 sj |
||
|
||
THREADIQUETTE
|
|
|
Subject: THREADIQUETTE From: bbelle Date: 08 Jan 00 - 10:52 PM "I've noticed a somewhat nasty trend in tone in some threads, though, and have a final, uncivil request for civility: If you aren't willing to take credit/resposibility for your criticisms, nasty comments or flippant remarks, DON'T SEND THEM! If you have qualms about attaching your name to your response, you should have qualms about sending it, too. Only flaming assholes flame anonymously." The above paragraphs were written by larmarca in 1997, at a time when the tone of the mudcat was not even close to being what is today. There have always been differences of opinion regarding philosophies, ideologies, political stances, etc., because we are all individuals with individual beliefs. That is a good thing because it's differences that make the world go around. I am, however, totally disgusted with the current tone of the mudcat cafe and agree with bbc that if it doesn't cease, people are going to leave. We will lose many people who have been committed contributors to the mudcat cafe, and WE WILL ALL LOSE! People calling people idiots, publicly debasing a fellow mudcatter and trying to garner support for having done so, ridiculing one's religious beliefs. This is unacceptable behavior from anyone ... family, friend, or foe. The mudcat cafe is not utopia and to expect it to be so is fantasy. I enjoy the edge of a good political discussion or a discussion on gun control, or censorship, or a number of other subjects. I have friends who don't share my political beliefs, however, I would NEVER talk to them the way you are talking to each other on this website. I don't want the mudcat cafe to be a milquetoast website because it would be downright boring. But, if I'm going to visit, I want civility and respect for all. For heaven's sake, people, exercise a little control! And learn to agree to disagree. I would be surprised to learn that you talk as nasty in person as you do in writing. Haven't you heard that writing it down makes it written in stone? I am going to annap's gathering next weekend to see some old mudcat friends and to meet some new ones, none of whom are exibitionists. And I am very excited to see them again. I hope that I will feel the same about you some day. Respectfully ... moonchild
|
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: _gargoyle Date: 08 Jan 00 - 10:56 PM Suggestion from _ Miss Manners
Never post your thread in ALL CAPS
It is not threadiquettically, aprapoe! |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: bbc Date: 08 Jan 00 - 11:12 PM Well said, moonchild. I've been tempted to go out of character & just tell everybody to shut up. It's all been said--more than once. Is it so important to some of you to see your name in print that you don't care what you say? I have seen some extreme rudeness on this site lately. I agree w/ moonchild that you probably wouldn't act this way in person. If that's true, how about thinking before you write it, as well. If you do behave this way in person, I hope we don't meet. I have really enjoyed being part of Mudcat, but not much, lately! bbc P.S.--Just for the record, gargoyle, the behavior has been so extreme, I think we need the caps to get people's attention. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: alison Date: 08 Jan 00 - 11:13 PM it needed said Moonchild.... unfortunately I think we have already lost several of our regular contributors, or at least they aren't contributing anymore.... so let's change the tone before we lose any more..... there is a wealth of musical knowledge out there, it would be a shame to lose it because of bad manners and rudeness. slainte alison |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: fulurum Date: 08 Jan 00 - 11:29 PM nicely put moonchld. i've only been a "catter" for a short time, but have already been spanked by the "the unknown" a couple of times. I refuse to let it bother me though because there is to many other helpful folks out there. A big thank you you to the good folks.
excerpt from Guantanamera; Jose Fernandez Dias peace |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: sophocleese Date: 08 Jan 00 - 11:57 PM You're right moonchild. I'm sorry any offence I may have caused. Sophocleese |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Clinton Hammond2 Date: 09 Jan 00 - 01:09 AM As a newish catter Id' first like to say that I don't htink I've run across any posts that I found offencive... That said however I'd like to throw in my 0.02 on this topic... this approach has worked well at other MB's I've been known to frequent... When a thread or message is offensive to you, the best thing can possibly be done is ignore it completely... In extream circumstances, the site moderators can be notified and the offensive party can be blocked from the site... The other thing that can be done in less drastic cases... learn the names of the people who's posting style bothers you, and simply don't read thier posts... Not that I'm trying to tell anyone what to do.. just sharing what experience has taught... The othere side to this topic is this.. one is forced to admit that the 'net' is not a static beast... things change at an alarming pace in cyberspace... Change cna't possible please everyone... as a matter of fact I find internet change simply seems to be a matter of sinking to the lowest denominator... Sorta that chain and weakest link thing... Again... just my 0.02 |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: JenEllen Date: 09 Jan 00 - 01:10 AM Moonchild: Well said. The love of words and song is why we come to this forum. It is sad to see the power of words used for harm, and it's been done too much lately. For myself, it is startling to see the number of Jeckyl/Hyde personalities that emerge through the course of a thread. That the same people can be so helpful and generous, and then spiteful in such a short turn, but it happens in the closest of families. You play long enough, you are bound to have your arm twisted behind your back until you cry "uncle"...BS is fine, everything has it's place, but the origional intent of threads for learning is being lost. I come to this forum with an open mind and heart, I think who I might be affecting before I type a word, and I love you all for the knowledge and fun I've experienced here. But continuing to grouse about past indifferences isn't going to do anyone a damn bit of good. What say we give all 'Catters a clean slate and be done with this? Elle |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: paddymac Date: 09 Jan 00 - 03:38 AM The price we pay for an open forum is that it must, in fact, be open. Ignore personas which you find offensive, but, please, let us not, under any guise, start down that slippery slope of censorship. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: kendall Date: 09 Jan 00 - 08:53 AM I'm in the process of training a young dog. One of the things he is bound to do, is to jump up on people. Now, with other breeds, an effective way of dealing with this is to give him a knee in the chest, or, step on his hind feet. I have seen that work well in other dogs..not this one, he is a Labrador retriever, bred for hard work and he is almost immune to pain. The other method is to turn your back on him when he exhibits undesireable hehavior. The reason he acts like that is simple..he wants your attention, but, if you turn your back he gets just what he does NOT want. I'm sure the average 'catter can see the analogy here. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: MandolinPaul Date: 09 Jan 00 - 09:05 AM I realize that censorship is a dirty word, and that it is indeed a slippery slope, but it can be justified. If someone is continuously being abusive, offensive, or whatever other bad "-ive" there may be, what's wrong with quieting them?
