BS: From Bruce O.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Art Thieme
Date: 05 May 01 - 11:36 AM

A personal note to Barry and Sandy at the risk of nauseating those opposed to personal messages to the extent that they might be a bit discommoded and even upset:

I agree with you both !

Art

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jim the Bart
Date: 05 May 01 - 11:07 AM

Thanks for your favoring us with your expertise; there are truly few here who can match your contributions on a purely intellectual level. I have often wondered if the folk tradition was lacking in that area. Be well, and don't let the cyber-door bang you on the cyber-ass on the way out.

Bart

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 05 May 01 - 10:39 AM

Hi Bruce, so that you know before you go I have been here since your first post & ever since have always been awed & impressed & warmed by your dedication & love of sharing your wealth of the music we here all love. Over the years since losing valued members like Elsie (aug 97') to our present loss of you there have been a few others that have disappeared from this site & each time it feels like the cut of a knife. Losing you has the feel of being torn & quartered. I hope someday you'll feel the wish to make your way back, thanks for all you have given & shown me. Barry

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Big Mick
Date: 05 May 01 - 10:22 AM

I think Bruce O made the right decision. Glad to see him go. I found his knowledge and his website invaluable, but his constant bitching and trying to change this site into something that it is not were tiresome. He spawned more BS by his constant carping, than he curbed. And I will say the same thing to him that I have said before. If you were sincere that you had to leave because you don't like the place, you would have just left. Quietly. But your starting a thread to leave is just another attempt to manipulate. When I balance the good with the bad, .............. it just comes out better for all that you have left. I hope you come back sometime when you work out your need to control the rest of us, because you are an amazing scholar.

With regard to your posting of personal messages, I am with my friend Ivan on this one. It is dishonorable, and you are to be castigated for it. I believe the parties to this whole line of shite need to spend some time on my hill with a Low D whistle examining their motives.

PETER T.......I am never, ever, .....I repeat........ever going to read your posts with liquid in my mouth. (referring to the scatalogical inversion post)

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:07 AM

to clarify - taken as a dig meaning I was saying saying "#1" was really me when I meant the post above it was my own.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:05 AM

kat, assuming you mean the comma after "GUEST", it is tagged on after all GUEST postings - if you don't believe me, look at Bruce O's post at the top or try a forum search for #1...

I'm not quite sure why my "#1" post lead you to believe I was picking bones with you. I was a) trying to illustrate that Fionn was right and b) giving a real count to go with comments made by Mark Cohen and yourself just for interest and my subsequent post was intended to confirm that the #1 one was really me which OK, under the circumstances, I can see could be taken as me having a dig - not intended though - just your interpretation.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Justa Picker
Date: 05 May 01 - 01:03 AM

It's like the Mob wars, Marty. Happens every 5 years or so. Time to hit the matresses, clean out the bad blood. We hit them. They hit us back, and then....it's business as usual.

:-) It is a well documented and scientifically proven fact that Mudcat compresses time, for those visiting, so I figure any time now we should all be sleeping in our own beds.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: catspaw49
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:52 AM

Hey marty......Glad you're doing well, pickin' wise. Don't run off and don't let this bother you.....It happens every few months on one subject or another and we all stand around beating ourselves up for a week or so. The end comes eventually and you'll find a period of pretty smooth sailing and good feelings for awhile before the next time. We were a bit overdue for this one so it may take a few extra days to pass.......Plenty of other good threads running right now so enjoy.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:43 AM

That's great, Jon, why not demonstrate the stupidity a little more? BTW, the comma gave you away. If you want to pick a bone with me, from now on, why don't you do it by PM?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: marty D
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:32 AM

I sure wish people here would stop messing with a good thing. As a lurker and guest I've still only been around for about a year, but the good things far outweigh the bad. One angry folklorist who can't keep his aliases straight, some insensitive joke tellers and a few people who keep stupid threads going endlessly are a small price to pay for what else we get. I've literally learned how to play the guitar pretty well from Mudcat. I didn't know anything about my instrument til I came here. Why can't people just ignore the ones with too much time on their hands?

marty

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:21 AM

It was me BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: GUEST,#1
Date: 05 May 01 - 12:18 AM

Sorry to do this kat but the situation for those who choose to posts as guests is pretty much the same as the situation you're describing...

For the record, I did a print shortly after your last post and did a count: Allowing for my interpretation of BS (I counted gatherings, FYI, NON-IRRITATING, A sincere thankyou, etc in regardless of prefix) I made a count of 165 threads, 52 or which are BS or a 31.5%BS content. Make of it what you will, it is not an issue to me.

Jon Freeman

(or am I guest #1 or someone else impersonating Jon Freeman...)

