Clarification on the Mudcat's financials

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: kendall
Date: 16 May 02 - 07:02 AM

I know I shouldn't respond to trolls, but, when someone attacks a friend of mine, he also attacks me.My ex wife accused me of being Don Quixote in a past life.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Hrothgar
Date: 16 May 02 - 03:31 AM

I still want to see this geezer donate $25,000 to make the Mudcat lodge reports!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 May 02 - 01:22 AM

¢¢

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Amos
Date: 13 May 02 - 11:17 PM

¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢There ya go!! Straight from the Mac's mouth.

But just for the record Macintosh is not a ocmpany, but a trademark; Apple has been consistently profitable since the Second Coming, and is more successful now than it has been since the original temptation of Jobs.

A

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST,Lyle
Date: 13 May 02 - 10:53 PM

You poor people and your cheap computers! All you have to do on a Mac is hold the Option key and press 4 and there is the ¢ symbol.

And GUEST, Macintosh is *registered* as a for profit company but often isn't!

Lyle

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Ferrara
Date: 13 May 02 - 02:43 PM

Well, I kinda agree with Mr. Red ... it is a folk custom to argue.

Keeps us off the streets, and it's yet another way to avoid whatever real work we have to do on a given day.... :)

Rita

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: artbrooks
Date: 13 May 02 - 01:48 PM

John, that has been suggested a number of times in the past. Unfortunately, Mudcat members (including thee and me) somehow can't avoid responding.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: John J
Date: 13 May 02 - 12:59 PM

I wonder if the time is approaching when posts from anonymous guests should be ignored as a matter of course.

John

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 13 May 02 - 12:50 PM

Kendall: dick can look like a fool without help from anyone.

Re: "tax exempt" in the "help the Mudcat" page. The phrase --perhaps an unfortunate choice--refers to the fact that contributions are not tax deductions. Both Mudcat and Digitrad are non-profit/not-for-profit/tax-exempt (in the sense that we are not called upon to pay taxes) corporations. The tax-exempt status is academic; neither organization has ever had any net income.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST,The Jester
Date: 13 May 02 - 12:23 PM

Money doesn't talk it swears

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Big Mick
Date: 13 May 02 - 08:39 AM

I keep tellin' ya, fella's. This poor soul had his/her diaper changed improperly and now looks for ways to validate his/her existence. And shame on you folks for exposing this slugs tactics!!! Spaw.............how is this person, and I use the term lightly, going to validate in his/her sick little mind his/her mental superiority if you keep exposing the methods. Never mind that you will have ruined their sex life............you know, Spaw, the one they have when they touch themselves in that spayshul way when folks fall for their simple machinations. Wait..............I just figured it out..............you are trying to drive them into a trip to the NYCFTTS................are you getting a bonus on this?????? Are you moonlighting outside of your obligations to LFPS???????

Mick

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: artbrooks
Date: 13 May 02 - 08:31 AM

Nah, 'Spaw...that pig won't fly. Following ANON.GUEST's set of links (rather than going directly to the site I linked earlier) takes you directly past the place where Max's and Dick's addresses and telephone numbers are posted. Of course, it has been obvious from the beginning that logic and reason are alien to this critter.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: kendall
Date: 13 May 02 - 08:27 AM

The solution is simple enough for a moron to understand; We like it here; we are well satisfied here; we get our money's worth here, if you don't like it here, PISS OFF! start your own site.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: catspaw49
Date: 13 May 02 - 08:23 AM

EXCELLENT JOB!!!! Troll, you have done well!!!

After not getting much of a bite on the page links and trying to make Dick look the fool, you decided that it was time to add in a new tack....the membership/contact thing. Superbly played. Now if someone once again gives you an answer as they have repeatedly, you have another "gripe" to fall back to....until someone addresses that one and you can then ignore it and get back to the charity silliness.

Nice job and I'm sure you'll be happy with the results as the more smokescreens you can intermix, the better!