I know that the danger in society is that we need some safeguards against whoever makes the decisions upon who or what to censor, but this is only a microcosm of society. We have good people running this place, who like to see it as a good forum to meet and discuss things with friends; they are not corruptible, fat-cat politicians. We won't have any of our civil liberties violated if they decide to censor a few things.
After all, we do have laws against hate propaganda; we have people who decide upon arbitrary levels of censorship (movie ratings board, radio and tv ethics organizations); we have anti-defamation laws. These are all forms of censorship, but it has been decided that they outweigh the evils of not having that censorship in place.
If Max decided to start deleting "offensive" messages from the Mudcat, that would be OK by me. Maybe some of the more boneheaded posts that I've done wouldn't be left hanging around for others to read in the years to come.
I agree with everything you have said, Moonchild. Thanks for saying it. Paul. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: bbelle Date: 09 Jan 00 - 09:32 AM paddymac, you need to reread my beginning post because not one word in my beginning post says that anything should be censored. I did not intend to add anything further to my thread, however, please do not turn this thread into a debate about censorship. If you have concerns about censorship, utilize Max's wonderful new super search engine and you will find many threads on the subject, with contributions by many of the past and present mudcatters ... moonchild |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: dick greenhaus Date: 09 Jan 00 - 10:49 AM Having been blessed with a thick skin, I'm not bothered at all by a poster's tone. I do think it's rude, though--at least within the context of this forum--to refer to songs that are not in the DT without posting the words. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Liz the Squeak Date: 09 Jan 00 - 12:39 PM Sorry Dick, but sometimes we aren't aware that the song hasn't been posted. Something that everyone is sick of in one town in one country, may be totally unheard of in another town just down the road, or just across the sea.... It is a pain to have to check through the DT if you just want to put up a quote......, and can be an expensive pain if you are like me, and don't do this at work where a nice corporation pays the bill. I do try to check, but sometimes it just isn't possible. And putting things all in upper case is tantamount to shouting, so it isn't nice. Typing it in colours just shows some of us up for the HTML virgins we are and is like shouting very loud, it hurts my eyes and ears, and my feelings..... LTS |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Neil Lowe Date: 09 Jan 00 - 01:21 PM After initiating a very sensitive thread, I noticed a marked change in the ambiance of the forum. The postings seemed a little more guarded or reserved, and it was as if a certain amount of tension between some members had been introduced. Maybe it was purely coincidental, but if in fact I am partly responsible for a nasty and unjustified turn toward what some perceive as disrepect, intolerance, or disregard for another's feelings, thoughts, or beliefs as exhibited on this forum, then I am truly sorry and I make a public apology to all who were unfairly affected or offended by the content of that thread. Rest assured that was not my intent. My personal feeling is that it would be delusional of me to think that anything I throw out here in the way of a comment or post has any significance or relevance to anyone but me, and I would be surprised, for various reasons, if the opposite were true. I have mixed emotions about the outcome of that thread (to which I will not refer out of respect to the members of this forum who may have been offended or made nervous by the content). On the one hand I am not altogether remorseful for bringing to the fore an issue which obviously revived some very painful memories for some, for the denouement of that exchange stands as a testament to the strength of this virtual community and the commitment that its members have to dealing humanely with each other. That, in my opinion, was a very positive and reaffirming example of how people can conduct themselves when confronting potentially explosive and divisive topics. On the other hand I regret that the subject of that thread made some people nervous and had the potential to instill feelings of disparity instead of togetherness. If friends parted from that thread as enemies, then I will consider that I have done fellow Mudcatters a great disservice. Regardless, InOBU and Big Mick deserve thanks and appreciation for sharing their perspectives and well researched wealth of information to back up their viewpoints. Their posts were educational and informative. Blackcat2 and Don Meixner have my gratitude for understanding the original intent of the thread and saying so better than I could. LEJ, Peter T., and Rick Fielding, men whom I've come to admire and respect via this forum - thanks as always for posting (sometimes reluctantly) your eloquent and thoughtful viewpoints. Hasek - Given the express intent and purpose of this forum, it is an honor that you consider the thread to have inspired you to finish a creative musical endeavor. That may have been one of the better things spawned from the discussion. Paddymac deserves mention for taking precious time to post reference material for those who were interested in exploring further. And to all the rest who, for whatever reason, felt compelled to express their thoughts, thank you. Overall, I feel that it was a very enlightening experience, "in the best tradition of the 'Cat," as 'Spaw said. Finally, to Steve Latimer - with whom I've never had the privilege to correspond directly, but from following his posts I surmise that in musical tastes we are kindred spirits: I regret it considerably if my musings on a controversial subject caused a resurrection of decidedly painful and bitter feelings. Please accept my apologies. Sincerely, Neil Lowe |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Clifton53 Date: 09 Jan 00 - 01:58 PM I'm also a newish 'catter. I don't have the time to respond to all the posts, in fact,I don't post much at all. But I do read alot of the postings and have found the threads I started to be well responded to. I think part of the problem is too quick of a response. I've read some things I didn't like too much, and I've written some I was sorry for, so I now make myself think a while before I start typing. Writing for writing's sake is not the best thing I can do to contribute. My skin is pretty thick too, working in a mill can do that to you, and not having the offender face to face so you can express yourself, probably leads us to an even stronger response via the keyboard. Clifton |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Rick Fielding Date: 09 Jan 00 - 02:31 PM Thanks Neil. And Thank you Moonchild. To me the success of this thoughtful thread can be measured by the number of posters here giving their opinions without any curt "Why'd you start this thread in the first place?" comments. Often followed by reminders that the subject (or subjects) had been dealt with in the past. I think we can all see that Mudcat is a constantly changing community, with new members arriving daily, older ones dropping out, and in some cases, former Catters coming back for a look-see. A couple of months ago I noticed some threads asking for information on songs that were being discussed when I first came here over a year ago. I have to admit I was a bit annoyed. "Look up the old threads" I thought. After a few minutes I realised, that it's the "here and now" that forms a great part of Mudcat's attraction. Most people want to know what others are thinking "right now". That means current active members. I totally understand that, and if it means giving someone some info or an opinion that I've already given once (or more) before, so what? We're here to have fun, learn and educate..and hookin' new people into the world of folk music is still a kick for me. Along with that, there will also be new threads questioning: balance, appropriate topics, political issues, and yes, even religious practices....just 'cause their will always be NEW PEOPLE coming along. Some will be shy, some will be aggressive, but Max built this "and they will come". Mudcat is (and will be) fine. If you have ANY doubts, just go to any general forum on the "net". You'll quickly find out why you chose to be a "folky". Rick |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: JaimieJ Date: 09 Jan 00 - 06:04 PM Thank you for posting this note here. I don't come here everyday, but I do love the people here. There are some really brilliant people who seem to be regulars and some of you are the funniest people I've seen on the www. I hope you work out your problems. I like this place, but am always a little frightened to post because I don't want to sound as dumb as I am! Jaimie |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Dave (the ancient mariner) Date: 09 Jan 00 - 06:12 PM JaimeJ, don't be frightened to post where your interest in music calls you. The odd argument here is not usually as heated as some recent examples; and for the most part the people in here enjoy a laugh, and the odd cry together. Lets you and I start a thread argument? I'm dumber than you or anybody else here mate. yours, Aye. Dave |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: clare s Date: 09 Jan 00 - 06:12 PM Jaimie I totally agree. Even though some people have made me cross, and I've got unduly cross in response, we're all folkies really, and that's what matters Clare |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: poet Date: 09 Jan 00 - 06:42 PM well said moon child. oh and Dave. I'm dumber than both of you. Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: MandolinPaul Date: 09 Jan 00 - 06:59 PM All right! I'll settle this: You're all dumber than me. Paul |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: kendall Date: 09 Jan 00 - 07:02 PM Oh yeah? well I'm so dumb, I'm over my head in a parking lot water puddle.. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Dave (the ancient mariner) Date: 09 Jan 00 - 07:18 PM Kendall you're just vertically challenged mate, not dumb. When I left school Logarithms was a birth control method for tree's and Calculus grew on yer teeth if ya did'nt brush em. Talk about dumb, I have to put a stop sign at the top of a ladder. Yours, Aye. Dave |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: JenEllen Date: 09 Jan 00 - 07:24 PM You guys may be dumb, but you're cuter than a sack full of puppies! Leave it to Mudcatters to turn serious commentary into a jokefest. Love you guys, Elle |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Jan 00 - 07:37 PM I am impressed by the good manners shown, and by the eagerness shown by most people to try to keep disagreements courteous and respectful of genuine differences and sincere disagreements.
Thanks to Max's Magic Super Search I've been digging back into some of the older threads. I don't really think there really is any significant change for the worse in current threads.
Maybe I've missed the threads that moonchild is concerned about. Life is too short to keep up with more than a fraction of them.
I've just looked through the thread Neil Lowe was talking about,the one he started. I think it kept within reasonable bounds throughout, even if it quite understandably got heated at times. I think we should be proud that arguments about things which many of us feel very strongly can be carried out in this way.
There are pubs where there's a house rule that noone talks about anything cotroversial, like politics or religion, or sex. They talk about the weather and football. Though football can lead to heated artguments, so that gets banned too. So it's the weather and staring gloomily into their beer. I don't want usto be like that.
All right, we've got music and song to talk about, and that's what brings us together. But as has often been pointed out, some of this music and song can be as controversial as it gets.
