in fairness, equality and non-discrimination are hardly going to stay quiet over his bigotry for fear of his using his rather frequent I'm-being-stalked gambit. And there are many occasions on which he posts nonsense that Musket does not respond to. If I were Mudcat emperor there would be no sharing of an identity and no multiple identities. I'd make the former use different user names and ban the latter for life. By the way, anyone who sometimes posts under a username and sometimes as an anonymous guest is posting under multiple identities. Emperor Steve would ban them from the forum for life. Thank God it's not my gig is all I can say.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 09:06 PM

He's referring to the three individuals who all post as Musket. He offends them and they stalk him. The four of them have managed to kill a lot of threads.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 08:36 PM

Interestink. Stinks, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 08:19 PM

And I have no idea what "communal use of one username" is supposed to mean. It's late, so don't bother to explain.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 08:13 PM

On the Gaughan forum all new members are monitored for their first couple of dozen posts. Only then are they allowed full membership. There is just one moderator and she is rarely seen with her mod hat on, ever. In all the years I've been in there, I can think of just one poster who changed her username. Reasons for wanting to change your username, whilst not always invalid, are rarely above board. One username per person - why not? And if you want to change it you should have to go through the moderators. It would rarely happen, especially if you knew you were likely to be told no. Changing your username on a whim is just pissing around. OK, I'm not going to win on names in profiles. Reasons have been given and I'm listening. Anyone found faking a membership or trying it on with multiple identities, exposed and banned. Absolutely no guests, ever. The reason given by akenaton, and that chap who calls me a Jew hater, for wanting to be totally anonymous is completely bogus. I can be just as offensive, playing the man not the ball, with an unnamed guest as I can with anyone else. No-one is going to address the argument rather than the man just because the man is the Man With No Name. Less likely, in fact, as these Men With No Names are quite likely to post offensively in any case. Bullshit, that argument is, and dishonest bullshit at that.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 07:29 PM

Gervase nailed it.

For a while there were fake accounts here at mudcat until the sleeper accounts (when revived were re-named to torment the innocent) were identified and removed, but when he moved onto all of the other sites (Flickr and Facebook were his favorite sites for doctored photo accounts, mixing your photos in with slutty teen shots and calling it an album, in your name, and often times tracking down your friends or workplace Flickr accounts to link it to). The photos and location information were for members only to add to and view, but I doubt many would add new ones now.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 07:14 PM

You can start a thread saying you're going to be in a certain area .....

and let everyone know you will be away from home and the house is empty.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 06:11 PM

Steve, isn't communal use of one username worse than GUEST posting, much of which is factual and informative and only designed to hide the identity of the poster

Communal use is a deliberate attempt to confuse and wreck discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 06:01 PM

OK, OK! I give in. This is an odd place. But I can't understand why decent and sane people can't at least agree that everyone should have a single, consistent, unique user name. And that unregistered or unlogged-in people should not be posting. The fact that those things are allowed to happen quite likely creates an ethos here that attracts the bloody lunatics. There are plenty of examples of forums on the web where good practice is not only carried out but also enthusiastically embraced by almost all members. Letting anonymous cowards post here is akin to a death wish. Example above.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST,Gervase
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 05:40 PM

I had to spend weeks; months in fact, chasing down fake profiles of me all over MySpace, Bebo, Flikr, FaceBook and various other sites because some infantile neo-Nazi wankpuffin who was a registered member of Muscat used the info on here to create sock-puppet accounts. So I can't shed many tears that the information is now hidden.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 05:37 PM

Hmm. Whatever made me think he'd rear his ugly head in this thread? Case proven, I should say.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST,Rumpelstiltskin
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 05:27 PM

I challenge you all to guess my name within 3 days.

oops... oh bugger...

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 05:21 PM

If people are so hung up about guest posting why did they make a positive choice top join a site that explicitly allowed it rather than one of the many that enforce membership?

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 04:53 PM

Communal use of one username should not be allowed for the reasons supplied by Backwoodsman.
It also allows people to make unsupported allegations against members without being called to account.
The present crop of Muskets are an example of this.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 03:39 PM

the person who called me a Jew hater

Rich coming from someone who spits out "Islamophobe" at posters yet attacks others' religious beliefs. Hypocrite with a capital H.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 03:10 PM

Some of us wouldn't go near Facebook with a ten-foot bargepole. Me included. I don't suppose it matters a jot.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 01:41 PM

We had instances where stuff in "member photos and info" was being misused to harass Mudcatters, so Max cut it off. Now we let Facebook handle the security of that in the Mudcat group on Facebook.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: maeve
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 01:17 PM

Mrrzy, the technique suggested by Noreen has worked very well for many 'Catters.

Regards,
Maeve

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 12:41 PM

Who are you ?

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Noreen
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 12:18 PM

You can start a thread saying you're going to be in a certain area and invite local Catters to contact you.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 11:36 AM

I used to be able to look up who was where I was going to be, so I could pm them...