Spaw

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 13 May 02 - 07:58 AM

I would also add, it is quite unusual in my experience on-line, to have to take out a membership in order to contact a site owner. I can't think of a website I've been to of late where there isn't an email contact for the site owner/maintainer. One must join Mudcat to communicate with the owners. That is pretty strange too.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 13 May 02 - 07:16 AM

Dick, for your information, here is the Mudcat trail I followed:

I came to the homepage after doing a Google Search:

http://www.mudcat.org/

At the bottom of the page I clicked on "Go Ask the Bartender" which took me here:

http://www.mudcat.org/contact.cfm

I then clicked on the "Financial Contribution" link which took me here:

http://www.mudcat.org/support.cfm#contribute

For those of you who are regulars, I'm sure you don't normally follow those links, but it is probably fairly common for newcomers.

One can also get to the homepage easily from the forum page by clicking on the Mudcat logo in the top left corner of the screen (many websites have this feature, ie when you click on the logo it takes you to the homepage).

One can easily get to the solicitations page by clicking on the "Help Support the Mudcat" icon in the top centre (or so) of the page. There one will find the address for sending money donations via snail mail, and a link to PayPal.

I figured all of this out in about 10 minutes time of reading and clicking.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Mr Red
Date: 13 May 02 - 05:57 AM

I care about open debate! It proves the point we are making, we like love Mudcat and not blindly so.
Viva BS, Viva Mudcat - it is a folk custom to argue
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh yes it is.

Mr Red surfing for free at the local Library.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Hrothgar
Date: 13 May 02 - 04:36 AM

Haven't heard about your $25,000 donation, yet, Guest.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: katlaughing
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:42 PM

I posted this on the other thread. Max is very clear that donations are welcome BUT also says (emphasis mine): Anyhow, I hate the idea of accepting donations. We can't afford to get our tax exempt status, therefore any donations are not tax-deductible.

I post this for the benefit of members who have expressed an interest. Otherwise, Big Mick has it right. GUEST who started this shit doesn't give a flying fuck about Mudcat or any of its members. I am sure It has been able to jack-off quite a few times at the wind-up it's enjoyed, though, getting everyone into the discussion. Why otherwise intelligent folkers would give It the time of day....walks off muttering and shaking head....

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Robin2
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:38 PM

Call me dumb, but could someone post the address to send contributions to Max? I'd like to send some cash.

I think guest has done a service, in a round-a-bout way, by reminding us how much Mudcat does for how little.

Robin

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: artbrooks
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:11 PM

One assumes goomba means THIS PLACE.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 12 May 02 - 10:54 PM

I'm obviously lost. Can someone direct me to the "solicitation page"? I find it hard to believe that there's any statement posted to the effect that either DigiTrad or Mudcat isn't a registered non-profit corporation.

They're both incorporated as non-profit (or not-for-profit, if you prefer) corporations; neither has applied for C3 status, which would allow contributions to be tax-deductible.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Art Thieme
Date: 12 May 02 - 09:39 PM

Sorry I let this moron get to me. I'll be stronger next time.

Art

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 02 - 09:28 PM

Thanks for replying again Dick.

Can you clarify why the homepage says both Mudcat & DT are registered non-profits, but the solicitation page says Mudcat isn't?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 12 May 02 - 09:22 PM

The difference between "non-profit" and "not-for-profit" is that there isn't any difference. Again, I can't speak fopr Mudcat, but The Digital Tradition Inc. has been running at a loss since its inception in 1988; doesn't solicit contributions (but will accept any, gratefully), and never expects to break even, even if we value labor at zero, I have a business--CAMSCO Music--that is independent of Digital Tradition, much in the same way that Onstage Media was (is?) independent of the Mudcat Cafe.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: IvanB
Date: 12 May 02 - 09:18 PM

Rita, the statement about Mudcat and DT being 'registered non-profit organizations is on the Mudcat Home Page, a page few of us probably see since I believe most of us have the Forum bookmarked rather than the home page.

I believe IRS would consider both the term "non-profit" and "not for profit" synonymous in determining tax exempt status. However, Guest seems to be operating under a perception that being tax exempt automatically makes an organization a charity and thus subject to laws regarding charities (more specifically, the Pennsylvania act). While the solicitation provisions of the act may certainly apply, my perusal of it shows no transgression on the part of Mudcat or the DT. I believe it's been made pretty clear to us that any donations made will be used to keep Mudcat running and that they are not, in fact, charitable contributions.

