BS: censorship

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: bbelle
Date: 15 Jul 00 - 02:59 AM

And, why don't you become a member? I noticed in another thread that you defended the premise of other than musical threads. You always have the choice to "take it or leave it" by simply not going into a thread or backing out immediately. You certainly are wreaking havoc in the wee hours of this morning. Perhaps a good night's sleep would alter your mood.

moonchild

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: GUEST,Banjo Johnny
Date: 15 Jul 00 - 01:45 AM

Too bad we have to wade through rubbish to find the good musical info and ideas which are here. Why can't you put a bullet or some other mark on the titles of the bum threads? There can still be free speech that way, and we can take it or leave it. Johnny in OKC

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: The Shambles
Date: 13 Jul 00 - 12:43 PM

We know what rubbish there is in the world. I would be very pleasant indeed if it could stay out of our faces, but it won't. There is not much point in pretending that it does not exist and it is useful and good practice to learn how to deal with it. For it will make us all stronger and wiser.

One person's rubbish is another person's treasure.

Joe is on the side of the angels and I recognise and appreciate his efforts on my behalf. I do not ask him to do it and I would rather that he did not. This is an open forum and as such it is open to abuse. That is the price you pay for freedom and it has been a heavy price for some. It is wise to think carefully before you are prepared to give it away.

There was an occasion in the past when I started a thread and Joe decided that he would prevent any more contributions to it. It was not an offensive thread but Joe considered that it was in the best interests of The Mudcat to censor this discussion………..He was wrong then and all of those who take on this responsibility will always be wrong. For the only person that has this responsibility is you.

'It's wise to question both your foe and your friend.'

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: InOBU
Date: 13 Jul 00 - 10:19 AM

I would like to cast a vote for Joe's excellent taste and self restraint. It is one thing to keep in some of the more foul alnguage that one would hear even in a family pub these days, and crossing the lines of good taste. I would feel my 11 year old nephew would be safe to learn about music and the culture of the folk tradition here, and that is because of Joe's occational hand on the switch.
Job well done
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 13 Jul 00 - 10:06 AM

One difference between a cafe and this site is that if someone is being boorish in a cafe, the other patrons do not have the choice of stopping hearing after the first few words. Here, you can stop reading. So in a real-life cafe, you DO need the folks around whose job it is to say Hey, that's enough of that. You DON'T need it here, in theory at least, because you can click away from anything you choose not to want to read. It used to be called voting with your feet - you just didn't GO somewhere if you knew you'd be offended. Here, you can vote with your index finger, or whatever you click with. No anatomical commentary necessary!

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: paddymac
Date: 13 Jul 00 - 01:20 AM

Hey Joe! Give me a break. My sides ache and I can hardly see through my tears of laughter at your "links-manship". Absolutely brilliant. Thanks for your good judgment, and sense of humor.

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: SingsIrish Songs
Date: 12 Jul 00 - 09:20 PM

Sometime the "deleting of a thread" is very called for...ie the porn links. The Personal message option to Joe or Max or the others who have editing authority is the best solution when such offensive items happen to appear. That way the thread isn't always resurfacing and drawing attention...

"Mudslinging" is a very different matter, and best ignored or dealt with by a personal message to one of the "site editors" as I will call you, to alert attention to the thread/posts. If the offensive person is a member, perhaps a warning could be sent by the Mudcat staff???....would there be a way to block names from posting (executed by the Mudcat staff) if they continue acting up???

I don't read all the threads that thoroughly and have missed most of the "hateful", etc stuff that has been causing a lot of turmoil...

Mudcat is for all people--not just adults--some minors might access the site for research on songs, etc. So, I think this is something all should keep in mind. Heck, even prime time television shows have adult jokes mixed in that go right over the childrens heads....but if something is way out of line (like the porn links), then that type of "censorship" is well within reason.

That's just my thoughts on things.....

Mary

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Kim C
Date: 12 Jul 00 - 05:03 PM

Mark Twain once said: "It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them."

