 sj |
||
|
||
Newbies vs Old-timers
|
|
|
Subject: Newbies vs Old-timers From: The Shambles Date: 16 Mar 00 - 06:57 AM Despite the combative nature of the title of this thread its intention is not to further divide Mudcatter's. For I don't generally like to use the terms 'old-timers' or 'newbies' or even think in that way. I do use 'old curmudgeons' but that is an affectionate term, I would welcome young curmudgeons too. .
This thread is, to air an issue that I feel is bubbling away, in order that it may be addressed. There is some 'thread creep' toward this subject in this excellent thread Help Oral Tradition. For it is an issue that I have been caught in the crossfire of, recently. In a current thread, I posted a link to an earlier one, on a similar subject and was asked if, by doing that, I was saying "been there, done that"? It can be seen in that way but I honestly did not think that I was saying that. Given some of the comments that I have seen about the arrival of another 'What is folk' thread and criticism of posts concerning the "never heard a horse sing it" quote, from folk who should know better. I can now see how my actions could easily be viewed as that. Whatever my motives, I console myself with the fact that putting the link there and giving people the choice to read it, was at least a positive action.
Mudcatter's cannot pretend that they have not seen or discussed a subject before but if they have nothing helpful to do or nothing positive to say, then it is probably better that they should say nothing. It would be at least a jolly good idea to read the new thread. Some people, to their great credit, have managed to add something positive and fresh to just about every 'What is folk' tread that I have ever seen here, and they are the ones, setting the very best example.
Cynical comments about, new posters, in effect, just being and acting new, is not the best example to set and will be counter-productive.
New posters have no real way of knowing (without trawling through all the past postings), that the point they are making is not original and not the first time it has been expressed here.
In reality there are no 'groupings' here. Some may be lucky and live together or at least close by, but when we post and read, we are all just ('sad'), individuals looking in to a PC monitor. It is not quite as bleak as that but I think it is easy to forget sometimes and it is not an entirely bad thing. As George Orwell said "All animals are equal" but I for one, can tolerate honest (if unoriginal) views on the singing abilities of horses, a little better than ones on the comic possibilities of 'tired' possums. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Hyperabid Date: 16 Mar 00 - 08:23 AM I am I would guess reasonably new to this forum having used it briefly for the first time a few months ago before being hooked and reeled in. I guess I object to neither young curthingy or newbie... and I would have to say that everybody has been very courteous, helpful and complimentary about my ditherings on various threads. (Although I would say that the Gun debate threads are only a place to go if you can smile when others passions are aroused). I am wholly impressed by the strength of this site and wish I had found it a long time ago. It is a fine reference and an opportunity to float ideas musical and otherwise in a supportive environment before trying them out in public. (You know - the kind of public where people throw things if they don't like what you're singing / saying). What more could you ask for? All musical sites should have a link to the mudcat! Cheers. Hyp
|
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Little Neophyte Date: 16 Mar 00 - 08:32 AM Shambles, this is an important topic. I guess with so many types of Mudcat personalities you are going to get all kinds of responses to topics that have been discussed time and time again. Some people will be tired of reading continually repeated topics and they will clearly let you know this. Not much you can do about that. Some new light will always shine on any old subject. There are those who will sift through the postings to find refreshing thoughts and new insight. The postings I aspire to the most are from the genuine teachers. Some Mudcatters have a natural gift to teach. They have the patience to explain the same answers over and over again. We should cherish these Mudcatters, for their gift of giving. These teachers are a great inspiration and to them I would like to say thank you for I am truly grateful. Little Neo |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: GUEST,Neil Lowe Date: 16 Mar 00 - 08:58 AM All salient points, Shambles, and in principle I am generally intolerant of intolerance (do you hear a "but" trailing along, waiting to make its premiere?).... But when one starts the process of creating a new thread, one has the option (advertised in big bold letters, no less) of searching the Forum or the Digital Tradition first before posting a new thread. How often do you suppose this option is utilized before someone creates his/her thread? I ashamedly admit to being so lazy as to not use this option myself. I started a thread just a few days ago inquiring about blues guitarist Rory Gallagher. Before posting the first message the thought crossed my mind, maybe someone has posted about this before. Then the old rationalization machine went into action: Nah, I check the 'Cat almost every day. I would've remembered seeing something on Rory Gallagher. And my short, stubby little fingers went to work. Just out of curiosity I went back and did a search after starting the thread - lo and behold someone had made mention of Rory. Not exactly the same stuff as the topic of my thread, so I didn't have to chastise myself too badly. But I think I'll search the Forum or DigiTrad next time before starting a new thread. And if the person in question had done the same thing before starting his/her thread on (for example) "What is Folk," that person would've been well equipped to then start a thread along the lines of: "I have read the posts regarding the 'What is Folk' debate and I have a perspective that may have been overlooked," or something to that effect, which would've made far more interesting reading to the "old-timers" who are passionate about that subject. Otherwise, I think a link, such as you provided, is a helpful thing to do for the originator of the thread, and in no way demonstrates annoyance with the topic. My two farthings...interesting thread Shambles. Regards, Neil