Either Guest is too hard-headed to note this fact or, as I believe, is purposely raising this issue to suit some agenda of his/her own. And, Guest, before you berate me again for the discrepancy between the home page and the funding page, let me state my belief that the term "tax exempt" as used on the funding page is an honest mistake in choice of words. I believe what Max intended to say was that Mudcat cannot afford to get "tax deductible" status, a status that is much harder to get than tax exempt status. If I'm wrong about this, I'll be the first to admit my error. And, unlike you, if that happens, I will have some accountability.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Ferrara
Date: 12 May 02 - 07:33 PM

I went to the support page and couldn't find the statement about Mudcat and Digitrad being non-profit orgs. Where should I be looking?

If it really says that, this whole thing can be resolved, I believe, but changing "non-profit" to "not-for-profit." There is a legal difference.

I don't believe the two types of organization have the same reporting requirements but may be wrong on that. Eitheer way, Mudcat is definitely profitless, unless you count the personal and spiritual ways it profits its members....

Mudcat is not a charity. It does not make a significant profit (in law or in fact!). Max says that On-Stage Media supports Mudcat. He certainly has made it clear over the years that Mudcat isn't supporting On-Stage Media!

Dick, if it really says "non-profit," don't we need to change that to "not-for-profit"?

Rita

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: treewind
Date: 12 May 02 - 06:59 PM

OK, I've found the donations page.

I'm not going to complain to any authorities or pursue a point, and I don't know what the legal position is, but our guest may have a point in that even if if an organisation is not making a profit, it might still need to have public accounts that show this to be true.

But then someone said that the turnover is far less than the threshold for any legal requrement for accountability. Surely that settles the matter?

Anahata

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: artbrooks
Date: 12 May 02 - 06:43 PM

As has been said already, ANON.GUEST claims his/her/its original question was directed at Max and Dick and is nobody else's business, yet he/she/it directs it to us on the public forum instead of to Max and/or Dick, whose telephone numbers and addresses are posted under Contacts. And as has also already been said, DON'T FEED THE TROLL!!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: treewind
Date: 12 May 02 - 06:31 PM

Can someone explain something to me?

Why is this guest questioner talking about solicitation?

As I understand it, the people who run Mudcat make no requests for donations of any sort, other than charging for T shirts etc. which is different because it's sale of tangible goods and has nothing to do with charity.

With that, and not claiming for tax exempt status, the internal finances of Mudcat are NODODY ELSE's BUSINESS. It's as simple as that.

We might as well all interrogate "GUEST" about his/her family budget, for all the relevance it has.

Mudcat does not solicit donations.
What is there to complain about?

Anahata

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 12 May 02 - 06:27 PM

¢ Since this thread is wasted disk space, just practicing my html numeric code. Bill D, holding down alt and typing 0162 just gives me 4 bongs from my computer but nothing prints. I must put & and # and 162 and ; to get ¢

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Steve in Idaho
Date: 12 May 02 - 06:04 PM

Ooooooooooo - GUEST - your anger!! Get bit by your own bite?? Too funny -

Steve

Hit this for the door prize!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 12 May 02 - 05:42 PM

I wonder if our 'Guest' has ever tried to check his OWN Bank Balance without 'Proof of Identity'.....let alone expect to get info about SOMEONE ELSE's accounts while remaining anonymous.

Strikes me as being very similar to this...

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 12 May 02 - 03:42 PM

I was going to ignore this bullshit thread, but I would like to make a couple of points.
Guest-This is a folk and blues forum, set up and run by Max because he loves music, I have bought a Mudcat T shirt and made a very small contribution, if I had a good job I would happily send more.I have had much more than my moneys worth from this site, I have met some wonderful people that I am proud to call friends, I have heard some great music from Mudcat members and learned a lot about music and instruments, attended some great sessions and gatherings.If I send a few pounds to Mudcat, I don't give a shit what they do with it, if as you suggest, Max has forgotten to fill in the correct forms would you really want him prosecuted or the site shut down? Or are you some kind of jobsworth arshole with nothing better to do?

On a final note, if you gave a couple of pounds/dollars to a busker, would you ask what he spent it on, his tax status, and how much he made this year? I don't think so! If you did, I reckon you would be told to get lost.
If you want this site to continue, then send what you can afford, if not get lost.
John (Evans)

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: DonMeixner
Date: 12 May 02 - 03:12 PM

If it isn't my business why was this brought up in the forum in the first place? By stating a concern and then further suggesting that I and others are supporting people who may be perpetrating a fraud on us and others you made it our business.