"They always argued. They never quarrelled." That was how G.K.Chesterton's biographer Maisie Ward summed up his relationship with his brother Cecil, with whom he had some profound disagreements.
I'd like it to be possible for people to say that about the Mudcat Cafe. Or maybe we could settle for "They always argued. They rarely quarrelled. They always made up again." And I think that is pretty close to the truth. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Peter T. Date: 09 Jan 00 - 08:28 PM Neil, you will always be a bud 'o mine. Anyone who posts such good things in the Thought for the Day is tops in my book. The great problem we face here -- which is also a benefit in some ways -- is that we don't have the actual ambiance of a friendly pub or sitting around just talking. This means that we don't get into real fistfights, which is good, but it also means that we can't make those little gestures to try and start over again or lower the temperature -- buy everyone a drink, try and talk the subject out in happier ways, tell a joke, be humane. We have to do it by these threads, and it is very hard, you are always pushing against the limits of what printed words can do to generate that space of give and take. As I have said a million times, this group handles it better than any other net group I know, because of the roots in traditions of sitting around sharing music. But we do need slightly more courtesy than we would in daily life, just because so much is filtered out. But how to generate that mutual courtesy without becoming boring or patronizing is a daily task around here. I am always fascinated by it because it is such a new medium -- it looks simple, but is really exquisitely balanced, and I know that I am constantly making mistakes and offending people -- the saving grace is that people here are so forgiving (and funny). I was reading the other day the love letters of Robert Browning and Elizabeth Barrett who lived in London in the middle of the 19th century (and counldn't meet), and because the Victorians knew how to run things, they had two mailings a day. So the two were sending letters back and forth to each other all the time, twice a day -- it is the closest thing I know to the Internet. And what you learn is that they are constantly trying to make up for the mistakes in the last letter, misinterpretation, and they do this in the fond expectation that there will be another letter back in a few hours. It is what brought them together, and it is very similar to what happens here (well, except for the lack of sex and the lapdog). yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Little Neophyte Date: 09 Jan 00 - 08:49 PM Moonchild, I truly understand your concerns. To create a thread on being civil and respectful to others shows how much you care. And the responses posted show how much everyone else really cares about each other. Sometimes I post something only to realize later how it may have hurt someone else's feelings. Then I feel terrible. I learn from that and become more aware and sensitive to this fact the next time I post. I'm quite sure others are learning from their postings. Bottom line, Mudcatters are a kind, loving bunch. Bonnie
|
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Jan 00 - 08:57 PM The other thing that should keep us all on the right side of unpleasant is that everything we say is being taken down and can be used against us.
And Max's new Super Search machine makes it even harder for us to get away from the times we may have strayed.
And now I'm off to my bed.<>P
"And all I've said for want of wit,
|
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: paddymac Date: 10 Jan 00 - 12:35 AM Moonchild - Yes, you are right. Your post initiating this thread neither mentioned nor proposed censorship. I did not mean to suggest otherwise, and humbly apologize if you read it to have that meaning. My intention was merely to wave a cautionary flag in the hope that the thread would progress as brilliantly as it has, rather than turn into an unsolvable agrument. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Rick Fielding Date: 10 Jan 00 - 01:01 PM I truly feel the kinds of things mentioned are "insolvable" without some implied "leader" setting down a number of "dos and don'ts", but a simple "oops sorry about that", counts for a lot. We all get frustrated at times, but at least we're not marooned on a desert island, a la "Goldman's "lord Of The Flies"! Now that would be something with the amazing cast of characters we have here at Mudcat! I look awful in "warpaint"! Rick |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Bert Date: 10 Jan 00 - 01:09 PM Rick, I don't think we need a leader for this, surely we can agree to.... 1. Be nice 2. Use 'Personal messages' for personal messages. 3. Don't respond to bad posts. 4. Read your posting and use the 'Clear Entries' key instead of 'Submit Message' if necessary. 5. Be aware that messages sometimes sound harsher than the poster intended. If in doubt - It was a joke! 6. Be nice. Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Steve Latimer Date: 10 Jan 00 - 02:02 PM Bert, Those are very good guidelines, I will try to live by them. Neil, no apology is needed. Had I followed Berts guidelines I probably would have changed the word 'offended' to something like 'troubled.' There is only one thread that has offended me at the Mudcat, the image of Rick Fielding at a Nudist camp has jarred me from my sleep many a night. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: katlaughing Date: 10 Jan 00 - 02:11 PM Accepting someone's apology can be equally as important and nice. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: reggie miles Date: 10 Jan 00 - 03:24 PM Wow, I too have not been keeping abreast of things here. The holidaze can become so all encompassing. I too have been impressed at the depth of understanding here by all those in attendance. It's a wonderful place to visit, explore and interact with and all of you are what makes it so. I have yet to meet any of you in the flesh but look forward to the chance when we may share some time together. Should that opportunity never arise, I want you all to know that I've valued this bumping of brains greatly. It's helped me gain a better perspective of who I am and what I can become. Thanks to all of you |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Dave (the ancient mariner) Date: 10 Jan 00 - 03:24 PM "Who ever thinks a faultless piece to see, thinks what ne'er was nor is nor e'er shall be. In every work regard the writers end, since none can compass more than they intend; and if the means be just, the conduct true, applause in spite of trivial faults is due" Pope. The human condition