 sj |
||
|
||
Should registration be required or not?
|
|
|
Subject: Should registration be required or not? From: katlaughing Date: 03 Feb 00 - 09:56 PM Most legitimate posters, new or old hat, have the courage to stand behind their words, through a well-known nickname or their real name. I do not think they should be the targets of flamers who lack any courage and seem bent on destroying the Mudcat through posting as the various permutations of facetious GUESTs we've seen in the past couple of weeks. Requiring someone to register could do a lot, IMO, to restore our trust and faith in one another as the decent individuals most Mudcatters have proven to be. An added benfit would be to discourage the gutless wonders. Sure I've pissed off some, I am proud to be, katlaughingand,onocassionDitzeeLee |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Sorcha Date: 03 Feb 00 - 10:05 PM Well, since it's you IT thinks is me, and we both know better, this one is funny. I hate to see the Mudcat go private, but it is not that big a deal to have to register a REAL e-mail address with the ADMIN, then he at least, knows who is posting and can control a little more if he wants to. Even I, as 'puter illiterate as I am, have figured out that if I want to post as someone else, all I have to do is delete cookies/temp internet file, post as GUEST*****, re-set my cookie, and I'm Sorcha again. "GUEST" is not the solution, but I don't know what is. How exclusive does the Mudcat want to be? I have read the other thread about exclusivity, and, being a Newbie, certainly don't want to cut out anybody who is seriously interested, but IT is doing that all by IT'S SELF. Sorcha, who is me, and answers to Sorcha |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Lonesome EJ Date: 03 Feb 00 - 10:12 PM The concept of a registered forum is interesting, because at least those flamers who cause the majority of the problems would be liable to some accountability. Unfortunately, the charm of the Mudcat as a "free forum" where all are welcome would be lost forever. It may however be the only recourse Max has if the anonymous attacks continue, because some of these are so virulent as to effect the entire tone of the Mudcat. LEJ |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: John in Brisbane Date: 03 Feb 00 - 11:23 PM What I'm about to say is not meant to be hurtful, but I don't have the luxury to spend a lot of time here these days. Pardon me therefore if I appear very task focussed - because I am.
I'm a big boy. Let me handle the virulence and disruptions in the best way I know how - I ignore them and I try to not respond to attention seekers at all.
I would prefer if the internal focus of these threads was labelled in such a way that I can choose to selectively view them. Call them BS/OS or even US. If Max gives us the tools to unclutter my Mudcat life I would expect that the well meaning regulars would attempt to respect my right to never see certain thread titles. This thread is one of them.
Thank you for reading. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Amos Date: 03 Feb 00 - 11:32 PM The default for someone without a cookie should be a required email address that they enter. If we wanted to be anal about it (and more closed than the Cat would ever want to get, I think) the user who wanted to use his email address only would have to receive a robot-generated password (to confirm that it was really the email address he was getting mail at). Another option would be some tricky Perl thing that parsed his IP number, and showed him as "Visitor from ______(DNS of host or IP number)." Dunno how effective that would be. Or we could force them to page through the whole of "Spaw's Collected Submissions" if they chose not to register, to prove they were able to stand it here!!:>) A |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Sorcha Date: 03 Feb 00 - 11:35 PM OH GODS! Not that! Pulleeezze! I'll register, really I will! |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 12:43 AM Something that only a LaughCat pure USA Democratic, Pagan, Liberal coule dream up.
Hell NO!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Sorcha Date: 04 Feb 00 - 12:47 AM GO FOR IT, GARG! SEND ME A REAL E-MAIL!I DO KNOW HOW TO DELETE AND BLOCK SENDER!! LOVE YA, DARLIN'!*** |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: katlaughing Date: 04 Feb 00 - 01:02 AM John, I've sent you a message, too, in case you don't come back to this thread. If you will check the recent MUDCAT IMPROVEMENT thread, you will find that Max posted a protoype of a filter which you can try out. It will show you a Forum sans any thread designated as BS. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 01:06 AM Look.....go off somewhere into the wilderness,
.......................................... band the birds, brand the cattle, catalogue butterflies, (or as my brother once did, ((for the US govt)) stick flags in buffalo turds and collect them after they have "ripened")
What sort of catnip have you been sniffing to come up with this 1984 nightmare???? |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 01:09 AM His last month's filter tests have been VERY interesting.