Don Meixner

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 02 - 03:03 PM

Troll or not, pissed off at guest's anonymonymity or not, butt out people, it is none of our business!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 May 02 - 03:02 PM

GUEST, if you have a legitimate complaint, then file it with the proper authorities and shut the hell up!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:59 PM

To quote from the literature of one folk club
"This is a non profit making organisation; we didn't plan it that way, but it is!"

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: DonMeixner
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:57 PM

The whole notion of knowing ones accussor seems to have fallen away with our dear Guest. Once again I don't care that he/she,she/he has an opinion different from my own. Go ahead and report what ever you wish to the IRS and any charitable enforcement agency you like. But have the common decency of using your own name when you do. The accussed has to stand before the judge, his name out front for all to see. The accussor may be able to justify his personal cowardice before the court by standing behind his right of anonymity. And further justify it to himself by saying. "It's the public's right to know."

In civics class I had always heard that on my day in court, if accussed or a crime, I would meet my accussor and the facts would be weighed and measured by my peers. The name of my accussor is my right to know. My guilt would be either proven to the accussor or my innocence sustained.

When you get around to accussing me of being a foolish supporter of a foolish place that may be guilty of filing the wrong papers or assuming that the world of folk music is a rose colored place with out malice be sure to get my name right.

Donald R. Meixner

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:46 PM

None of this is any of the members' business. It is Max and Dick's business, so why not just shut the hell up and stay out of it?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Big Mick
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:40 PM

And some of you people were troubled when I called these assholes by their proper names. They are worthless slugs, not worthy of your time. I even recognize the one that started this. It is so easy. And don't you just love how they try to cover their intent (which is to make themselves feel better, because we didn't give them the "attention" that their poor self worth felt they were due) by making it seem to be a legitimate question on non profit status. And then you let them elevate it to discussion level. Then they feel they are sucessful.

This slug has been here a long time s/he even operates with a handle. This slug delights in getting you into circular arguments such as this one. This slug has been here so long that they know full well that it evolved and that Max just keeps it going as best he can.

They only proper response is to ignore the arguments that this slug is raising and send in another contribution. Don't let this slug feed on your indignation. That feeds its need for legitimacy, and does nothing to cause IT to seek help for low self worth.

Mick

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: mack/misophist
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:37 PM

Dear Guest, Your obvious distress is heart rending. The only solution for you would be to consult the state authorities. Do let us know what their response is.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:31 PM

Not with the level of antagonism and hostility being directed at me I won't.

Which is why the Pennsylvania State Dept. of Charities allows people to bring complaints against an organization like Mudcat Cafe anonymously too.

If some of you could only see yourselves as potential funders/donors see you behaving, I think you might reconsider how showing this level of hostility and venom doesn't help the cause, but in fact, can do a tremendous amount harm to it.

It is always your choice how to respond to queries about the Mudcat Cafe's non-profit status. I suggest you all stay out of it next time, and let the site owners deal with directly themselves.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Dani
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:20 PM

"Integrity, character, and truth...." You show us yours, we'll show you ours ;)

Dani

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:14 PM

IvanB, the discrepancy is between the homepage, which says Mudcat Cafe is a registered non-profit organization, and the solicitation page, which says it isn't.

My objections are not about how much or how little money is being made off this site. My objections are about integrity, character, and truth in solicitation.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 12 May 02 - 01:55 PM

*LOL* Well said 'Spaw...my own sentiments exactly!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: IvanB
Date: 12 May 02 - 01:45 PM

Guest, where is the discrepancy between the Home page and the "Solicitation" page? The home page states that Mudcat and Digital Tradition are both registered non-profit organizations. The solicitations page clearly states that donations are not tax-deductible, i.e., are not charitable deductions. There is no conflict in that. Many types of organizations are registered as non-profit without being charities. A labor union is one type that comes quickly to my mind.

Unfortunately, I can't tell by your moniker if you're the same 'Guest' to whom I already replied in this same vein in the other thread on this subject, but, if so, you seem to delight in beating a dead horse. I believe most of users of this site are of the belief that the benefits far outweigh our contributions. And, frankly, you seem to persist in implying that Mudcat and DT are some vast conspiracy raking in money by the bushelsful. Although I certainly have no proof of my belief, I still firmly believe that such an assumption is highly erroneous.

