 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2
|
|
|
Subject: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: SharonA Date: 06 Dec 01 - 01:37 PM Here is part 1 of this thread: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 1
Sharon, you had accidentally put a "colon" where |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 06 Dec 01 - 01:40 PM YES!end of thread... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: SharonA Date: 06 Dec 01 - 01:43 PM Sorry; I guess I have to go back to blicky school. How unfriendly of me to make a dud blicky that leads nowhere! Let's try again. Here is part 1 of this thread: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 1 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: John Routledge Date: 06 Dec 01 - 01:46 PM I thought you were being friendly Sharon:0) Cheers Geordie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 06 Dec 01 - 02:17 PM No! I think it's bloody awful. Worst site in the world. Should have been banned by the Geneva convention. Destroy it before it takes over the world!!!! You'd never catch me posting to it.
Dave the Gnome |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: PeteBoom Date: 06 Dec 01 - 02:36 PM OK - I'm throwing in my tuppence. Been busy as a one legged man at a butt-kickin' contest (as my colorfull brother in law would say) and have not had much chance to read, let alone post here of late. That in itself should have raised the "friendliness" level. A site like this is what it is. People can disagree on issues and still be friends. A simple disagreement does not make the other person a total ejit - it simply means you do not agree with someone on some subject. Will the world come to an end because of it? Only if you have the nuke launch codes. There are some things I disagree with people here over - that does not mean we must be unfriendly to each other. A little bantering with people does not mean that anyone not getting "it" is being excluded, rather, in a Jeffrsonian Democratic way, the temporary grouping on a common issue may not include you. The next one may very well include you. Speaking of which, Mick - how's learning the bazooka coming? Devilmaster - I've been in that bar in Windsor - not for a few years BUT... Mick - do NOT bring yer new bazooka to the bar - they're increasing security at the border and they might notice it. Now, back to work - P. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: John MacKenzie Date: 06 Dec 01 - 03:05 PM I am a Scot and I live and work in Scotland, out of my staff of 7, 2 are English the rest Scots. When we rib both of theses Englishmen about being incomers and "white settlers", one laughs and joins in, while the other often sulks and takes offence Different strokes for different folks as they say, some people will insist on being outsiders, even when they're not. Guess that probably applies to GUESTS as well. Failte...Jock |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: SharonA Date: 06 Dec 01 - 03:18 PM The nice thing about the bantering here is that, if one doesn't "get it", one has only to ask and some friendly person will explain the joke or provide a link to a thread explaining the joke! In that sense, one is not excluded at all. There are cases where one person's sense of humor may not be in another person's taste, in which case person number 2 must learn not to take offense (I point the finger at myself here; I'm one of those "number 2" people and I learned this lesson recently!). That's just part of participating in any sort of group discussion, but especially true in a forum such as this one which draws people from so many different areas and cultures! Of course, if person number 1's humor is offensive to the group or to society as a whole (as in the case of flamers), the group will react accordingly. In fact, the site administrators' recommendation is to exclude flamers from thread discussions by ignoring them! So I guess the goal of Mudcat is to be an exclusively nice place. Works for me! Sharon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Bill D Date: 06 Dec 01 - 04:22 PM Jon...(I assume you are still reading this)...In our song circle..(Open Sing), we get a wide variety of people. In the Folklore Society which hosts it, we get an even wider variety. These people interact in some very complex ways, and they often irritate each other....some would as soon talk as sing, and will try to follow each song with commentary, analysis and attempts at humor. Others want continous music, with only the barest of introductions, and get VERY grumpy if people talk. (Sound familar?) Some pat attention and sing along; some seem to be bored until it is their turn....some get up or return in the middle of a song; some carefully sit still until a proper break occurs. Some are shy and afraid to do much...others are outgoing and boisterous. Etc, etc...it just is that way, and it is VERY hard to change basic behavior much. Thus, one's incentive to attend varies.... Some choose NOT to attend the Open Sings for various reasons...one of the most common is that since everyone is allowed/encouraged to sing, there is a great disparity in the 'quality' of