|
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Mar 00 - 09:23 AM I think I am the latest newbie to lose her newbie status and so I especially want to address this while it's fresh. But time is short at the moment. So I'll just make a start and say more later. There is nothing like being new, to anything, to give one a fresh sense of what is possible. Some people are better at welcoming new people to a going concern, than others. Some people are more graceful at arriving and being welcomed than others. The BEST welcoming I've had here has been welcoming that helped me be in charge of my own being-here, by giving information and encouragement, and by hanging in when I felt unsure about how I fit in. The WORST welcoming has been the rush to respond to me as though I am one-dimensional, with whatever long-saved stereotypes, positive or negative, people have about what kinda critter I am. YES I invited that, and have made lots of important connections with people in the process, but everyone here seems one-dimensional just at first. That's true of newcomers and veteran members-- you see what I first present, and I see what I first see of you. I would suspect that here in the virtual environment, where all we have to see is often words, the usual effect of first impressions is enhanced by the medium. But it is also true that if you stick around, and have any flexibility in your nake-up at all, this place also lends itself fabulously well to the debunking of the stereotypes. (See my recent de-newbification at the tavern, somewhat consciously sought but assisted beyond my wildest hopes). Incorporating new people just is complicated. It's that way in any setting-- ask me about new-member incorporation at church!!! Here, a hand is a powerful tool. Friendly hands or unfriendly-- people come here more wide open than I see them in the 3-D world. Friendliness and unfriendliness are both more compelling here than out "there." Well it was going to be short, but it may get longer yet. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Mar 00 - 09:31 AM Make [flexibility in your nake-up] flexibility in your MAKE-UP, sorry! |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Mar 00 - 09:48 AM Guilty as charged Shambles. I think Neil has, eloquently as always, made the point I would have wished to make. Sure, I get worn with the folk discussions, but as new people come along, they DO often add different perspectives. But we also have some people come along who simply throw up the same old tired cliches. OK, I can understand that to a degree. What truly set me off was a post saying that the writer wasn't going to bother reading anything else and then stating an opinion which had been put forth dozens upon dozens of times before as though it were an original thought!!! I know I may be the biggest smart-assed jerk in the place, but on those times when I welcome new folks, generally one line I always include concerns researching old threads. I read this forum and many old threads for almost three months before I made my first post. I'm not suggesting that as some sort of requirement, but to totally negate everything that has been said here........?????? I like Neil's line above re: "I have a perspective which may have been overlooked" after reading what has been said before. Indeed, different perspectives and ideas come up EVERY time and there are new ones in the two threads running now regarding "folk." We will probably always have repeated topics here....its only natural. I would ask only that those posting might spend a bit of time backchecking first. Neil, once again, you have made a wonderful point in a fine manner. Thank you for your clarity, the Prozac must be working! (:<)) Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Mar 00 - 09:58 AM But Spaw, you are also one of the quickest and nicest welcomers here-- when you groan it just doesn't have as much sting as when it comes from someone who usually lurks then posts pissy objections to same-old same-olds. I would also point out that in that first flush of newness, you really don't even know what the place is or how it's so elegantly fashioned to let you use it gracefully--- what has helped me the most with that has actually BEEN the same-old same-old threads, where veterans post clickies to the old stuff or say how to go look up topics. It's a BIG candy store-- you can fall into a sugar swoon at the first counter and never make it back to the *rear* section! ~~Soft smiles~~ |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Mary in Kentucky Date: 16 Mar 00 - 10:10 AM Here is a post I put up months ago (with the new italics I learned here) ...in the meantime...I find it very helpful when some of the "Old Timers" remember a previous thread and put a link to it in the current thread. Somehow it seems that all our computerization just can't match a