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: AKS
Date: 12 Jul 00 - 04:35 AM

Hei, this is a café - or perhaps a club, right? And in such places (in the conventional world, that is) there's always someone to tell people, in case the going gets rough, 'ok that's enough of that, calm down or outtahere'! It's simply a matter of applying the 'rules' of decency and has nothing to do with cencorship. Why should an internet café be different?!

Arto K Sallinen, Joensuu, Finland

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 11 Jul 00 - 08:52 AM

Joe,

I think your taking the right line here. My old Headmaster used to say "If we give you greater freedom then the greater is your responsibility to use it wisely"

Because the internet and Mudcat are free forums we have to take responsibility for how we use them. Personally I'm here for the music and if I find threads that are personal arguments or displaying excessive prejudice I can excercise the responsibility to leave them. If others cannot take responsibility for being mature and tolerant then we have the freedom to ignore them.

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Jul 00 - 04:32 AM

Well, yesterday, I edited out a couple of porn links because so many people complained. Let me tell you that I do that sort or thing very grudgingly, but I gave in to pressure.
Today, another porn link got posted, and I got more requests for editing. I stuck to my guns this time, and left the link right where it was. If there's messed-up HTML or duplicate posts, we're glad to fix that. But if somebody wants an objectionable message deleted, be aware that we are very reluctant to edit out that sort of thing.
Besides, we'd rather spend our time on music, wouldn't you?
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Terry K
Date: 11 Jul 00 - 12:46 AM

I guess it's a question of whether we want to be a public forum or a private club. It's all very well reminding us that we carry the power to choose what we read and look at, but what we don't have is the power to exclude those whose behaviour is simply unacceptable by any standards.

If you think of it in, say, folk club terms - would you put up with someone whose behaviour was totally unacceptable or would you show him the door. And if the same person kept on reappearing time after time, to the detriment of the club and the majority of reasonable people in it - would you not wish to be able to deal with it?

I agree that some of the threads are unpleasant - there are some subjects which bring out the worst in people because of entrenched views and we are probably all guilty of that. There is one famous organisation that bans all political and religious discussion - sounds like a good idea (massive grin thing).

In the meantime, I hope Joe does continue to edit (call it censor if you like) - perhaps you could edit "bob jr"'s posts to put some capitals and punctuation in - they'd be much easier to read!!

Cheers, Terry

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: DonMeixner
Date: 11 Jul 00 - 12:08 AM

I am opposed to someone else determining what I will watch, read, hear, or touch. These choices are mine and guarranteed by the constitution.

I am opposed to anyone telling me what I may write, draw, sing or say, A right also given to me by the constitution.

What is not given to me or anyone else is the power to make someone read, view, listen to or otherwise consume my free expression.

If you don't like it, don't consume it, but don't deny anyone else the same choice.

Don

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: bbelle
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 10:51 PM

I don't believe in censorship ... it bespeaks of McCarthyism. My parents did/do not believe in censorship, so that was how I was raised. I do believe that censorship must come from within ... if you don't want to read, watch, look at something, then don't. And ... if you stumble into something accidently ... stumble right back out.

People who are well-read and know their authors know the content of what they are going to read. Occasionally, I've been surprised, but not often. No one forces anyone to read a certain book/novel.

Movies are rated. Porn movies are advertised for what they are. Trailers are usually a good indication of what movies are about. I have no desire to see certain types of movies, e.g., I had no desire to see "Eyes Wide Shut" so I didn't.

As to links in threads ... c'mon ... you out to know by now that, if it's a link supplied by one of the current notorious flamers, it's going to be prurient in nature. No one is forcing anyone to click on the link.