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: katlaughing
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:52 PM

Fionn, someone posted an entire thread using my name, which was what prompted Max to come up with the Guest moniker; totally different situation, not to be measured against what Guest#1 has been trying to do which is "divide and conquer." If the majority of us are wrong and he isn't Guest#1, let him come forward and say so. Besides his signing, it is still his style which shines through...it is difficult for almost anyone to hide behind another name, once they've consistently posted in their usual fashion.

Thanks, Mark. I remember one time a few of us compared the numbers. I just didn't feel like counting through all of them today to point out the majority were, as always, about music!

kat

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: gnu
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:46 PM

Got back from the BBQ, in good spirits, only to find out that the 'Cats are still hissing. I repeat...

A related thread is underway, titled, "BS: or not BS? a suugestion", with some ideas that may appease Bruce... hopefully. I certainly don't wish to see him leave.

Why is this such a big problem with you guys ? Why can't the Mudcat be a wonderful place for all ? Just a little common sense and courtesey ? No ? NO ?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:38 PM

oops, hit the send button before I was even close to being finished. Get the message?

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 04 May 01 - 11:36 PM

Let's take a good look at this useless Forum which is totally clogged by useless BS and stupid political crap. At this moment, we have threads such as: "Has anyone heard this song?" (a sincere request for the source and meaning of a traditional Irish lullaby); "Belfast Graves" (request for information on a song about Irish Republican heroes); "Spanish Cavalier" (another request for info about a old favorite song); "Who wrote music for 'The Hazel Wood?"; "Hawaiian Song" (answer to a query and a brief discussion of slack-key guitar by somebody who lives in Hawaii); information about Richard Dyer-Bennett, who researched and popularized many old traditional ballads; a request for lyrics to a rare Irish ballad (answered); a request for an old Scots song, High Jeannie High (answered); a request for singalongs to be sung at a nursing home (answered with a wealth of info); request for music to "Bonnie Susy Cleland"; "Long Time Traveling" (fascinating discussion of a shape note tune and its transmogrifications); "In the Jailhouse Now" (discussion of several different versions); "Mary Ellen at the Church Turned Up" (about an old music hall song); "Trench Songs of WWI"; "Hornpipe query" (answered, more or less); "Last Farewell" (4 replies in 26 minutes); "Need a song about war/soldier/pacifism" (lots and lots of good replies); "Ora Wa Shinzimatta Da" (request for lyrics of a Japanese popular song --

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: IvanB
Date: 04 May 01 - 10:12 PM

No, Fionn, you obviously know nothing of me. It's an inviolate rule with me that personal messages and/or private e-mail are just that - personal and private. I'm not so naive as to think something I sent to someone else might not be posted for all to see, but that doesn't mean I'd like it. And you will never see anything sent to me in private posted publicly unless I have the sender's permission. That, to me, is part of good manners and living within a community - whether it be real or virtual. And I still believe Bruce acted reprehensively, his standing in this 'community' notwithstanding.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:56 PM

Some spot-on points, Jon. But IvanB, I don't think you're being realistic. If you'd got that message from Sorcha, with its threats to publish more widely, I think you'd have been tempted to post it too.

I'm a bit surprised at your line, Kat. What does Bruce's name at the end of a post prove? There was a time when your name appeared at the TOP of a post, and everyone here was quick to accept that you'd had sod all to do with it.

That's interesting advice, Nutty, but in my case it would amount to a gagging order.

But seriously, folks, I wallow around in, and add to, the crap here as much as anyone, but I'd never come to this site at all if it wasn't such a terrific folk-music resource. We wouldn't have to lose too many Bruces before we were left with just the crap. I think Sorcha paid a fair price for sending such an aggressive note, and to be honest, she took Bruce's intemperate reaction in better spirit than one or two who leapt to her defence.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: SINSULL
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:50 PM

Carol,
Were you wearing black fishnets at the time of the shooting? Maybe someone was just trying to find out what exactly was behind the accordian.

I hate it when we can't play 'nice" together. Sorcha was one of the first to make me feel welcome here. BruceO has (unwittingly) contributed to my list of books I have to read and/or own much to the delight of a few on-line booksellers. Posting someone's private comments without permission is just not acceptable. My question to Guest#1 is: "Do you get any enjoyment out of your study of folk music?" I am baffled by your lack of humour. This music was created to entertain.When all the "t"s are crossed and "i"s dotted, human emotion is the basis for all folk music. If I have missed your connections to this, let me know. Please.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Ma Fazoo
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:17 PM

Still feeling my way around the site, but it seems to be a pretty healthy place to be, on the whole. I've learned many things about traditional music, and been amused by the many witty people who post. I think I'll stay awhile.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:14 PM

It began with people, Ebbie. Maybe that's what makes it all so interesting.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:09 PM

Earl and Carol, I'm sitting here laughing out loud. Bodhran, accordion, banjo- where did it begin?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:06 PM

Thanks, Earl. I feel better already.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 09:03 PM

Carol,

I don't think European circus belongs in classical, I just think, these days, that's where it will probably end up.

