Thought for the Day - Jan 19

Subject: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Peter T.
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 08:48 AM

The assault on someone's identity that took place last night here on Mudcat has driven all other thoughts from my mind. John Stuart Mill and all other advocates of virtually total free speech made two exceptions: violence, and the willful destruction of the communications system itself. It is this destruction that is so dangerous: the Internet is an open space, and communities within it depend on something very fragile -- they depend upon this little thread of typing you see unfolding in front of you -- and the expectation, trust, that the person typing it is who they say they are. It is certainly possible, indeed essential, that people be allowed to have personas, or retain their privacy under adopted names. But the danger of it all is that when that personal identity is intentionally misrepresented, then no one can trust anything anyone says any more, and the place dissolves into berserk madness, as it did last night. We lose all ability to communicate, to require people to be decent, to talk to each other with some faith that we are talking to the person we are talking to. It is a fundamental threat to the Mudcat: I have seen versions of it destroy other Web sites, where people under other people's names began doing even more disgusting things than happened here, which was mild. People abandoned those sites when they could no longer believe in them: they were forced to set up private on-line clubs.
I have said nothing about the personal violation, which is bad enough. I am speaking of the violation of this community.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 08:51 AM

Well said, but little hope that those concerned will have the grace to even feel a little ashamed. I hope I'm wrong.

LTS

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:20 AM

I have'nt read all those threads, but could not agree more with Peter T. Such a violation of this community's integrity is very disturbing. Personally directed disparaging remarks, and missuse of someones personal identity are not amusing; in fact in this day and age it may be frightening to some. Perhaps it may be neccessary to log in in order to prevent such an abuse. LTS judging from what you say, and what I have read on some threads I doubt if such people would feel ashamed, they obviously do not have a conscience. Yours,(definately T.A.M.)Aye. Dave

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Little dorritt
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:33 AM

Well spoken Peter T, what sad anoraks some folks are! it reminded me a little of the naughty kid in school who wrote something rude on the blackboard but wouldn't own up to it. I doubt that any true remorse will be shown , that may stretch their limited intelligence a little too far. Frankly it's best to ignore this behaviour in the hope that they may go and take their sad selves elsewhere.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Ali_UK
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:34 AM

Unfortunately,or fortunatel, the Internet is an open space and it would be difficult, and I also believe against the spirit of the net, to police the whole thing. This means that those braindead dweebs that also get a kick out of phoning in false emergencies to the fire department, have a whole new playground to practice their sociopathical games. What can we do about it? To be honest their is little that can be done, what is possible is what Max has done with the cookie programme, which identifies each person that comes on and automatically gives them their 'handle'according to their personal information. Sadly, this means that we have to put up with the fuckwits that play these silly games.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: jeffp
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:35 AM

I also found it deeply disturbing. The feeling of community that we have here is predicated on trust. Trust in each other and in each other's good feelings toward the community at large and the individuals in the community. Even though my name was not usurped, I still felt personally violated. I hope a way can be found to prevent this sort of thing without eliminating the openness which, I believe contributes greatly to the ambience of the Mudcat. Thank you Peter, for giving us a thread to discuss this and, I hope, deal with our own personal reactions to this most unfortunate incident.

jeffp

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: flattop
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:38 AM

You could all just lighten up. I haven't had time to read all the posts on the offending thread this morning (and won't have time today) but the parody seemed to be reasonable well written. Where's the laugh in katlaughing?

Mel Brookes said that when he falls down a manhole and breaks his neck, that's tragedy, but when you fall down a manhole and break your neck, that's comedy. Understandable, kat down a manhole is having trouble laughing. If she had laughed and said, 'Good one guys, you got me,' they wouldn't have had so much fun.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:40 AM

Well said, Peter. I marvel at your gift for articulate speech. I've watched for some time the stalking and the cowardly "bait and run", and I've wondered what the solution might be. I have every confindence that there will be a solution. Meanwhile, I'll continue to read (as time permits) the trememdously informative song info threads, the music theory threads, the wonderful witty humor in the Tavern, the personal well-wishes and prayers in personal threads and the thought-provoking philosophical statements that seem to crop up everywhere.