music/singing. Another reason, (not usually admitted openly), is that if everyone is taking turns, they may get to 'perform' only 2-3 times an evening, poor things. So, maybe you are ahead of me in where this is going...it is very like Mudcat in many respects and people simply differ in how they respond and interact...some like 'sessions' in which the level of the music does not vary too much, and fairly clear rules and 'pecking order' are in effect. Others like a more free-wheeling format where you do whatever you can get by with, both in choice of music and how often you get to sing/play...and in how much extraneous talk and gossip is tolerated! And, as you might expect, some express their displeasure in things they don't like pretty openly, while others just disappear and go find something to suit them. Mudcat is VERY like that...as we all know. If I go to the Getaway, there are times when the noise/BS levels get so bad in some areas that some break away and go hide...while others seek out the big crowds and relish the seeming chaos. I have, at times, also voiced my opinion that I'd sorta like it if Mudcat had parallel threads in various ways...(mostly to keep 'folk' separate from other music)...but, since Max does it this way, I simply adapt and open threads as I am moved...and sometimes I DO contribute jokes to a silly thread, and sometimes I see a title and never open it!...I assure you, it is easier here than at the Getaway or at the open sing, where one must mostly endure a lot of it, if one chooses to attend. The real situation is that Mudcat had become MUCH more than a music database and forum about music....it is, like it or not, a true community where all of the good and bad associated with a group of people is on display. We get those who post if their dog dies, and those who have serious personal traumas that we barely know about. There are some whose entire identities and life are an open book, and those who are only a name associated with opinions about guitars and whos location and real identity are almost unknown...THAT IS HOW PEOPLE ARE.... I have my preferred mix of these elements, but I gave up long ago fretting very much about it, because I can't DO anything about it... I used to wish I was a programmer, so I could design a sit to suit ME....and, Jon (I am sort of still using Jon Freeman as my virtual audience for this rambling)....you had the ability and need to do just that!...The Annex is a fine site, and includes some features I greatly admire...I guess I feel like I just don't have time to 'regularly' follow both...and....the song database is HERE..*shrug* I have been comparing Mudcat to FSGW in several ways, but maybe it could also be compared to one's own city, or country, where good & bad abound, and critics and flag wavers bicker constantly about what should be done and who is an asshole and who is a paradigm of sanity, humor and virtue. There IS no real answer except the one we give those who complain about TV and pornography...don't look at it...don't open threads with obvious titles, and close 'em fast if you see it going astray..... I guess I am just lucky...I have a pretty good 'personal filter' and CAN ignore most of what I don't like...(and I do less & less of THIS anymore..meta-analysis of the society)...so, I ferevntly hope all those people I have enjoyed for 5 years on Mudcat will continue to find something they like here, and contrbitute what they can...and this CERTAINLY includes Jon Freeman, a talented, giving, interesting fellow with basic goodwill and thoughtful offerings! *smile*...now, knowing that very few are likely to have read this far in this highly personal rambling. I guess I'd best go do something useful with the rest of the day! sorry for the verbosity...it won't happen often.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Liz the Squeak Date: 06 Dec 01 - 04:48 PM Nice to see that the anonymous GUEST in capitals thinks this is a friendly site, because they've been instrumental in creating some of the nastiest threads we've had. Makes you sort of wonder what their idea of horrid would be...... LTS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 06 Dec 01 - 05:12 PM Well Liz, Since you ask.... Seeing you naked would fit the bill. What a repulsive thought... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Liz the Squeak Date: 06 Dec 01 - 05:13 PM See what I mean....? LTS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 06 Dec 01 - 05:14 PM No thanks Liz, please |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Dec 01 - 05:31 PM I know the temptation is to think that out there there is some faceless creature writing all the GUEST posts, but it ain't necessarily so. Remember there's no particular reason to think that GUEST is the same as GUEST. For what it's worth.
Jon wrote: "I find it almost impossible to imagine that there are not similar communities in other areas of interest." So do I - but I haven't found any yet that come close. And pretty well all the ones I've come across do in fact divide up the sites into different forums, and I think that is one reason they don't work as well, even though the arguments in favour of doing that seem quite cogent.