person's memory...and of course a Mudcatter's generous willingness to share. I stumbled onto this thread from a link in another thread. Just last night I had some info to share in the classical music/folk thread, and because the info I wanted to highlight wasn't in the title of the original thread, only my memory and a little searching could dig it out. When we get the SuperSearch back we can search the bodies of messages. But as I stated, there really is no substitute for a Mudcatter's memory and willingness to share. I also feel I can contribute by doing some of this info-finding and thus giving the "pros" more time for their wonderful insights and comments. Mary |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: MMario Date: 16 Mar 00 - 10:17 AM I think the marvel of the MudCat is that there IS such a diveristy of people, and of talents, and of resources. Some have access to hardcopy research materials, others have the time and resources to do web research, others have the wealth of decades of experience to draw on. The Mudcat includes the enthusiasm of the young and the new, the dedication of the tried and true, boundless enthusiasm and tempered cyniscism. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Art Thieme Date: 16 Mar 00 - 10:46 AM "Tried and true..."---yes. But "tired and true"---yes also ! ;-) Art |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Molly Malone Date: 16 Mar 00 - 10:50 AM I would be nice if we knew, on average, how many new "Catters" we get every week. I still consider myself a "newbie" to this site, though I'm no newbie to music or internet forums, and I'll admit to posting the same-ol' ame-ol'. I do this for two reasons: 1) It gives the newer folks an opportunity to speak their piece, and 2) It gives the not-so-newbies an opportunity to place their blue-clicky's worth so that information doesn't remain buried. That's why I'm here. I never, ever want this information to die. I want my great-great grand children to have access to the knowledge I have and more importantly, all of you have. There are some incredible minds here...and unfortunately I'm not bloody likely to go to Australia or Ireland to meet you any time soon. You may have said it a thousand times over, but I want to know that my generations to come will know what folk music is. (...she says as she steps off of her soap box, humming the words to Pass It On.) Hy ly dy di da dy dy, da da dum Hy ly dy di da dy day dum. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Lady McMoo Date: 16 Mar 00 - 11:05 AM ....whoops! Sorry...thought this was a football thread! mcmoo |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: GUEST,Neil Lowe Date: 16 Mar 00 - 11:13 AM Wellbutrin, 'Spaw, Wellbutrin...that and laying off the sauce. No particular reason, just thought I'd try sobriety for a while. It feels so weird I'm starting to get off on it. Gracias for the compliments, Spawmeister. A good one to you. Neil |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Mbo Date: 16 Mar 00 - 11:57 AM Thanks for the support, but even as one approaching 1-year membership status, I'm still pretty much not as improtant a component of this place as say, Rick Fielding or McGrath of Harlow. I am encouraged to add input on various teaching threads about chords, playing style, tips on performance, but my words are pretty much ignored or attacked. I'm sorry I don't have the long years of experience and eloquent words to state my musical advice and theories. Sorry I can't be of more help to what this forum is obviously REALLY about. So if you don't mind, I'll be on my way to the Mudcat Tavern now, and after that the other BS threads that everyone hates and I thrive in so well. --Mbo |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Mar 00 - 12:17 PM People may enjoy ragging you Meebo....I do.....but you have always had a place here. This place has lots of nooks and crannies and they are filled with people who have "knowledge of the nook" so to speak (as opposed to knowledge of the nookie which ain't your forte). See, I love to rag your ass!!! Seriously......the talent, caring, and knowledge that are here on so many subjects, music and otherwise, is simply amazing. I'm consistently left in awe of the depth and breadth of the accumulated knowledge and the often overwhelming empathy and compassion of the 'Cat. Of course the complete jerkwad jagovs have a place too...mainly being jerkwad jagovs. Spaw Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Amos Date: 16 Mar 00 - 12:32 PM Mebbe we could get a single web page full of orientation and starter links. If ye can't love 'em, FAQ 'em to death ... |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Hyperabid Date: 16 Mar 00 - 12:39 PM No please love us A... Although an orientation on sign up would be good. Hyp |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Elektra Date: 16 Mar 00 - 12:54 PM What I have been wondering is, (as though Max & co don't have enough to do) how come we don't have a FAQ link from the main page? While (as some of you may have noticed -- or not, thanks to Joe)*grin* HTML markups are not exactly my forte. However, I would be happy to attempt creating at least the text portion... and take a stab at the rest, if Joe or Max will hold my hand.
Answer to questions could include both basic info AND links to old threads, where relevant.
At the top of my list would be "how do I embed a blue clicky thing in my messages?" ;-) It could include (or link to) basic DT search rules, i.e. use of [phrase matching] as well as thread naming conventions, etc... kind of a "crash course in Mudcat/DT", perhaps broken down by technical (how do I?)vs. social questions ("local" netiquette).