Well, Done MAX.....there is more sophistication to this "washboard & spoon jam" than meets the eye. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 01:14 AM The BEST way to assure a "hacker challenge" is to broadcast to "the community" that your site is now "secure."
OPEN architecture, code, forums, discussions....is the best way to assure that you will NOT need "healing" in the future.
Forcing others to "heel" is NOT the way
My first grade primer (British) had the text Scat, Scat, little cat, go away and don't come back. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 01:19 AM Let's do a ratio.
There MUST BE "one upload" of music related content for every "five downloads" of Cat Crap. It is easy, the "FILTER" has been used for over 15 years as a "standard" of net sites.
thatwouldshutuptheKatterLaughingonthemudcat |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Sorcha Date: 04 Feb 00 - 01:27 AM Oh, for all the God's sakes, you are SO pathetic. GET A REAL LIFE, why doncha, instead of pretending you are a folkie? |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST Date: 04 Feb 00 - 01:28 AM Cram It CLOWN |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Feb 00 - 01:36 AM The original purpose of this forum was for it to be a place for people to post and request lyrics that aren't in the database. If we were to require membership, I think we would add an air of exclusivity to the forum, which would tend to discourage visitors who come here seeking folk music information. Is that what we want to do? I think it make sense to require registration for Mudcat Chat, but not for the forum. This place should remain open to visitors. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Rick Fielding Date: 04 Feb 00 - 02:13 AM A few days ago in a thread about "improvements" I suggested that the music and "other" threads be separated (I have always participated in both). I was outvoted by about a thousand to one, and some suggested that doing that would be devisive. My feeling was that it would calm down those who REALLY can't hold their anger in. "No, no, we're adults here", seemed to be the feeling, "we can police ourselves". Well I doubt it. Sometimes a bit of chaos can be funny. Trying to figure out who's posting under different names can be entertaining (it certainly brings out the latent Sherlock Holmes in me). And yes, I'll admit it, I thought at one time that Gargoyle might just have a wicked wit, and if there were less idle chit chat here, he'd go back to being knowledgable and merely unpleasant. I wouldn't bet a plugged nickle on that happening now. Too many people with, I suspect, no history on this forum, have taken his lead, and are having fun with it at EVERYONE'S expense. It's just too distracting. I've always made my e-mail, street address, and phone number easily available here, but I would be HAPPY to have this site become as "registered" as need be to bring back the feeling I had the first eight months I was here. When it comes to the music I live and love, I'd be equally happy to make joining this forum an "effort". I suspect a number of people who's opinions I value would come back. I'm sure I'd be outvoted by the same margin on this issue but I just don't believe in "inclusion at all cost". Rick
|
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Sorcha Date: 04 Feb 00 - 02:16 AM Nope, not by me, and I'm a REAL Newbie! Sorcha, who is not, but might be, kat. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Escamillo Date: 04 Feb 00 - 02:21 AM Joe, I came here for some lyrics and enjoyed 7 months of friendship and continuous learning. I would like others to have the same opportunity, so I agree. However, to have the opportunity and make abuse of it, by attacking other members for fun, is not fair. I've seen in this thread somebody suggesting that a member's proposal is unacceptable because he is "USA Democratic, Pagan and Liberal" - this is no mockering, but it IS serious. What can I expect for me ? "Latin SouthAmerican Dark-skinned? "? I suggest to display a summary of common ethical rules for every guest or member to make things clear, and keep the right of admission and permanence in the Café. Un abrazo - Andrés |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Rick Fielding Date: 04 Feb 00 - 02:55 AM Thanks Sorcha, if you ARE Kat, can I count on two votes? Hi Andres, I won't ask you about the weather again! The situation (to me) has gotten like the proverbial jam sessions and song circles that have been discussed many times (without serious incident) here. What do you do when the original focus is disintegrating? Well, some move on to other groups, some sit tight and hope for the best, and some make and enforce a few rules. My point was that if rules HAVE to be made to keep this wonderful site less annoying than it's become lately, I'm all for them. I have no qualms whatsoever of being selfish in this case. Sorry to disagree with you Joe, but I guess after seeing what utter chaos can do to the atmosphere, it makes any previous complaints I had about directions, quite unimportant. Civility has become the only issue that I care about right now. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Áine Date: 04 Feb 00 - 06:53 AM I know that I'm late in chiming in on this subject; but, it *was* hockey night last night (Dallas Stars 2 - Phoenix Coyotes 0 = GO STARS!). Anyway, after seeing the level of nastiness and personal attack grow in this forum over the last two years (see Mr. g's comments above for a good example), I have come to agree that registration should be required. I understand how many of us could feel that this smacks of Big Brother/1984 control; however, we are a community, and even the *best* community needs to have rules. It could be, that for a small minority, this requirement would be off-putting and they would not choose to register. On the other hand, this would be their *choice*, and I think this fact should be considered. I belong to only one other forum (who could possibly have time for more??), and it suffered from the same kind of nastiness that has befallen the Mudcat. This forum now requires registration if someone wants to post messages and receive the other benefits of membership; however, it is still available for everyone else to read. I think this would work well with the 'Cat. Folks that did not want to sign up could still take advantage of the forum, and this would probably lead to many of them deciding in the end to join. If the 'Cat did go to a *read only* format for non-members, I think it would actually encourage more people to join us, because without the personal attacks and nastiness, this would be a very attractive (and attracting) forum. So, there ya go. We've got to do something, because we are relatively powerless to do anything to improve our community here as things stand now, and things are just getting worse. -- Áine |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Little Neophyte Date: 04 Feb 00 - 08:08 AM I support the concept of registration. Aine's suggestion makes a lot of sense to me. Having a membership for posting with 'read only' format for those of non-member status. I also have changed my previous opinion on the seperation of music threads from other threads. I believe at one time 'Other' threads contained veins of valuable knowledge that would be of interest to those seeking more music content. Now I feel those intermingled music gems within the 'Other' threads are rare. John in Brisbane's ideas of 'tools for selective viewing' would help the group of Mudcatters like John who steadily request for an efficient way to focus their time on the Mudcat. I'm not sure if this would involve the concept of seperate forums or just manditory categorizing of threads. Bonnie |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GeorgeH Date: 04 Feb 00 - 08:30 AM Reluctantly, I also agree with the concept of registering in order to post. Although I'd like to see a "song request" route open for those who are not registered, if Max is prepared to moderate such a route. Registering is no big deal, and no big price to pay for participation. Just as not going out of one's way to offend others is no big price to pay. Mudcat IS a 'club'; I see no moral objection to its setting non-excluding rules for membership. Currently there's too much anger and distress being generated to no constructive purpose by those who seem to derive some satisfaction from inflicting hurt on others. G. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,Roger the skiffler Date: 04 Feb 00 - 08:35 AM I'd be happy to register if it didn't require "cookies". Working at various shared machines at work, I don't want to accept cookies on them. RtS |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Amos Date: 04 Feb 00 - 08:40 AM I would have no objection to a 2-tiered approach using registration and the presence of a cookie as the dividiing factor. There are many sites that do it this way. Personally I registered in the first few minutes, but I'm not hiding anything from anyone. My life is a lot simpler that way, too. A |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,Jon Freeman Date: 04 Feb 00 - 08:52 AM One thing that needs to be considered when talking about registration is the number of people "passing through" who sometimes start an interesting thread or make a valid contribtution. These people may not want to register (at least until they get the feel of the place) and may decide to go to more "open" places. The question is: is it worth risking losing a number of good contributions simply because there a few people trying to spoil things for everybody? Also, and I don't know on this one and it is not my problem but the time and effort involved in setting up such a system may be an issue. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Wolfgang Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:16 AM Just think for a moment what we would loose by registration: Do you think Dick Gaughan would have bothered to register to tell us what he had in mind when writing a certain song? Do you think Eliza Carthy would have registered to tell us how she sings a song? I guess that even some of the now regulars would never had started coming here if the first step would have been that high. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Amos Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:30 AM Actually, the only problem we have is with the occasional slimeball who abuses the guest privelege. I am inclined in the direction of doing it the Mudcat way -- we'll just out-create the suckers. We can handle jerks either through an excess of humour or a little compassion or just unleashing Spaw on them. Maybe we should roll along with the open approach and continue to deal with the deeveiates on a case by case basis. A |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:31 AM I'm on the pavement Thinking about the government
Man in a trenchcoat, badge out, laid off,
LOOK OUT KID!!
It doesn't take a Weatherman to tell which way the wind blows>
Excerpted from Gerry Garcia's forth coming new book Chicken Soup for the New Mellenium |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Blackcat2 Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:33 AM Greetings all, I, for one would probably not have registered for Mudcat if that was the only way to access the discussion. I think that smacks of exclusion - how ever minor. Yes, I've joined up, but only after hanging out for a while and seeing the benefits of the place (many), versus the drawbacks (few). I still don't get it with the distuptive behavior angst. The childish stuff that goes on at Mudcat is just that - childish - all those people who attack others instead of arguing actual points of disagreement, clearly have an "pre-adolescent Inner Child". (I myself have the heart of a 14 year old - it's in a jar on my desk . . . but I digress) These people are looking for attention in the same fashion that a child throwing a temper tantrum in a store is. What do you do when you see that? Do you walk up to the child and try to deal with him/her, or do you just move on? I move on - I have better things to do than waste my time on him/her. Likewise, when I read attacks on my or someone else's character here at Mudcat I ignore it. It's not easy, but that the only response that can ever work. Trying to talk reason to someone who is unreasonable is . . . well, think about it. Anyway, I'd hate to see Mudcat be unavailable to people who drop by to find out a bit of info on a song or two but don't have time in their busy lives to stay around. I think that Mudcat is a resource as well as a community. Thanks for listening and thanks for all who have enriched the past 5 months of my life for sharing their wit, wisdom, etc. here on the Mudcat. pax yall Blackcat2 (named after the Blackcat Cafe - an open-mike coffee house held monthly in Orlando for the past 6 years). |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: annamill Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:36 AM You guys are funny. You seem to think that this is a democrocy. Max decides. Sillies. I like status quo, thank you very much. I'm registered, but I didn't for a while. I needed to see what I was getting into first. I had to interact first. I wanted to meet you guys (virtually speaking) first. Then I fell in love and decided to marry you ;-) and become part of the family. Others should have this chance too. Reading lately shows me that things have seemed to have calmed down a bit. I'm enjoying reading again. Like I said, Mudcat is like New England, if you don't like the weather wait a moment. Leave it alone please. Love, annap |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Áine Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:36 AM Dear Jon and Wolfgang, I agree that requiring registration to post here would keep some people from doing so. However, how many people will leave anyway if we let the kind of flaming that has started recently go on? Just a few of the most recent examples can be found here, here and here. Personally, I can take it on the chin and keep on going. This person's opinion doesn't bother me at all. But, what about the folks that see these type of postings and decide not to contribute in any way, lest they become victims of the same sort of abuse? Yes, we might miss an interesting thread here and there, but whose voice, song and/or music will we not hear because of this type of harrassment? We have to do something, and that something is to require registration with a read-only option for non-registrants. -- Áine |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:39 AM Dearest KatLaughing
As I have suggested in several other of your threads.