Mary (and it's easy to figure out my entire name, but only a stalker would bother)

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Little dorritt
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:53 AM

flattop - I do not think it was the parody itself that was offensive, it was the abuse of others identity that has irritated people. If someone wants to take the p*** out of something I say - I don't mind thathappens all the time, if someone is pretending it's me saying it -well I might just wonder why they chose to do that.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: flattop
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:53 AM

Mary, it seems foolish to challenge ill-mannered people to make you a target, unless you're a really good sport.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: flattop
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 10:06 AM

Little D,

Impersonation has always been an accepted technique of comedy and higher areas of entertainment. Was Glen Campbell every a lineman for the county? I doubt it, but, he often sang like he's just been hit by 5000 volts.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Little dorritt
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 10:13 AM

well I can't disagree about the singing, flat top! and you have identified the heart of the matter. the impersonation is fine, if you know its happening, but when you are being misled, it's an abuse of trust. In the UK its a little bit like our tabloid press printing an interview with a famous pesonality - only to find out it never took place.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 10:21 AM

I understand what you are saying Flattop, but there was a fundamental difference here. I reread the threads. There was, in my opinion, a deliberate attempt at passing oneself off as someone else in order to discredit them. A parody is one thing. A fraudulent attempt to pass oneself off to discredit and intimidate is quite another. I see this as an attempt to drive Kat away, not as a statement. And that puts it in an entirely different light. That I love this community is a well known fact. But last night I came within seconds of leaving. I would have done so quietly and with email to selected friends. But I will be damned if I will let miserable control freaks drive me off. If these jerks were to just ignore the offending threads, I would have no problem with their view. But they go beyond, to the point of attempting to make it an image of their choosing and being very intolerant of the majority view which has been expressed time and again. It is the same problem I have with another here who rambles on and on about what is wrong with the "house of many rooms" concept. The beauty of our Mudcat is that it serves as an outlet for a very diverse and talented community to EXPRESS themselves on the music and the issues that spawn it. It also provides a means for artistic people to express that madness that all artists have residing in them. True talent would recognize this.

Big Mick

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 10:41 AM

flattop--I think you were talking to me, but for the life of me, I can't understand what you were saying.

Mary

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: flattop
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 11:40 AM

Mick,

Unfortunately you are in a position where you can't ignore the fights. That must feel awful. You have my sympathy. Most of us can take it or leave it. Perhaps we should leave it more often than we do.

As soon as I read kat's denial message, it became quite clear that some perverted soul was pulling her leg. The humour was obvious. Most Muddcatters seem intelligent enough to not be fooled for long but I could be overestimating you all. Silly me. I still think that if kat had written something like, 'I don't recall writng this. Perhaps I'm suffering from animalnesia,' she could have deflated these clowns.

A teacher who I knew in Toronto once answered the phone to a male voice saying, 'I'm masturbating.' She replied, 'I bet you can't spell that.' It was a standard teachers' line but the guy was struck speechless, stuttering, 'You can't say that to me.'

Mary, your line about stalking sounds like clown baiting. Please take better care of yourself. Take control of the conversation. Don't over react. Don't become a target. That's my humble opinion but feel free to shoot me down.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: AndyG
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 01:10 PM

flattop,

Using a stolen identity is fraud, impersonation for comedic effect is funny because what's said is usually opposite to the known views of the target.

Don't misunderstand, I fully realised that the post was fraudulent by content alone, without being told. I'm angry that somebody saw this could be done and also did it, not comprehending that it strikes at the heart of a data-based system which has almost no sideband information. (ie facial expression, tone of voice, etc) Style and content are the only patterns other than name by which posters can be recognised.

Emotionally I have little long term reaction to these events. Intellectually I'm very very concerned about the short, medium and long term problems this sort of disruption can produce.

AndyG

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 02:06 PM

flattop,

I tried to send you a personal message, but it didn't go through. Do you see the problem we have here when we can only know people from what they say, and then to not be able to trust that a message is from who it says it's from? More later.

Mary

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Áine
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 02:39 PM

Andy G. posted an extremely informative link over on the BS: Who Do You Want To Be Today? thread. After reading the information on this link concerning 'trolls, flames and crosspostings', I have a feeling that the Mudcat Forum has been invaded and victimized by the sort of people described therein. I encourage all of you to read this information and let's discuss it on this thread.