"Striving to better oft we mar what's well." "If it ain't broke don't fix it." "If it isn't essential to change things, it is essential not to change them." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Peter Kasin Date: 06 Dec 01 - 06:38 PM Yes, Mudcat is, by and large, a friendly place. An amazing place when I think about this - a largely unmoderated forum where anyone can post. Given the relative anonymity the Net provides, there's this dropping of inhibitions the Net's famous for when it comes to bringing out nastiness and invective. The Mudcat, though, despite occasional snowballing bouts of nastiness, (largely but not exclusively from anonymous flamers), has some core values and a humaneness that shines through and gives the site it's own "personality." It's unique. -chanteyranger |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST, Anon. Member, sick of all this sh*t Date: 06 Dec 01 - 08:08 PM So your'e hoping the word 'please' will work, 'Guest'? Right.... Please, Please, Please, Please, PLEASE &*%$ Off! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Robin2 Date: 06 Dec 01 - 08:33 PM I love this place. It has convinced me that the answer to all questions are hidden behind blue clicky thingies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Jon Freeman Date: 06 Dec 01 - 09:22 PM Bill, I'll think on your post... maybe I need to learn to mellow a little... (and I won't say with age ;-)) McGrath: I'm not sure what to think except to suggest that some of the choices are limited becuase people just "buy" a forum and try to make the best of it without having the ability (if indeed there is a desire) to do anything about it. There are some awful ones around - (I think you and I would agree over the BBC system for example) but some are pretty good. It seems to me that a standard was set by the UBB system and there are many (of what appear to me to be) clones of that one - the Annexe, in its origins being one in ASP format. The Mudcat design, has it's origin (I believe) in a set of example templates that came with ColdFusion and I have found a few examples on the Internet - although none anywhere near as advanced as this site where things like PM system, tracer, etc have been added - the help forum seems to be pretty near the original - basic but functional and perhaps with the advantages you like (and mostly I like). The Annexe is probably one of the more unusual in that it is a multi-forum system but can operate as a single lists like Mudcat - in theory, it is easy - I have the info to split - single base forums do not so whereas one can work "the other way", the other can be a "brick wall" when trying to provide more scope. It will be interesting to see how all these ideas work out on the Internet over the next few years. I will be following with interest - in fact I wish I gathered stats (and no I won't abuse cookies or membership settings) with the small no of people who use the Annexe - would love to know what % prefer to read a thread last post or what percenatage, like me prefer posts in the order made but want to get to the last page first for example... Waffling here but it is an area, possibly relevant to many of us that I do find interesting. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Bill D Date: 06 Dec 01 - 09:52 PM Ok, Jon....I know you always re-thinking it all....but 'age' can BE a mellower..*big grin*....or maybe that's simply a decline of energy. I am not nearly as combative at 62 as I was at a mere 58.. (your mileage may vary) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST,vince Date: 07 Dec 01 - 11:36 AM I've got 'GUEST' in front of my name when i use Mudcat (a site i find thoroughly useful and interesting). Why do some have guest and most don't. Scuse me ignorance! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: pinkfiddle Date: 07 Dec 01 - 11:55 AM Answer to the last post - you need to register as a member - see the home apge of the site. I seem to have really started something here. I posted originally not because I am thin-skinned and can't take criticism but because I am relatively new to internet forums and was simply surprised to see someone who knows nothing about me or my research criticisng it in black and white. Prior to a few altercations with GUEST or GUEST the question of whether this was a friendly site or not had never entered my head. It seemed just to be a good place to discuss music and other matters, and to find new songs to sing. I have met some of the English mudcatters at festivals and everyone was really friendly. I read any of the threads that look interesting and I can't recall seeing any similar posts to the ones I've had from GUEST. So I'm not thin-skinned or incapable of ignoring 'flamers', but perhaps I am guilty of being a little naive of trolls and flamers. I am now more than aware of the sad individuals that unfortunately lurk amongst all the friendly Mudcatters. Louisa (pf) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: John J Date: 07 Dec 01 - 12:24 PM Yes. Not only is it a friendly site, in my opinion it is the best site in the world. For anything. John PS My mum thinks so too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: SharonA Date: 07 Dec 01 - 12:34 PM Hi, Louisa! I see you're a member now; welcome! Oh, yes indeed, there are many, many posts similar to the ones you received from the flaming GUEST. Apparently they're more plentiful in the summertime, when the junior-high kids have no school and are home without proper supervision (or perhaps I have that impression because I started posting here last June, when the school year ended!). There is a resultant proliferation of threads on the subject on a regular basis, and a corresponding exodus of some Mudcat members who become disgusted with the flame wars (more's the pity). I'm glad to hear that you're not among the thin-skinned. Hope you continue to enjoy everything that's great about Mudcat! Sharon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: John MacKenzie Date: 07 Dec 01 - 02:31 PM If Mudcat is a global village, and I think that this is a fair description. Then it is only fair that it should have a village idiot (or two). Failte...Jock |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: SharonA Date: 07 Dec 01 - 03:38 PM Every time I see this thread title, I think of the old Rocky & Bullwinkle cartoon show. One of its pre-commercial shorts showed Bullwinkle as a fortune-teller trying to conjure spirits: "Eeny, meeny, chili-beany, the spirits are about to speak!" Rocky asked, "Are they friendly spirits?" and Bullwinkle replied, "Friendly?! Just listen!" (Then they'd go to a commercial.) Is Mudcat a friendly site? Friendly?! Just look! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Jon Freeman Date: 07 Dec 01 - 06:38 PM Just following up on what I had said before on forums in case anyone else dabbles. The ColdFusion code from the examples that would produce something very similar to the Help forum here can be found at this page Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 01 - 06:51 PM Quiet, Jon! People will start realising that Max isn't God! That will never do! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:02 PM Let a thousand flowers bloom. But I haven't seen much sign of it yet. (The Annexe for me is a part of the Mudcat, and a welcome part too.)