Go create the type of site that................. YOU want
................ and requires photo-IDs-attached to e-mails, with courier based dispathes to verify authenticy, ...................................................... and real-time-monitor-attached video cameras to determine facial expressions at the time of each missive's launch
Go create!!!!
|
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:42 AM It's true!!!
The there is NO such thing as GRAVITY.....
|
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Áine Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:42 AM Sorry, it's a little too early for html perfection. The examples I was talking about above are here and here and here. -- Áine |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,_gargoyle Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:45 AM OH NO!!!!!!!!
I feel the "FILTERS" activating
Help not so soon.......no the weekend's coming.....no don't.....not yet.....
Damn, caught me again.....see you later after the filters are shut off.
|
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Jon Freeman Date: 04 Feb 00 - 09:58 AM Annap, I certainly don't believe Mudcat is a democracy and I am well aware that Max is in charge. I do however like to think that he does read the threads and has an interest in the opinions of others where this site is concerned. This thread started for whatever reason but having started, I think it is quite reasonable for folks to state thier own feelings on the subject with out being considered funny. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Sean Belt Date: 04 Feb 00 - 10:21 AM Okay. I don't post an awful lot to Mudcat. But I do read frequently and, mostly, enjoy the discussions. Particularly when they're music or performance oriented. My vote on this one is to allow posts from unregistered guests. Registration should be an option and should be encouraged. But, not required. There are far too many good people out there in the world who can join in the exchange of ideas and have a lot to offer, but wouldn't have the inclination, for whatever reason, to register. As far as the obnoxious behaviour displayed by some posters lately, I can only say, "Consider the source." There are jerks all over the world. Unfortunately, Mudcat isn't any more immune to this fact of life than anywhere else. The best way to deal with it is to pretty much ignore these people who post hurtful/hateful messages. Responding to them saps our energy, leads us away from our real purpose, and serves to grant them the attention they so desperately crave. Forgive my long-windedness. Now, who wants to get back to playing? - Sean |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Midchuck Date: 04 Feb 00 - 10:25 AM The problem seems to me to be that a website is the wrong medium. I'm on a couple of e-mail listserves that seem to work a lot better. You can't post or receive unless you sign on; but anyone can sign on. But if you continuously post abusive or totally irrelevant material, the listowner can delete you. And make you beg and promise to reform in order to get back on. It is, admittedly, about as democratic as prewar Germany or the late Roman empire. But it works better than Mudcat has of recent (I seemed to join just when things started going to hell. I hope it's only coincidence.) One variant on this is what Bgrass-l does, you have a mailing list that's echoed to a newsgroup. So anyone can read the posts, but you have to be a member to post. Come to think of it, that's about the same situation you'd have here if you required membership to post to the site. So I guess I would chime in on the side of requiring registration. It's repugnant to me in principal (or do I mean princible?) but it appears to be necessary in practice. If a newbie may be forgiven for having an opinion. Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: JedMarum Date: 04 Feb 00 - 10:27 AM I'll show my ignornace when I start with this, but - when I first started using the Mudcat forum, I was under the impression that you had to register to post. I only registered because I wanted to find out about a song that was not in the DT, and one which I thought someone might know about (and I was right). I did register under a pseudonym, because I didn't know much about internet interpersonal communications in general, nor about Mudcat in particular. So I am not sure that forcing people to register would scare many off. I must admit, I have not seen why the 'flaming' and the bad language is worth worrying about, but I have not seen too much of it, and accept that it can be disturbing to those involved. I am not even sure that categorizing threads is al that important either, since I choose to participate or not, each thread based upon its interest to me, and I look through most based upon