Click here to reach the site.

-- Áine

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: GUEST,flattop
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 03:47 PM

AndyG,

I didn't believe that the offending message was genuine when I read it this morning. The cap-locked screaming headlines on the form may have been a clue. However, I like to believe that I would have clued into the mousy headline and to the message itself by the third sentence. (Not that some people wouldn't want to hold hands for a sick mouse and god forbid that I offend them.) Kat would have to be truly self-deprecating to have written that message. Her messages, at least the few that I've read, seem to have a completely different tone.

Reading the offending message again, I find that it's not great parody. The additional messages in the thread, especially the reaction ones, add to the impact and to the impression. Your arguments raise some interesting questions. Did it fool you completely? Then I accept that you must be one of the mudcatters whose intelligence I overestimated. I will take your word for it and I have no argument. Or are you saying that you were not fooled but that you feel that other mudcatters are too stupid to get the joke? That position I find contemptible. I see no evidence that other mudcatters are stupider than we are. Unless mudcatters were thick enough to be fooled, the poster committed no serious fraud. He or she may be guilty of bad parody, rudeness, in-your-face message writing, but probably not fraud. Also, if the messages had been written so well that it was indistinguishable from kat's usual messages, might we have passed over it with a yawn?

What bothered me more was the recent flack on the thread about Metchosin's friend. I would hope that people emotional enough to feel notes and lyrics could simply say that they are sorry to hear that her friend's daughter had died or say nothing. To me, that was not a thread for arguing. Perhaps I expect too much of civilized people. Metchosin handled the garbage very well. I was impressed. Thanks Metchosin.

I support kat in starting that thread, although I would have used different words if I wrote it. I don't care a lot how kat said it, what she said was important and moving. Again, to me, saying that we understand that a mudcat member is suffering through grief is more important than collecting more obscure lyrics for 48 Bottles of beer on the Wall. Music is about human emotions. We hide our emotions too often but they do creep through in the songs we like and in the messages we write. I know the other arguments for pure musicology but that's my personal view.

That said, someone taking the piss out of kat in an isolated thread is a major improvement in bad manners and lack of consideration. Perhaps we should praise each and every improvement. It might even be fair game if kat is up it. __________________________

Flies make great pets. All you need is a litterbox and two pieces of litter. - from The Great Big Book of Canadian Humour

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: GUEST,flattop
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 03:58 PM

Mary,

You can reach me at: [e-mail]

If you're wondering. The internet account is in my wife's name so I use yahoo. Yes, I'm not a mudcat member. I started reading threads because an outstanding musician/singer, sophocleese, told me a few months ago that she was writing to mudcat.

If anyone else who would like to write to me too, I like mail but I may not have time to reply before the weekend.

David

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 04:23 PM

Dear folks,

For what it's worth, I basically support flattop's view. No time to write more now, but I just thought I'd add that, because I know that sticking your neck out is a very lonely and sometimes scary experience.

My best to all concerned,

Mary McCaffrey

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 04:49 PM

Peter T. I am glad to see you dedicated the Thought for the Day to the events of last night.
If someone took my cookie, it would make me cry.
I felt terrible about what happened. There was something mentions about having a password added to our cookie. I think that may be a very good idea.

BB

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: TerriM
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 05:02 PM

I feel that anyone who cannot/will not participate in the warmth, fun and intelligence of this community is a person deserving of our sympathy, a sad individual who excludes themselves before the rejection they percieve they deserve, arrives. It is a small measure of false control in a world they clearly have little or no control over. We should be sad for them but to respond is to collude.Better to ignore it.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 05:34 PM

flattop--I'm 99% sure you are who you say you are. But the only way I can make a judgement is by your choice of words, spelling, context, grammar, etc. Frankly, after last night I will not respond to anyone not registered here.

Mary

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Wesley S
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 05:59 PM

I think the thing that suprises me is that the people who object the the most to non-music and healing threads spend a LOT of time reading and responding to them. If their time is so precious why do they bother? Skip them and go on. It's the same thing I do when I hear the Spice Girls on the radio. The only thing I can assume is that they are in desperate need of attention. Any child psychologist will tell you that is why many children act out. Negative attention is better than no attention.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 06:09 PM

What I found disturbing about the mousehealing thing was that it followed in the wake of the thread about the kid that got killed.