By allowing newbies to be initally directed to the FAQ, this will hopefully cut down on
Not that we aren't generally an encouraging crew. =) Then, once have read the FAQ if they still have questions they will know how to (hopefully) title the thread appropriately and otherwise feel more free to join in discussions.
*Whew!* Sorry, didn't mean to write an essay. Whatcha think? *elektra*
|
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Bill D Date: 16 Mar 00 - 12:54 PM ah, Amos...I lobbied for a FAQ on posting, searching, the database, the menus...etc. 2 or 3 years ago, till I was blue in the face! I STILL think it is needed. One clicky thing labeled "Go here to see explanations of this place and how things are done" (or a more compact version)...I offered to help Joe and others write it. But, although there are little menus with some help, nothing comprehensive has ever been done. Of course, when someone ASKS, they usually get some answers, but these are often random and not always timely. A link to a page that is accessable ANYTIME would save a LOT of typing and posting of old threads//(though some of those old threads ARE excellent guides...they just need to be all in one place) |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: GUEST,Neil Lowe Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:05 PM I don't see it so much as a contest for status among the well-entrenched, talented, knowledgeable members ... hell, I ain't even a member. I'm entitled to my opinions, and I consider them to be just as valid or invalid as anyone else's on topics of a general nature. And if something I submit or contribute is ignored or attacked, so what? If it is ignored, maybe I will conclude it is his/her loss. If it is attacked, maybe the antagonist will enlighten me. I would obviously defer to Bruce O., for example, on the origins of a particular song, as it is evident from his postings that he devotes time to researching such things, whereas I have not a clue...and to others (come to think of it, just about everybody) like Rick Fielding or Art Thieme on the nature of professional recording, or the notes to a particularly difficult passage, or how to teach guitar...these guys live this stuff - I just give it a nod now and then. Who'm I to argue or disagree with them on these specific topics? That would be rather pompous. Nonetheless, I can have a dissenting (but silent) opinion on these subjects, nor am I bound to take every piece of advice given to me. Selfishly, I get more than my money's worth every time I log on here. If I sit on my hands and keep my eyes open, I just might learn something. And most of the time, if I start a thread, it's to pick 'Catters' brains about something. This Forum is a great resource for my edification. I don't know enough to contribute to the knowledge base, and maybe I should feel guilty for being a "bandwidth waster." But hopefully with enough immersions into the vast pool of diverse sources available here....well, who knows. Regards, Neil
|
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: MMario Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:08 PM It isn't the writing of such a thing that is the problem, but the maintainence. And I think that may be why you haven't seen one. But should someone be willing to spend the time and effort to write AND MAINTAIN a faq/guide/introduction I bet you would find that it would quickly be supported by a power that be... |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Amos Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:12 PM A consensus for Joe, Max and Bert to chew on -- a Central Map with guideposts for the New -- well, great idea. I would think we would want to limit the top level to ten (an arbitrary number) main concepts. Here are some possibilities: 1. Welcome to the Mudcat, by Max 2. Looking for Songs (which goes to a page on using the DT, checking the MIDI resource, etc. 3. Talking Music (how threads work, how to post, what kinds of music get discussed, a list of major past threads maybe (about music)...all on one separate page. 4. Talking Anything (Discussion of BS threads, the range and scope and depth of depravity to be found therein, what the mudcat Tavern is, link over to past major threads, list of characters (Cletus, Cleigh and other figmentii) 5. The History of the Cat (includes what a mudcat is, why the banjo, max's Dream, and other funny historical points including a discussion of the sad diaspora that happened after the Evil Garg began his ministrations of toxins in Eden back in whenever (99?) and how to research mudcat history. 6. More about Mudcatters (bbc's Mudcat Resources) 7. Blue Clicky What? (basics of br, href, and so forth and links to further HTML guidance.) Well, whaddya think? Maybe someone could start drumming up some free web space and designing some pages with graphics for this area. I think Áine's probably got her hands full with kids and fesity, whiny songmeisters. Whose game? A |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:13 PM Oh good......"ANOTHER gawddamn thread on the need for an FAQ," the curmudgeonly and rude Spaw grumbled. LMAOWROTF!!!!!!!!! But we do need something and there have been several good attempts but they are mainly in bits and pieces at this point. Jeri, Alice, and of course Dick and others have done sections, but a coherent collection of these would be great with a basic explanation of what's what. When the Super Search is back up, doing one would be a lot easier....maybe I'll even take a shot at it. BUT until then, let's talk about it!!!LOL.......Say, what about another discussion on Mudcat hats?!?!?!? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Elektra Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:19 PM MMario -
Obviously, thus far the setting up HAS been a problem. I mean, an infrequently updated FAQ is better than none at all -- and I ain't seen a-one yet.