Now how does one do well-intentioned mudcat member research? Do I pm an elf who knows I'm not a troll, and maybe answer some make-sure-I'm-me questions?

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 09:32 AM

Well I suppose most forums let you post under a pseudonym. I've never considered that there's been a single reason for not posting under my real name, but I concede that it's a tide I can't fight against. Knowing who you're talking to means everyone having a consistent user name. Changing it every two minutes should not be allowed. On some forums it's a right old shenanigans if you want to change it, and that's as it should be. This is the only forum I've ever been on that you can post to without registering and logging in. I think that's insane, and I think it causes a lot of problems. Here's another thing. I'm accountable for everything I say. If I've said one thing today, but you vaguely remember that I said the very opposite three months ago, you can click on my name and find that old post and challenge my inconsistency. Teribus does it to me, I do it to Keith, and that is a healthy thing. Conversely, an anonymous Guest can't be held to account because all "guest" posts are rolled up into one huge great list. So, we get threads polluted by suspicions and accusations (usually that "Bruce" or "brucie" has been at it again), not to speak of the ability to insult people from in hiding. I'd love to know the name of the person who called me a Jew hater. I think that person forfeited any right to anonymity, frankly. Bloody waste of energy, stuff like that, and bringing the forum into disrepute. Not the only thing that does that, of course, but it hardly helps, does it?

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 09:10 AM

Possibly. But why make it any easier?

I regard the closing of the 'GUEST posting' loophole as being far more important and desirable on the forum than providing members' personal details. I don't care who members are in the real world - I don't care if you're 'Steve Shaw' or someone else - I just want to know that, when I address a post to 'Steve Shaw', or enter into debate with him, it's consistently the same person. Any other information is irrelevant, AFAIC.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 09:00 AM

Couldn't you do that anyway without resorting to scanty details in forum profiles? Just asking.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 08:45 AM

"I think the reason the member info was locked up was that it was lifted (by registered members who also happened to be lying psychos) for creating fake Facebook profiles".

And there I rest my case, M'Lud.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 08:16 AM

I think the reason the member info was locked up was that it was lifted (by registered members who also happened to be lying psychos) for creating fake Facebook profiles.

Most forums have similar information and don't get a similar problem. The explanation is probably legal/sociological - if someone tried that using LinkedIn, Google or Twitter profile information, the sysadmins would happily cooperate with the cops in getting the perpetrator prosecuted. Max won't do that and the fakers took advantage because they knew they could get away with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 07:49 AM

The information in the member and photo section was voluntary. Since it was my father's music that brought me to mudcat, I posted a couple of his photos, and others like Paddy Graber, Stan James, Don Firth, Bob Nelson, and Mary Garvey, regular Seattle-area mudcatters.

The section that contained that information was maintained by early-mudcatter Pene Azul, who left a long time ago for personal reasons; though we hope he still drops in as a guest on occasion, he seems to be permanently gone as a logged-on member.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 07:02 AM

When we say personal details in a profile, we generally mean our name, maybe some stats on posting history, then anything else you choose to add. You have control. There's a lot of daft talk about people knowing your shoe size, marital history, etc. Have a look at my profile on TheSession, which you can only do if you're a logged-in member, by the way. Not much for MI5 to go on there. Anyone who reads my posts could track me down within minutes if they really wanted to. That's because my posts contain my real name and because I don't conceal my location and I'm in the telephone directory and the electoral register. So? I'm not bloody James Bond, you know. I'm simply talking about having the manners to have a consistent user name at the very least and a non-googlable real name. And the word "Guest" should be banned from the forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 22 Feb 16 - 03:06 AM

I suspect members' personal data was eventually hidden for the usual reason - individuals being subjected to abuse.

I'm with Steve wholeheartedly in respect of pseudonyms for posting, and I don't believe 'guest' postings should be permitted, but there's no way in hell I'm going to join a forum that reveals my personal details to anybody. If I want individual members to know who I am, where I live, what my inside-leg measurement is, I'll tell them by PM or email (there are a number of members who know me through the forum, and who have my real name, email address etc.), but to have that information available to all and sundry? Not on your fucking Nellie.

Even forum members can be nutcases - as evidenced by Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Feb 16 - 09:32 PM

Pity. We should always know who we're talking to. Anyone who wants to know anything about me, just PM me and I'll tell you. You can stay off Google if you really must (I don't care myself) but still let people on the forum know who you are. Have a pseudonym for posting but let logged-in members view your profile. On sites like this, though not this one for strange reasons, it works like a dream. Acme knows exactly who I am and I know who Acme is. Good, that. Healthy. There should be a lot more of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 21 Feb 16 - 06:16 PM

Well, humph. Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 21 Feb 16 - 06:05 PM

It hasn't been available for a long time.

Subject: BS: Member Info? Maybe this is Tech?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 21 Feb 16 - 05:59 PM

the link for mudcat member info only goes to the forum?