As for accordions, unless mudcat has changed even more than I think, there are plenty of accordion players here. I play concertina. There is no reason to laugh at that, it's not like you play bodhran.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:54 PM

Oops. Looks like I misspelled *accordion*

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:53 PM

Thanks Earl. I don't think European circus music would have been anywhere close to classical music. Probably more along the lines of Eastern European and Roma folk music. I'm guessing on that, but I do feel pretty confident that it would be some kind of folk music.

The unpopular instrument I play is the accorion. Had one shot right out of my hands in the 'Orient Express' thread just yesterday. Some people's hatred for accordions knows no bounds. ;-)

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:42 PM

Carol,

I consider myself a serious student of certain forms of American traditional music which I don't think will help you much. The only thing I can suggest for European circus music is maybe check classical music. I know for American music to find serious recordings of the music of Stephen Foster or other nineteenth century popular songs I look in the classical section.

I saw your post earlier and I agree it must be even more difficult to find discussions of instrumental music. What is the unpopular instrument that you play?

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:16 PM

Earl, since you are obviously a serious student of traditional music, perhaps you can help me with a question I've been trying to get an answer to for as long as I've been posting to the Mudcat. I would welcome Bruce O's input as well, if he has any...

I am looking for sources of instrumental music that would have been used in European circuses and similar types of settings, say, in the last couple of centuries, but not after World War II. So far, I've only been pointed in the direction of contemporary circus music, or music that would have been used in circuses in the U.S.

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Matt_R
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:11 PM

Sure am! But I didn't get my pic in to Alison in time... :-(

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:02 PM

wannabe poser

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Matt_R
Date: 04 May 01 - 08:00 PM

Been there, done that.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 07:55 PM

folk you.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Matt_R
Date: 04 May 01 - 07:09 PM

If I'm a stray cat, then I'm gonna rock this town. Rock it inside out.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: RWilhelm
Date: 04 May 01 - 04:05 PM

Years ago Mudcat really was dedicated to folk and blues music. It was not just folk but traditional folk and any attempts to blur the boundaries where met with fierce debate. In those days the prevailing view was that indulging an overbroad definition of folk music was like feeding a stray cat. Before long you have a house full of stray cats. At the time I thought that was a pretty harsh assessment but ultimately it proved true.

There is obvious a great demand for BS and non-folk threads but it can be a lot to wade through if your are looking for a discussion of folk music. Maybe it is time to split the forum into two sections; one for folk music and one for everything else.

The departure of Bruce O is a great loss to Mudcat. He joins a long list of exceptionally knowledgeable people who no longer post here.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: paddymac
Date: 04 May 01 - 04:01 PM

Bruce has been a valuable contributor here, and I thank him for that. I don't have much interest is pissing contests, at least not unless my leg is getting wet, so I don't know and don't really care about whatever was going on between Bruce and Sorcha. I will say only that "personal feuds" don't need to be aired here at all, and that most of us, at one time or other, can revert to rather juvenile behavior. It's a human trait that we need to be alert to on an individual basis, and check it first in our own deportment.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: katlaughing
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:42 PM

Thanks, Bert, Justa Picker, and Spaw for saying what I feel and believe, too. Bruce did leave before and came back. It is my understanding he signed his real name to a couple of Guest #1's postings, thus outing himself, long before anyone else made mention. Now that he has failed in his attempt to coerce us all, he makes a big fanfare about leaving.

Before you got so angry about the BS, Bruce, I always appreciated your insight and scholarship and your website, but as Guest #1, you went way over the line and I will not miss that.

I would like to say one more thing. A few years ago, Joe Offer and I got into it and I posted a portion of a personal message he'd sent to me, which was particularly vicious. He and I have made our peace and even enjoy PMing back and forth, at times. However, when I did post that posting, from a personal message, much the same as Bruce did with Sorcha's email, I was castigated, excoriated and vilified up one side and down the other. One wonders where the outrage went when Bruce did virtually the same thing.

kat

took too long to post this, so didn't see the
link provided above...now you can read the whole sordid story:-)

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:34 PM

I don't know Bruce, so I haven't had an opportunity to be impressed by his scholarship. But I can't say I'm all that sympathetic. If he wants to avoid BS threads, it's easily done. Even when someone forgets to use the BS prefix, you can usually tell what a thread is about pretty quickly, and make your exit in favor of another thread that you find more to your liking.