Once it is set up I believe the maintenance really won't be much of an issue. Oh, there'll be some initial tweaking for sure, but I would be willing to do something pretty comprehensive. After that the revisions shouldn't be more than occasional.
I suppose I could volunteer for the maintenance as well, but I'm afraid my attendance record is pretty flaky here. Then again, an infreqently updated... *big grin* *elektra* |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: MMario Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:37 PM difference of opinion here, but *IMO* an infrequently updated and/or poorly maintained FAQ is WORSE (MUCH worse) then none at all.... I feel the only thing MORE frustrating then having to search and hunt for your answers is to have the answers posted and the links etc be WRONG. and we all KNOW how quickly stuff can change around here.... |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Amos Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:38 PM Geeziz, rude and curmudgeonly Spaw, whyn'cha go blow a possum? Here we're trying to do sumpn PRO-active an' all you got is snide remarks... I'm gonna sic Praise on you to re-MEE-diate yore internal dissonances... git your kneepads out, mate! |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: paddymac Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:41 PM One of the marvelous attributes of the M'cat family is the way in which subtle humor is often used to great positive effect. A case in point is Mcmoo's post above. I was intently reading my way through the mostly profound commentary, and when I reached his post I just sat and chuckled for a minute. It had the effect of completely "refreshing" my mind, saying to me "let's not take ourselves quite so seriously." Anyone wo has ever been in the role of "teacher" knows the joy of teaching students to think, instead of simply propounding dogma and cliches. Some "students" take longer than others to cross that bridge, but it's the mental nurturing by the "teacher" that helps it happen. That, dear friends, is what I see as the central value of Mudcat - the "teacher-student" relationship thriving in a way that might be next to impossible in the formality of a classroon setting, because interactions here are more in the nature of "among peers". |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: paddymac Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:48 PM Just read Escamillo's post on the current Amazing Grace" thread and thought it appropriate to add his phrasing to this thread. He expressed much the same thoughts I shared above, but ever so much more simply when he spoke of the "ENRICHMENT of my musical tastes and knowledge" at the 'cat. Well said, Andres. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Molly Malone Date: 16 Mar 00 - 01:57 PM How about anyone without a cookie goes to the Intro/FAQ page whenever they load the page. Cookie holders go straight to forum home. ...(she says with a giggle and hides behind a table before the evil 'Spaw monster comes to attack.)
|
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: MMario Date: 16 Mar 00 - 02:05 PM hmmmmm, if that CAN be done, it sounds like a good idea. AND it would encourage peoples to sign up. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Molly Malone Date: 16 Mar 00 - 02:09 PM Really??? I was kidding. I hate it when that happens. *G*
|
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: M. Ted (inactive) Date: 16 Mar 00 - 02:09 PM I think the best things about Mudcat are: 1) Plenty of people who have been around music for a while and don't hesitate to share what they know 2) People usually don't make an issue much about whether someone is new to the group or not when they are responding to them
|
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: GutBucketeer Date: 16 Mar 00 - 02:11 PM one easy fix on the topic of duplicate postings would to have an automatic search be performed on the words in the title before once they are entered. The poster could then go ahead with the post or not as they saw fit. I don't know if this is even possible. It's just a thought. With regards to newbies and oldsters. If the metaphors of some of the other threads hold and we are like an extended village or family then the oldsers are sort of like the elders. They can/should gently direct newbies as they learn to toddle/walk/run in the Mudcat. They, by their example, should teach the etiquette of the Mudcat. What behavior is accepted, or not accepted. Then in turn, the newbies become oldsters and teach the "tradition" (maybe even culture is a better word) to the next generation. As with the real world every generation has to learn the same things, and asks the same questions, over and over again. And as in the real world the answers slowly change/evolve over time. My 2 cents JAB |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Elektra Date: 16 Mar 00 - 02:41 PM MMario -- While I DO, in many cases agree with you, Re: infrequent updates, my point was that since all the links would be internal, i.e. to other pages in the FAQ, or to threadid's, broken links shouldn't be a problem as a rule.