There are websites that censure what type of material may be discussed and if things stray, that person/persons are sanctioned from using the site. This means that if any of us started a thread about one mudcatter doing a kind deed towards another mudcatter, and it was not a purely music-related thread, this would cause the mudcatter who started the thread to be sanctioned. I wouldn't want to see that happen.

moonchild

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: bob jr
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 10:27 PM

well my question remains sort of which is always "when you start drawing lines where do you stop?" the internet is a place where anyones right to say anything is under constant attack but is that a good or bad thing? it is when i read certain diatribes against any number of "problems" with threads that i get concerned but then again i havent been here that long so.......

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Irish sergeant
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 05:47 PM

Joe; I didn't see the thread in question but I've noticed since I've been a guest and a member of Mudcat that when you do have to censor something it's done in a leavel headed and fair manner and is usually the last extremity. It would be great if everybody censored themselves but that isn't going to happen with some folks. To our non-English speaking friends and those who speak English as a second (Or third)language Please ignor the rude, ignorant dipsticks who feel that bashing others is a "Mature" thing to to. Be assured they are in the smallest of minorities here at Mudcat. Best to all, Neil

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Sean Belt
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 05:27 PM

Well put, Joe. I'm in complete agreement with you, McGrath and Mrr about the necessity of self-control and some measure of a guiding hand. As far as the removal of hateful, hurtful posts; I don't envy you your position of deciding what to remove and what to leave. Someone is always bound to be unhappy about it.

As far as the swipes at those for whom English is a bit of a struggle, I've noticed it, too. It disturbs me. I always tend to think better of the folks that frequent this place. I'd hate for us all to get too politically correct or to think that someone coming in for the first time can't take a good natured joke, but we really should try to be good examples of humanity. Whatever that means...

Bread & roses,

- Sean

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 04:59 PM

I usually don't contribut to threads like that because I think they can easily become preachy and boring, but there's another thing I'd like people to think about.

We have a few people who participate in this Forum who do not speak English as their primary language. There are times when I notice that these people are subjected to a certain lack of hospitality and even attacks from English-speaking people, and I find that really distressing. I suppose that if we want to have a free and open forum, we have to put up with a certain amount of bigotry, but it's something that really bothers me.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 04:49 PM

I hope people will take a look at what McGrath has to say above. Is this cafe a friendly, comfortable place for all - or is there too much ugly talk? We're all responsible for making Mudcat what it is. Every message we post becomes a part of the whole, so maybe we should stop to think before we post.
It's my opinion that the tone of the Forum is a little out of kilter just now. If I were to stop in for the first time at this very moment, would there be enough in the Forum to make me want to stay? I'd see a number of long, nasty threads, and then some other preachy ones that try to tell people to behave. Then there are some generally pleasant chit-chat threads that don't seem to have much weight. Buried among those other threads, I'd find a few, shorter discussions that have some really valuable information. If all we had were the serious discussions, the tone would soon get to be far too heavy. We need a balance, and it's up to each one of us to contribute to that balance. Censorship doesn't work. What we need to do is to stop and think, just for a moment, before we hit the "submit" button. Does my message help make Mudcat what I want it to be? We all have different visions of what we think Mudcat should be. If we all would keep our highest vision of Mudcat in mind when we post, the result of our mixed vision might be something truly remarkable.
Actually, though, what we have is pretty darn good - but it could always be a little bit better.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 04:42 PM

BlueJay, of COURSE it's censorship, but that doesn't mean it ISN'T (ALSO) "protecting the integrity of the site" - what people seem to forget (ignore? prefer would go away?) is that SOME censorship, even by ourselves of what we post or choose to read, is fine, good, and may even be preferred. If I think better of telling some poor soul that they need to get a life, that is still censorship, it's just nice, and good, and nothing wrong with it.

I got into trouble with this before, when a posting said something like I'm not being hypocritical, I'm just not saying what I mean. Well, that IS hypocrisy, AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT in that context, it's just aka politeness. I wish people wouldn't be afraid to use the words they mean when they are the "mot juste" - and what Joe did, which I don't think anybody minded, WAS censor the site to get rid of something offensive. Yes, it would be better if people didn't post offensive stuff in the first place. Of course I would prefer to see threads like that die from lack of posting (you can always start another thread about Don't You Hate Posts About (whatever), can't you?), and I do think that Joe's removing it was censoring. I just don't have a problem with what he has chosen to censor so far.