their title and length of time on the board. If you are registered, and 'own' your name on the forum (as many of us are/do) then it is clear who is posting. If you are a guest and have a 'temp' handle then all reading your posts understand your situation. That seems to be an adequate protection for identities - but again; I haven't seen much of the bad stuff goin' on here, so maybe a higher level of security is required. The long and short of it is; for me, I am registered, so I have no objection to Mudcat making that some level of requirement for participation. And as far as prefixes for threads; I use them already (I presume) correctly, so again, I'm not bothered about enforcing them or even dividing the forum in multiple categories. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Allan C. Date: 04 Feb 00 - 10:33 AM For those who are worried about such things, I submit the following: The age of G.Orwell is here in y2K. Big brother is watching! I just came upon an FBI site where you can check to see if they have a mug shot of you on file. I did the inquiry and sure enough they had an old picture of me from an ID badge I had taken. Better check to see what Pics they have of you. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: JedMarum Date: 04 Feb 00 - 10:57 AM LOL - great stuff Allan!! y'all need ta click and see fer yerselves! |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Amos Date: 04 Feb 00 - 11:07 AM Damn -- they got my picture too -- but that's not my Mama!! A |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Bugsy Date: 04 Feb 00 - 11:20 AM So that's where Bert got my picture from. Onya Bert!!! Cheers Bugsy |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Little Neophyte Date: 04 Feb 00 - 11:26 AM Allan, that is a pretty good picture of me but I wish I had known the FBI was taking snap shots of me, I would have shaved. BB |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,Neil Lowe Date: 04 Feb 00 - 11:42 AM On the one hand, I can sympathize with those who are the objects of the seemingly misogynistic remarks. Words don't mean squat, however, unless one gives them weight. What someone says about me or to me only affects me if I let it. Screw them. I won't let them have that kind of power over me. I am of like mind on this with Joe Offer, Blackcat2, Jon Freeman, Wolfgang, and Sean Ruprecht-Belt. They seem to have made all (or at least most) of the salient points. And Gargoyle has a point: installing restrictive measures challenges the hackers to break through. Then you're in a game of one-upmanship that never ends, or your measures result in a forum so impenetrable that it destroys the very thing you're trying to maintain. Seems like there's better things to do with one's time. Registration, restrictions, limits, barriers, boundaries.....Christ! I come here to get away from all that crap. (Intercom on, voice tinged with contempt): Identify your last port of entry, space wanderer. (Intercom off)
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer, But it doesn't matter what one thinks about this. The final authority, of course, is Max. Neil Lowe
|
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: Amos Date: 04 Feb 00 - 11:55 AM Roll, roll on, you Mudcats roll on!... reckon there's a song there, too! A |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: sophocleese Date: 04 Feb 00 - 12:18 PM I like the picture but they goofed and got my daughter instead of me. As for registration I don't think its necessary. The flamings haven't been that many. Before we legislate any type of restriction we should attempt more rigorous self control and ignore all rude posters (side point - posting to say 'don't post' is NOT ignoring the flamers). If you feel the desperate necessity of posting make it a personal message to the victim instead of a public rant. After the initial provocation it takes two, sometimes in Mudcat two dozen, to make an argument. |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: annamill Date: 04 Feb 00 - 12:31 PM Sorry Jon. I was just being light hearted about the whole thing. You know, being funny. Maybe I should have added a smiley thing. My opinion was also stated and I do believe it was close to yours. Oh, and GG. I thought that was from Dylan's Subterranian(SP?) Homesick Blues. I could be wrong ;-) <-smiley thing. NOI Love, annap |
|
Subject: RE: Should registration be required or not? From: GUEST,Banjoman_CO Date: 04 Feb 00 - 12:36 PM We are adults here(well most of thetime) Mudcat is a wonderful place with many wonderful people. We shouold do what any mature adult would do--- Ignore any thread that is from a "Guest". Most everyone here is very open and willing to let people know who they are. This should be true for everyone. Let us know you or leave. Banjoman |
| Share Thread: |