The only time that is might be an issue was if at some point Max changed the URL for threads and/or made some MAJOR changes to the site, thus rendering significant portions of the FAQ obsolete. At that point, if no one was willing to update the FAQ it could always be removed again. Not that I feel this is by any means the best solution... but anyway, I would probably be willing to do it then, too. *elektra*
|
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: katlaughing Date: 16 Mar 00 - 02:57 PM Joining Spaw in kicking up some litter...last I heard on the radio, Bert was supposed to be doing a FAQ page and Jeri did some fantastic diagrams with blue clickies to all kinds of info, in some thread, somewhere.**BG** |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Froodo Date: 16 Mar 00 - 02:57 PM Thank you to all of you who know how to put those blue clicky things there, you put us newbies in touch with additional info. above and beyond the thread at hand. We should always contine to interact with the threads no matter how many times we've seen them before. Each new time we have the opportunity to learn from fresh ideas and reinforce and refine our own. In short, I wouldn't want it any other way. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: MMario Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:03 PM elecktra - basically playing devil's advocate....*grin* it's a gray gray day out and it's seeping inwards, if you know what I mean. As kat said, I think Bert's suppossed to be working on a fag...why don't you PM him with whatever you can work up? I bet he wouldn't say no! |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: GUEST,Les B Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:08 PM If not a FAQ, then perhaps some kind of lumping of similar topics under chapter headings by content analysis -- like "What is Folk," "BS threads." "Possum abusers," etc. that could be accessed and assessed quickly before launching a "new" old hat subject. It seems to me Amos is on the right track. While I am amazed, amused, and sometimes concerned by the depth (and once in a while the shallowness) of Mudcat threads, I enjoy reading through them and would hate to see any kind of censorship of thought. But, after having lurked around Mudcat for over two years I have started to get that deja vu feeling all over again that I used to experience in photographic magazines; about every 18 months they recycle "gee whiz" stories on What is Depth of Field, Medium Format VS Large Format, etc. ad nauseum. With a little bit of computer cleverness perhaps that feeling can be avoided. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:16 PM Geeziz Mario....I had no idea!!!! Bert is working on a fag? Does Tree know of this? I suppose you were the one who outted Gargoyle too........figures. You need some lessons in non-social interaction from Clinton H. don't you think??? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: MMario Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:19 PM oops! No one was suppossed to know he smokes! |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:24 PM Oh he's smokin' alright Mario..........Let's not play the cigarette meaning simply because Bertie's a Brit. ANd what of that name....Bertie.....I should have guessed. Has Max any info that's useful on this? Is there a reason Max always seems relaxed and is smoking a cigarette at the beginning of the radio show? And what of that strip thing.......... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Molly Malone Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:36 PM I'd like to see the FAQ start out with the Adventures of Cleigh. Or would that be misadventures. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: MMario Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:39 PM aw geez...she's tying to drag the thread back on topic. What a spoilsport.... What about it 'spaw? Cleigh ready to write his memoirs? |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Molly Malone Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:52 PM Am too! Could the cookie thing actually work...and not cause a hugh headache to program? Sorrry, but that's a little outta my league there. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: catspaw49 Date: 16 Mar 00 - 03:55 PM Cleigh sends his love Molly, but the adventures are few and far between. And how many people want to hear about having someone blow up your ass? I think its something you need to experience to appreciate. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: Molly Malone Date: 16 Mar 00 - 04:04 PM My, now that sounds like the voice of experience. *G* Maybe it should read the misadventures of Spaw and trusty sidekick, Cleigh??? |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: wysiwyg Date: 16 Mar 00 - 04:04 PM Smathers, be so good as to take a memo.
... Let's see, what's the date here... humph humph .... you put that part in |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: MMario Date: 16 Mar 00 - 04:20 PM I don't know molly, but if the cookie can be detected and put your name in and not give you the option to ...then I would think it could also trigger an "if then" decision as to which page to go to....but I don't know. |
|
Subject: RE: Newbies vs Old-timers From: M. Ted (inactive) Date: 16 Mar 00 - 04:32 PM I am not sure if we need a list of Frequently Asked Questions-what is the point? Since they are "frequently asked, someone bound to ask it- What I want is a list of "Rarely Asked Questions"--Such as: "Where can I get a folksinger haircut?" "How do you make a fiddle case out of old socks?" "What are your favorite zither songs?" "Are the any folk songs about wheelbarrows?" "Where can I find noseflute recordings of "Scotland the Brave"? "Are there any traditional ballads that haven't been written yet?" "Will it hurt my guitar if I fill it with popcorn?" "What songs are easiest to play when you're real drunk?" "Will it help my playing if I put one foot in a bowl?"
|
| Share Thread: |