In other words, while I do WISH that no censoring would take place, I do TRUST Joe's hand on the Delete button.

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: BlueJay
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 03:24 PM

Joe- I for one am glad you stepped in. As one who saw the full effect of the thread, I ignored it. Someone, (sorry I don't remember who), urged you to "get rid of this shit immediately". I am very glad you did. You understated it- this was not merely a link to a porn site, but rather a link to two highly explicit photos.
Not what I expected. I thought it was related to the "men's mudcat" thread. If I wanted to go porn-shopping, I would. But certainly not on the Mudcat. Likewise, I don't expect to see any Black and Decker ads here, unless they can relate it to the music.

It is not "censorship", it is protecting the integrity of the site. I think you do a pretty good job. I'm sure many others share my sentiments, at least judging from the folks who tried to multiple post it off the page.
My apologies to all. Even this posting has given unwarranted attention to the "Guest" who started this whole thing. But Joe did right. BlueJay

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 01:04 PM

I'm not too sure about those Christian Deer hunters though...Isn't there a song somewhere called "Killing for Jesus". Bambi's mother ran into a missionary...

Sorry, thread creep. Yet again I say it, there's all the difference in the world between censorship and self-restraint. But if I'm in a strange cafe or pub and the starts sounding ugly, I won't stay long. (And that tends to be ugly talk about blacks or women, but the way the language is used comes into it to. It's noyt so much particular words, it's how they are strung tgether.)

So if we don't want to drive away people whose company we'd enjoy, we need top go easy sometimes.

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: SINSULL
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 12:36 PM

I ignored that one but also went on refresh frenzy the other day when 10+ copies of the same thread appeared with a questionable link. Waste of energy.

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Amergin
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 12:14 PM

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Jed at Work
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 10:34 AM

Joe - what thread did are you talking about? (from which you deleted messages)?

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 08:44 AM

I am glad you did that, Joe. I had gone on a refresh frenzy trying to get that one to drop off the list. Last I'd seen there were only the two posts. Glad i missed the rest. Thanks...kat

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: alison
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 02:36 AM

Oh Gee thanks Joe,

thanks to my favourite site I now have a screen covered in dancing Pikachu's and 2 kids who don't want me to delete him......

some friend you are... *grin*

slainte

alison

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Amergin
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 02:28 AM

That seems to be the best way...

Subject: RE: BS: censorship
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 02:22 AM

Well, Bob - we try our best to keep this an open forum, where everybody is free to speak out, and to have a good time. We censor as little as possible. However, when people post personal attacks on other individuals, that tends to scare away the recipient of the attack, so we may delete some of that. If we let some bully beat up on somebody else, is that freedom?
Yesterday, somebody started a thread with a message with a couple of links to porn sites. Usually, I just ignore messages like that and figure they'll drop off the Forum Menu. Other times, I'll get sneaky and change the porn links to this or this, or maybe alison's favorite site. For some reason, yesterday's nasty thread generated half a dozen or more indignant replies from our regulars, and each message brought the thread back up to the top. It was all a bunch of garbage and everybody was getting mad, so I deleted all the messages in the thread. I don't like doing that - I'd rather just have people freeze out flamers by ignoring them.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: censorship
From: bob jr
Date: 10 Jul 00 - 01:24 AM

i am sure this has all been said before but i want to know where you folks stand on this cause it keeps coming up in alot of threads i read "you shouldnt say this" "this shouldnt be allowed" etc etc i heard someone say in one thread that this place is like a cafe so everyone should be on there best behavoir or some such sheesh you folks dont go to same cafes i do there is all kinds of talk going on ........i just dont listen in if it sounds nasty.....so are you folks for it or against it???