is such that we get carried away with our ability to post as frequently as we like. What is needed is a chance to ceasefire; without using it as an excuse to fire back. I would hope that some kind person would e-mail me, and remind me to lighten up, if I got carried away with my own self importance. Or perhaps stand between and "request" that the sniping stop, on the thread in question. But then that might lead to censorship. How about a self imposed guideline that if an argument is getting too personal and heated; those who know the combatants directly warn first; then gently request a ceasefire, and allow the thread to age away naturally.. In fact someone will be able to invent one of those delightfull abbreviations for it like MGFPATITF = MUDCAT GROUP FOR PEACE AND TRANQUILITY IN THE FORUM ? ( which I am only just begining to understand thanks to someone explaining them to me)I am sure that enough of you would get, and deserve respect, from the combatants. I know I would respect the venerable members here. Yours, Aye. Dave |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: harpgirl Date: 10 Jan 00 - 03:47 PM Ah, Steve...to each his/her own...I find the image quite enjoyable!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Steve Latimer Date: 10 Jan 00 - 03:48 PM Neil, I was trying to imply that your apology was accepted, but just in case, your apology is accepted. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: annamill Date: 10 Jan 00 - 04:17 PM I find, with disappointment, that I'm not learning very much from the threads any more and I'm not having as much fun either. I haven't had much interest in many of the threads we've had lately and this saddens me. I'm starting to feel a great loss. What keeps me here, is the fact that if there is one thing that's true about Mudcat, it's the changes we go through. It's like New England, if you don't like the weather, wait a moment. So I'm biding, reading here, posting there. Enjoying the music threads still though. Good point, Moonchild. Love, annap |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Wincing Devil Date: 10 Jan 00 - 04:38 PM Speaking as a former BBS SysOp (Remember dialup BBS's?), I have a few thots [sic] on e-etiquette©. <SOAPBOX>
|
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: JedMarum Date: 10 Jan 00 - 06:17 PM I have seen some comments in threads that were crude, rude and unreasonbaly personal ... not many. And I've seen some that were nasty ... even fewer. I have also seen many responses to threads to and from individuals who were really hot about the issue,and yet took the time to make strong statements of disagreement that were not personal attacks. Sometimes those statements were construed as hurtful, but often they were seen at face value. I have seen healthy debate here more often than I have seen childish, nasty name calling. Mayeb I'm an optimist ... I have also seen Mudcatters rising to the defense of others when bad nasty comments have been made. All in all, we have a pretty good mix. I agree with moonchild's original sentiment; that it is important for us to consciously protect our air of civility; even when we disagree strongly. Fairness is not what I dare expect from this world, but it is what I seek to achieve. Likewise, I understand civility may not be required of those with whom I communicate, but it is what I expect of myself. Great thread. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: JedMarum Date: 10 Jan 00 - 06:20 PM ... maybe I'm an optimist, but I sure ain't no typist!! After rereading my comments above I can only, once again, apologize for my typographic shortcomings, and hope that my fellow Mudcatters will "know what I meant!" |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Neil Lowe Date: 10 Jan 00 - 09:07 PM Got it. It's cool. I'm together with it all. Now I'll get back to learning Rick Derringer's rhythm back-up to Johnny Winter's "It's My Own Fault." It's in a weird key for me, though...Eb or some such. I've been looking for a place to insert this quote from Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert (which I sheepishly admit to pronouncing as "Flaw-bert" until just recently someone told me it was French and pronounced "Flow-bear") that I copied down many years ago and found again while rummaging through some old papers: "....fullness of soul can sometimes overflow in utter vapidity of language, for none of us can express the exact measure of his needs or his thoughts or his sorrows; and human speech is like a cracked kettle on which we tap crude rhythms for bears to dance to, while we long to make music that will melt the stars." (pp 215-216) Goodnight all.....Neil |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Little Neophyte Date: 10 Jan 00 - 09:24 PM Annap, want to learn something? Okay, here is a tip I got from Rick Fielding. If one of your tuning pegs become too loose. Unscrew the tuning peg, ram a tooth pick in the peg head hole and then screw the tuning peg back in the hole. The sucker should now be tighter than a ........................ You guys can fill in the rest of that sentence. BB |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: catspaw49 Date: 10 Jan 00 - 09:34 PM ....now clap..........Really tight huh? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Night Owl Date: 10 Jan 00 - 10:08 PM Great quote Neil,....well said as well in this thread. Thanks for taking the time to post it! |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Blackcat2 (at home) Date: 11 Jan 00 - 01:31 AM Greetings all Few things are left to say in this thread. Two things come to mind though - a. ignore annonymous posters (the analogy of the dog jumping up is perfect.) Ignore them - their egos will shrivel to the dimensions pf there previously shiveled genetalia. II. pay attention to the initial post. I see so many angry posts that are arguing a point the originator of the thread never made. Thread creep is fine (and unavoidable) but never get mad at someone for what she/he DIDN'T say. Add to that, that I've screwed up before and am sorry and that I think this is a terrific place and I'll shut meself up. pax yall |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Patrish(inactive) Date: 11 Jan 00 - 04:25 AM I am not very brave - perhaps a bit of a wimp... I have been put off posting threads, replying to threads etc because of the bad feeling I've sensed. I think as a fairly new member I found some of the critisism in the threads intimidating. Not all of us find it easy to speak out. Thanks Moonchild Patrish(the not very brave) |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: katlaughing Date: 11 Jan 00 - 07:52 AM No all anonymous posters are gutless or shy; they may just want to avoid any prejudices which may have arisen. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Skipjack Date: 11 Jan 00 - 08:14 AM I'm a newcomer, and haven't really seen any bad blood (apart from you know who) so I deduce this must've been a helluva place back awhile, as it still holds too much of the attention now. I haven't done chased all the threads, but the only one that got understandably sparky that I saw recently was the poor girl (I think) who confessed to stabbing George Harrison, and whilst I enjoy the mutual respect that is so much in evidence here at the 'cat, unexpressed forthright views leave an anodyne vacuum. I suppose what I'm trying to say is that we should keep crticism of a validly held conviction on a conceptual basis, rather than personal (i.e. Peter T shouldn't have gone for the jugular with the 'Idiot' description in the second person in that GH thread). This has probably all been said further up this, and many other threads, so my apologies for wasting space. The meek shall inherit the earth, if that's OK with everyone else. Skipjack |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: KingBrilliant Date: 11 Jan 00 - 08:36 AM Just a small point - but I remember a while back I was posting anonymously by accident - my label had just disappeared & it was probably a while before I noticed. So some anons might not realise they are. I think that's when I started signing as well - just in case it happens again. Kris |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Steve Latimer Date: 11 Jan 00 - 10:18 AM Neil, Kindred sprits indeed!!! "It's My Own Fault" is my favourite live electric blues tune ever. The other one I love on that album is "Meantown Blues." Good luck with the rhythm part. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Peter T. Date: 11 Jan 00 - 10:23 AM Sorry, but unless you can suggest why the initial remark made in that thread wasn't idiotic, deliberately antagonizing, as well as attempting to insinuate my personal guilt for a horrific act to someone I revere, it seems to me to be a fair assessment, even restrained under the circumstances. Courtesy has its limits, otherwise it is meaningless: as they say in Arab countries: I will invite a stranger into my house, but if they piss on my carpet, they are no longer my guest. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: catspaw49 Date: 11 Jan 00 - 10:27 AM So could you take this towel and the Resolve and......... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Bert Date: 11 Jan 00 - 10:58 AM Peter T, One of the problems with this medium is that we don't know who our readers are. Obviously the poster who offended you, didn't know that you spend your whole life trying to make this world a fit place to live in. He just assumed that no one cared and blamed everyone. That's why he got so much flack here, where people 'do' care. In the real world his comments (even though they were expressed somewhat childishly) could be construed as a necessary nudge to get people to wake up and take notice. Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: catspaw49 Date: 11 Jan 00 - 11:37 AM Bert, I love ya'...but I disagree. Even for me (in the real world) there is a fine line between activist and zealot. The surest way to piss me and a lot of others, possibly including Peter, is to come on as a zealot and tell me in no uncertain terms what I MUST do. That's complete nonsense, especially from one who doesn't know the audience they're speaking to...and the poster didn't. I appreciate your point Bert, but perhaps the poster's point could have been made with feeling and tact, even in question form maybe. But to immediately lecture me without any knowledge? I react the same way out here in the real world. A few years ago, a 20ish and newly trained therapist had the first session with one of my foster kids. We had lived with her 24/7 and Karen and I were very experienced in the type of problems she was having. Without consulting us and what we had been doing to that point, without any real knowledge of the case, and with the idolatry and passion born of youth, said to me, "I don't think you understand the dynamic of what is happening here." Ask me if I went off on her? I think this thread has served good purpose and I too would apologize to those which I have inadvertently offended, even in jest. But I will not apologize to that poster, nor will I apologize for reactions that I would carry out face to face. Love you all, but I too have some triggers and I try to control them. Believe me, I have pushed the "Clear Entries" button more than occasionally. I'll try to watch myself, but if you expect less than honesty, you'll be disappointed. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: JedMarum Date: 11 Jan 00 - 11:44 AM I agree with Peter T that the issue re: George Harrison justifiably raised the ire of many (including me). I think Peter T's comments attacking the statement were appropriate. I think the comments in that thread attacking the person making the statement were not (I don't recall if Peter T's comments were personal). Sometimes it is difficult not to respond personally, when people make a deliberately provocative statement - but there should be rules about fighting. Attack the comment, attack the behaviour - do not attack the person. There is a world of difference to the addressee when he/she hears "You are an idiot," as compared to hearing "You are acting like an idiot." Attack the behaviour, not the actor. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Bert Date: 11 Jan 00 - 11:45 AM Well said 'Spaw. I guess that guy just didn't push any buttons for me. I thought the posting was kinda silly but not worth responding to. I certainly appreciate your point of view and I CAN see how both you and Peter T would be offended by it. Keep being honest guy. Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: catspaw49 Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:07 PM Good point liam....true, but very difficult at times. But you are right. And Bert, glad you understand You're both morons.......(:<)) Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Peter T. Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:12 PM Thank you, Bert, a reasonable starting point for a discussion at last, as opposed to warm or cold fudge. This has nothing to do specifically with the earlier thread, about which I have said all I intend to say. But the question of the rhetorical use of collective blame is very important, and very delicate. I think imputing collective blame to people is a very dangerous practice -- all men are not guilty of rape; all English and Irish citizens are not guilty of what happened in Northern Ireland, and therefore are acceptable targets for bombing; you are not guilty of the death of thousands of 3rd world children each week simply because they are dying of malnutrition and easily preventable diseases and you are in a developed country and have done nothing about this issue (I mean this as an example, you may be a foster parent for all I know). This kind of tactic is not a "necessary nudge": it misrepresents by a kind of cheap sociology -- if you do nothing, you are part of the power structure which is carrying out "structural violence" on your behalf -- the ways in which we are in fact absolutely responsible for certain things, relatively responsible for others, and constrained by others from responding. If we cannot make some of these distinctions, then we are guilty of everything or innocent of everything, and language becomes meaningless; and when language becomes meaningless, we lose our best tool for change. The result is usually an unholy mess ruled by screamers. Smearing guilt all over people as a tactic is now widespread: and the result, in my experience, is that people grow to resent it, and turn their backs on their real responsibilities. It is not a "necessary nudge" in my book. yours, Peter T. (P.S. You can come and piss on my carpet anytime.) |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Jeri Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:16 PM It's odd we have another thread going on about people who play music without first making an attempt to listen and figure out how things work. We have had some posters who have done that as well. It works best when they try to understand a bit about the forum before they jump in. If that doesn't happen, things can still work out if we just keep talking. I'm quite sure I've said some idiotic things here, but no one's called me an idiot. (yet) Thank you. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: catspaw49 Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:22 PM Okay... You're an idiot. Just wanted to get that out of the way for you. Always happy to oblige. I'll be mopping up the carpet now............ Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Bert Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:28 PM "You're an idiot Jeri" - There, now do you feel better ;-) Just joking of course, but I thought I'd get that in before Old Spaw did. - I love you really. Peter T. Ah yes, good points, I guess I was being too general there, as well. Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Bert Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:31 PM Bummer - he beat me too it after all. It only takes someone else to say it and it becomes true. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: catspaw49 Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:33 PM Ya blew it Bert...but its reassuring to Jeri I'm sure to have a "second" on the thought.
Actually, to quote an old favorite routine, "I think we're all Bozos on this bus!" Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Mbo Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:42 PM "We're not weirdos...we're Mudcatters!" --Quoted by Me! :{> --Mbo |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Jeri Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:43 PM You like me...you really like me!!! (sniff, sniff) |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: JamesJim Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:48 PM I am also new to the Mudcat, but I am simply overwhelmed with all the nice people who post and all the knowledge out there. I'd like to have you all as personal friends. I hardly let a day go by that I don't access Mudcat - I'm always excited to read/see new threads. This whole thing reminds me of the old story about the sparrow who was freezing to death (I paraphrase), when a cow walked by and crapped on him. He was saved by the warmth. Sometimes a little s..t in your life can be good. I read the idiotic threads and those who are a little less than civil. It reminds me of every day life and gives me hope that those who are sometimes a little less than civil can learn from those of us who are not. Regards to all! Jim |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Peter T. Date: 11 Jan 00 - 12:48 PM It is a deep, deep question. I think, off the top of my head that -- Spiritually I am responsible for all beings, politically for as much as I can handle working with others, practically for as many as I can respond to without betraying my or their needs, directly for those whom I can care for most powerfully, and all sorts of other distinctions. Taking on responsibilities, assessing where one fits, and sometimes just going with your feelings without logic -- this is what people like Catspaw, Big Mick, and other people here do every day: wrestling with how much they can commit and whether they are getting anywhere. Look at Mick's response to his Birthday thread. Universal guilt in a situation like that is totally useless. I feel passionately about this because my best students are burdened with universal guilt, and get locked into despair. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: bbelle Date: 11 Jan 00 - 03:09 PM I will accept my "your an idiot"'s face-to-fact this weekend at annap's, thank you very much. But be mindful ... you might be sharing the couch with me ... shalom ... moonchild |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: katlaughing Date: 11 Jan 00 - 03:25 PM I agree wiht you, PeterT. And I don't thnk your "idiot" was out of line. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Jon Freeman Date: 11 Jan 00 - 04:06 PM Whether PeterT was right to calling somebody an idiot or not is debatable. Personally, I prefer to try to avoid name calling and in that instance in may have been better to have referred to the comments as being idiotic. Having said that, we all have subjects that we feel strongly about and are entitled to our own opinions and if PeterT feels that the poster is an idiot, I see no harm in him expressing that. I do feel that people are over reacting to a few posts and that overall, Mudcat is a very friendly place (compare it to some newsgroups). We are only human and a number of us will react harshly on occasions but I think that this place would become very sterile if we all had to ensure that every post we made could not conceivably offend anyone. In an ideal world, there would be no dissagreements but we live in the real world where these things happen and what is more important to me is that these arguments blow over quickly and that there are no grudges held. I have seen anonymous posters mentioned in this thread and mention of harshly worded posts but there are other matters that I have seen in Mudcat that I consider to be far worse. I have seen the deliberate goading and repeated personal attacks on a poster and recently saw a post that I suspect was a troll. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: JedMarum Date: 11 Jan 00 - 04:13 PM sharing the couch? hmmmm, maybe I need to make these gatherings, as well! :-) Peter I certainly agree with your point about the collective guilt crap ... and in fact stated so in response to that thread. But I softened my words because the attacks on Gern had been personally directed. I spite of the fact that the originating statement made my blood boil, I felt the need to rebut the behaviour, and soothe the behavor (is that a word - or did I make up a new one, again)! |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: bbelle Date: 11 Jan 00 - 04:37 PM Well, I understand the couch is about 8 feet long and I'm 5 feet long, so unless you're 7 feet long, it's probably not a very exciting prospected. Well, my friends, this thread has probably run it's course, since we're dipping into intense, good-natured threadcreep. BTW ... for a while I wasn't sure what "threadcreep" meant. Duh! Now I understand why and how it happens and it really is kind of fun and let's the steam out a bit (as opposed to letting my waistband out a bit) ... moonchild |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Jeri Date: 11 Jan 00 - 05:09 PM Moonchild, annap has informed me that I get the other half of the couch. You'll be able to able to recognise me by the fact I'll be wearing a top-not, and plaid with polka dots. I also may be carrying a banjo. Who was it who said "No one can call themselves an idiot. It is a name that is given to you, not one you give to yourself?" |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Rick Fielding Date: 11 Jan 00 - 05:22 PM It's interesting to me that the two Catters in the middle of the (easily avoided) public firestorm of a few days ago, Kat and Joe, have been, during the year I've been here two of the first to offer help and assistance. (whether solicited or not) Since Peter T.'s name has come up several times here for his "idiot" comment, I think it's fair to say that he is another who constantly offers his services when needed. I've gotten to know all three well enough to know where their hearts are...and believe me they're in the right place. That doesn't change the fact that Joe's method of dealing with his frustration at what he felt was Kat's manipulation of Mudcat was BRUTAL. I'm sure he feels that he was being "brutally honest", but had that been aimed at me I'd have been really hurt. Having said that, I think making a clearly edited private e-mail of his, public, was inexcusable (no matter what the rationalization was) and starting a thread dealing with EXACTLY what was at the heart of their disagreement-"compulsive thread posting" (knowing full well, that anyone who got involved would be literally forced to take sides)was deliberately devisive. Peter's calling someone an "idiot" might have carried more weight if Gern had stuck around and argued his point, but from the way both posts were written, my guess is that Gern would have been out of his/her league, even if Peter had used milder terms. Peter me Lad, when you choose, you can use the english language like a rapier! Recently I asked to be removed from a private Mudcatters' e-mail list. I have respect and admiration for every person on that list, but I will not be part of one "group" who feels collectively that they're "in the right"...meaning others (collectively) must be wrong. For all I know, I've lost friends, through that action, but I think carefully before I sign my name to something (still a computer dork, so I wouldn't know how to be anon. even if I was scared to take the heat) and I try to be true to my beliefs. Like Catspaw and others, I've got buttons that can be pushed, but the only button that got pushed this time was the one that said "stop..don't take sides" Rick (still firmly pro B.S. and pro music..but anti-power struggles) |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Peter T. Date: 11 Jan 00 - 05:32 PM Yeah, but Rick licks guitars when no one is watching. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Jeri Date: 11 Jan 00 - 05:38 PM I think he goes after banjos too. Does that make him "bilingual?" |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: sophocleese Date: 11 Jan 00 - 05:47 PM And now he's starting on fiddle too, (how many would he have to lick to be cunilingual?) Sorry, sorry for the really terrible joke. Spaw hasn't made it yet. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Peter T. Date: 11 Jan 00 - 05:49 PM God, I never thought of that. Thanks, Jeri, it was time he was outed as the degenerate he really is. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: catspaw49 Date: 11 Jan 00 - 05:53 PM ....come join me Soph. You get used to the heat, but avoid the flamier bits. Not a bad place overall, just watch out you don't piss-off the horned guy in the red suit with the pitchfork. I think analinguistic is a bit more than cunnilinguistic isn't it? Well that about wraps this one up. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Rick Fielding Date: 11 Jan 00 - 05:55 PM Wouldn't take this from a serious topic into the realm of jokes for anything, but thanks to Jeri's patience and kindness, I am INDEED learning the fiddle (squawks and all). I played very poorly a number of years ago and am trying to do it right this time. I practice an hour and a half every day.(Now I even miss "Yes Minister") My goal is to go public in 3 months. Oops, 2 and a half months. Thanks again Jeri. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: katlaughing Date: 11 Jan 00 - 09:53 PM Once more: the Compulsive Thread Posting thread was obviously meant to be a joke and in no way was meant to be deliberatley divisive. I am sorry that it was misinterpreted it and that it was brought up in this thread. Having said that, I personally do no think anything justifies the kind of attack slung at me last week. Can we please let it rest now? Thank you, kat with a small "k" out of respect for the other "Kat" who was here before me when I logged on as katlaughing. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: Bert Date: 12 Jan 00 - 09:15 AM "Least said, soonest mended" as My Dad says. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: annamill Date: 12 Jan 00 - 12:44 PM Who hurt our Kat?? Let me at them. This is what I get for staying away so much! L.,A. |
|
Subject: RE: THREADIQUETTE From: katlaughing Date: 12 Jan 00 - 12:59 PM Annap, please, I will answer your question by private message. Please, phoaks, let's not hash this out again in a thread. Thank you, kat |
| Share Thread: |