Also, I might suggest that, if you want to join an exclusive club, don't look for one that meets on the internet. The doors to this place are wide open, and we all have our own reasons for being here.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Peter T.
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:25 PM

CP, you are what in scholarly circles is referred to as a scatological inversion. Your character as portrayed here is tied to the mirrored need to maintain ordered structures through the occasionally acceptable appearance of the contrary, yet necessary anal, excremental figure -- often associated with Dionysus, the Devil and other threats to implicit or explicit norms. Musically of course, we need go back no further than the association with the Feast of Fools and other events (such as the Feast of the Holy Innocents) in the liturgical calendar. The appropriate carnivalesque and burlesque roots in the folk traditions are, I am sure, your constant study. Was it not you who made passing reference to Bakhtin's study of Rabelais in your own flatulent way?

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: CarolC
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:22 PM

Bruce O.

I have no feelings one way or the other about whether or not you stop posting to the forum. I just want to say one thing to you and to everyone who thinks this forum should just be about song lyrics...

I am an instrumentalist. I do not sing songs. Songs are not the only form of traditional music. Instrumental music is as important a part of traditional music as are songs and ballads.

I play an unpopular instrument. There aren't many people who want to talk about my instrument. When I get into a serious discussion about my instrument with other mudcatters, people feel perfectly free to turn my serious musical discussion into a joke because they feel my instrument is a joke.

There's not a hell of a lot I can do about this except laugh along with them. Please don't contribute to the invalidation of my instrument and the traditional music I play on it, by only talking about traditional music as being only songs and ballads. That's not right, and you ought to know it.

Carol

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:21 PM

I can't say that I agree with making the contents of a private e-mail public but I do draw a distinction between what the reaction to an attempt at a THREAT and using the contents of a personal e-mail to bolster an arguement.

As spaw has indicated, it has happend before. The only occasion I can remember reading was of the second type and is here. From what I can make out from the thread, it passed without the type of name calling Amerigan used and I can't see much in the way of "roundly denouncing" although comments may well have been passed elsewhere.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Fortunato
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:20 PM

I'll see you elsewhere, Bruce.

Chance

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: GUEST,Neil Comer
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:17 PM

I have to agree with Bruce. There is no doubt that there were some memorable threads- Carrickfergus etc- but the Forum has become a platform for too many other subjects. I signed off when the politics took over

Slán agus beannacht Neil Comer

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: gnu
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:13 PM

Spaw... my sincerest apologies for being so dense. Apparently, the weekend has begun too soon for me. I shall take my leave now and go forth to do good deeds (when you own a truck, everyone thinks you have nothing to do but good deeds requiring a truck) and then, to even things out, I shall play my Hran with great gusto at the BBQ.

They think the free BBQ is all that is required to rent my truck and time for a few hours. Perhaps, if I play and sing long enough, their neighbours will complain and my truck will move down the list of, "Who can we bum a truck from ?"

Some of you might ask, "What about the dust bunnies ?" Well, in ten years..... But, that's another thread, Bruce.

haveHranwillsessiongnuevenifyoudon'twantmeto

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 May 01 - 03:01 PM

gnu....It was Ivan B. who said that (we cross posted) and I could not agree more. It has happened before here and the member involved was roundly denounced. Bruce O. should be no different.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Justa Picker
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:56 PM

People that aren't planning to return leave quietly and do it without fanfare.

People that plan to return at some point start a thread about their leaving (so they can gauge public opinon, at least from what I've seen and read around here.)

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: gnu
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:52 PM

A related thread is underway, titled, "BS: or not BS? a suugestion", with some ideas that may appease Bruce... hopefully. I certainly don't wish to see him leave.

Spaw.... For what it's worth, I agree that publishing a private communication without consent is, at least, rude.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: nutty
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:50 PM

I was always taught - If you can't say anything nice , don't say anything

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:44 PM

I know that you consider me as one of the "major downfalls" of this place, but Bert said what I think far better than I could. No one controls this place, least of all me or you. This is not the first time you have left and it may well be that you decide to return. These things are strictly your decisions.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: IvanB
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:43 PM

I, too, am sorry to see Bruce's decision to leave Mudcat. However, if he published Sorcha's private email in a public forum without her permission, I believe that to be a reprehensible action and its distastefulness to me is not lessened by the perceived value of the person to Mudcat in general. Perhaps just a polite way of stating what Amergin already said.

Subject: RE: BS: From Bruce O.
From: Sandy Paton
Date: 04 May 01 - 02:10 PM

I'm really sorry, Bruce, but I'll keep in touch via that other list you led me to. Thanks for that, too.

When I'm very busy, as I have been recently, I find that I can only take time to look at a few threads. So, please, folks, title your threads carefully to assist us in finding those that we might find of particular interest. Others might be fun, and I occasionally participate facetiously in them, too, but I have to be selective when I'm working under deadlines that can't be avoided. I know you understand. With careful titling, we might keep scholars like Bruce around and thus benefit from their research.

Sandy