The most impressive thing about Max is the fact that he's been able to hold out against the temptation to meddle and modify in ways that seem sensible but which could bring the whole cardhouse tumbling down. That is a rare quality. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:14 PM OK, I'm the 'Guest' who has written most of these nasty messages. Why? Because I'm a drunkard who is going through hell and is very miserable, terribly so. Believe me, it's very easy to slip down to the place I'm at. Judge me, loathe me, hate me Maybe I need some love... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Jon Freeman Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:14 PM On thing I guess I should stress is that using example templates (assuming it was the same base - looks like it to me) is not a criticism from me in any way. It seems to me to be quite a sensible route - I'd use anything that gives me a start, use code snippets from the web (as long as I understand them)... McGrath, I'm finding with the Annexe, that the "meddling" is a case of trying to strike a balance and I guess we all have our ideas on where such a balance lies. On thing is for sure - it is quite possible to take something quite functional and useful and turn it in to a bloated, unfriendly heap of junk (why does AOL spring to mind) - hope I don't do that with the Annexe. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:22 PM yet another cry for help goes unheard... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:27 PM Youve given it SIX MINUTES... Which admittedly is greater, you bullshitting 'Guest' than your attention span....well done! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Jon Freeman Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:28 PM Guest, there's not a lot one could do to help in the threads. If you are who I think are, why not send me an email - or send me one anyway at jon@jonbanjo.com if you want to someone who knows the hell drinking can bring. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:29 PM fuck off nasty person, you do no-one any favors |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:35 PM Jon, It's a tad scary that my identity is so obvious to you But you make a lot of sense Am currently very scared, but thanks for the support |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST, the 'unsympathetic' one Date: 07 Dec 01 - 08:53 PM Jon, I doubt its your friend... I think its someone trying to play on the sympathies of people here so he can mock us for it. I think he started the 'Hug' thrad a few days ago then laughed in other threads at those that did. Maybe this guy DOES have a drink problem, but thats probably cos he alienates himself in the real world too, by his behaviour. (Though he might not be the Guest that did all the nasty threads, & thats just a claim to make himself more credible & seem more vulnerable) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Sorcha Date: 07 Dec 01 - 09:10 PM It's a tad difficult to help someone who doesn't even have the guts to have a name. I can't bother. Get a name, and send me an e mail. The addy is EZ to find. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Morticia Date: 07 Dec 01 - 09:24 PM I'll take a chance on you, guest...e-mail is terri.messenger@ ntlworld.com. Talk to me |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 07 Dec 01 - 09:38 PM Guest with the drink problem-I reckon I know who you are as well. johnhat@kitv.co.uk |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 07 Dec 01 - 09:40 PM PS use a hotmail account if you want to remain anonomouse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Peter Kasin Date: 07 Dec 01 - 10:40 PM Pinkfiddle - glad to see you've decided on membership! -chanteyranger |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Rick Fielding Date: 08 Dec 01 - 12:24 AM Welcome Pinkfiddle. Geez, this thread sure has 'legs' (and I don't mean yours 'fiddle'). What are the numbers? Probably 'bout a hundred and thirty for 'friendly' and ten 'not friendly'. Whatever...those ain't bad odds. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: GUEST Date: 31 Jan 02 - 09:38 PM Ekh. What a load. Just when I thought I couldn't hate America any more... Seriously, someone from a good country: Adopt me. ----Lepus Rex Thanks to Jeri for the link to this site. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Lyrical Lady Date: 31 Jan 02 - 10:09 PM I know "unfriendly"...I've lived "unfriendly" ... this site is not unfriendly! If anything this site has been my life saver ... I never have too much to say...but I check in everyday and it is a constant in my life... I love to play...and have never been disappointed. If you gage this site on whether or not you can hit it off with the likes of "Spaw" ...forget it ... that's not what this site is about ...just be yourself...give what you can..and these folks will be there for you through thick and thin! LL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: artbrooks Date: 31 Jan 02 - 10:16 PM Lyrical Lady: ANON.GUEST has resurrected about a dozen "why I hate Mudcat" threads, many started by the same or other ANON.GUESTs (who can tell) and posted the same meaningless message on all of them. This thread died a well-deserved death a month ago...let it die again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Lyrical Lady Date: 31 Jan 02 - 10:24 PM Damn...Silly me ...F****king guest ...and I thought I did'nt have a life!!! LL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Is Mudcat a friendly site? Part 2 From: Jerry Rasmussen Date: 01 Feb 02 - 07:37 AM R.I.P Jerry |