And what happened in that thread had made me feel sick at heart, and very angry with the people who were responsible for polluting it. But some people are like that. I don't go along with the kind of talk about lack of intelligence or people being braindead dweebs and that - it's nothing to do with intelligence. It's not even just attention-seeking behaviour. It's some kind of disturbance that you can't begin to make sense of, without a lot more information. It can't be much fun being inside that kind of person.

But then came the mousehealing parody - and what was sick about that was it's context, what it came after. That mmeant that it couldn't be funny, and the borrowing of kat's name made it doubly unpleasant. But I don't think it was in itself meant cruelly, just thoughtless and stupid, and the person responsible owned up and apologised, which was in its way brave.

What followed was nastier, because as PeterT said, it undermined the whole sense that this is a place where we can talk - whether about music or anything. Readingn through the threads affected you got the feeling of collapsng walls - maybe there wasn't a Mudcat at all, it was just some mad person with multiple personalities talking to himself. I had the same feeling that Big Mick had - I felt close to logging-out and getting out.

I hope that the extra gizmos Max has had to put in will help us pull out of this without damage. But it's so unfair - he's got enough on his plate trying to hold of the Hairy Fox Menace, without having to deal with this kind of crap from people who should be his friends. And it pushes us in the direction of constraint and restriction and show your IDs and Members Only and Private Property.

Ansd even writing this, I still get the nasty feeling that at any time we'll have an outbreak of gangrene here too.

I feel that Lewis Carroll is probably our best recourse at a time like this:

They hunted till darkness came on, but they found Not a button, or feather, or mark, By which they could tell that they stood on the ground Where the Baker had met with the Snark.

In the midst of the word he was trying to say, In the midst of his laughter and glee, He had softly and suddenly vanished away -- - For the Snark was a Boojum, you see.

Ansd for the rest of The Hunting of the Snark try here.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: GUEST,flattop
Date: 19 Jan 00 - 09:03 PM

The internet can be confusing. Do we have multiple Marys or a Mary with multiple identities?

Mary McCaffrey,

> sticking your neck out is a very lonely and sometimes scary experience.

I tend to have fun writing, sticking my neck out or shooting my mouth off. I had fun with most of the e-mails that I wrote today - slipping in my twisted asides. Nothing scary or lonely.

Kentucky Mary,

I'm glad that you listened to my advice to be careful on the internet. Talking on Mudcat threads works fine.

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: AndyG
Date: 20 Jan 00 - 06:09 AM

Áine,
I appreciate that a "reds under the bed" sensation often follows ones first reading of the a.s.t. FAQ but I didn't post it to worry people.
I do not believe there's a concerted attack taking place, the mudcat forum wouldn't be a worthy target for a.s.t or their like.
However the FAQ outlines the frailty of virtual communities, and has good pointers for protective measures.

AndyG

Subject: RE: Thought for the Day - Jan 19
From: Escamillo
Date: 21 Jan 00 - 02:29 AM

Thanks Peter T, Big Mick and others for your concern. I think the Mudcat is under attack by one person (not many) who wants to drive ALL of us away. It happened in many other places. As Big Mick was at seconds to leaving, I was too.
Look at the list of threads tonight: an anonymous Guest has taken the burden of refreshing 40 or more 1-message threads (mainly Lyr/Req), thus pushing all other threads out of the 1-day list, except those he considers appropiate or self-gratifying. We don't want to install a police in the net, but these people act as policemen, judges and executioners. Why they do this, is out of my knowledge of psichiatry, but the two things we can do are:
- Ignore all their comments, refresh the threads we like, and continue as if they were not existent, and hope they (or he) will get bored and move to another, more reacting group.
- Install censorship on the contents of the postings - This is awful, but sometimes necessary. Of course we need a very active commitee, otherwise the postings take too long for approval and people gets rapidly bored, as it happened in another group in Argentina. Once this person gets tired of typing and not seeing his "work", will leave.
Un abrazo - Andrés