As has been stated numerous times, don't donate if you don't feel comfortable with it. But, although I try to be openminded about such threads as this, your persistence leads me to believe you have a hidden agenda of sowing seeds of doubt in order to harm this site.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 May 02 - 01:18 PM

Not on my keyboard, BillD. I tried it on both Word and in this space and nuttin' happens. What am I missing?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: kendall
Date: 12 May 02 - 01:16 PM

GFuest is obviously a power freak. At no point does he/she say WHY it bothers him/her. So, rave on Guest, but, get this: WE DON'T FUCKING CARE!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 May 02 - 01:07 PM

'Tis my policy not to respond to trolls, but since there are already fifty messages here, then what the hell!!

Considering the benefits and the enjoyment that I derive from Mudcat, it warms my heart to think that Max and Jeff and Dick and all their mysterious hench-persons such as Joe Offer and the various Joe Clones are able to ride around in chauffeur-driven limousines, wear the finest clothes, eat in the finest restaurants, drink the most expensive booze, and in general, live the high-life — and that they actually manage to do it on the pathetic small check that I send to Max at highly irregular intervals. I consider that to be very efficient use of my meager contribution, and I am more than satisfied. There'll be another check in the mail very shortly, Max. Keep up the good work.

Don Firth

P.S.: Doesn't GUEST have a life?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Art Thieme
Date: 12 May 02 - 12:19 PM

YES, Pat. That's what I said.

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:59 AM

Wonderfully done circle games you're playing my dear troll......Excellent job and I commend your performance......You fail to answer the relevant questions thrown back by repeating yourself on a different issue/question.....Very well done!

Now obviously none of this has anything to do with you nor is it even remotely important to anyone that matters nor are you even slightly interested at all in Mudcat, so again, I commend your performance as it has achieved an excellent response from the members which should delight you no end. Congrats on a job well done!

I don't mind giving you this additional message as I'm sure you will continue in any number of ways to keep both of these threads going until you decide to quit....and as you seem to be a weekend kind of troll, I imagine that will probably be about Tuesday.

Until then, keep up the good work in continuing to prove the effectiveness a knowledgeable troll can have. Again, an excellent job of stirring!!!

Spaw   

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Art Thieme
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:57 AM

Guest,

You are a real time prime example of my favorite definition of POWER --- which is: The extent to which one can inconvenience others. My life's mission has been to avoid people like you if at all possible. But when people like you crash jets full of fuel into the World Trade Center, it might possibly be time for some overkill. Showing you up for what you are is simply justified human nature and when Bush comes to shove, you will get what you deserve. Please stay out of my way. Hide behind your semantic spewings and regulatory nicities all you want, those will not save you from being shown up for what you are.----Even Hitler saw the light and put a bullet into his own fetid brain. The stench and the fecal matter on the ground beneath you will give you away for the asshole that you are ! Decent people everywhere will, mercifully, be forewarned so they can step around you.

Love ;-)

Art

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: RichM
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:50 AM

No, THIS is how it sounds:

http://www.s-hamilton.k12.ia.us/antiqua/mp3/krumtrio.mp3

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: RichM
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:47 AM

and this is how it sounds

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: RichM
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:43 AM

Dear Guest, here's a tidbit for you (Sorry, Doug, it's a snack for the troll, I know)

You need to take up a musical instrument. May I suggest this one?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Mr Red
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:39 AM

Well I haven't got the spare dosh but if I had I would regard my contribution like I regard the raffle or the cover charge on a Folk club full of floor singers. Entertainment.
Love 'em or like em, without Mudcat, how could I see such humour from so many (like Spaw?)
As Oscar Wilde said "My! I wish I'd said that"
Don't anyone plaguarise Laurence McNiel Whistler (or his mother) by saying "Oh you will Mr Red, YOU WILL!"
Let us hope Max has work and can indulge himself and us.
I vote Max, and Joe and all the unsung helpers.......

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Celtic Soul
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:35 AM

It would be a "consumer rights issue" if we were "consumers" here...BUT, we are *not* "consumers" as we DO NOT PAY FOR THE SERVICE!! As it is totally free, and no one is being forced to donate money, you're point is such a non-issue as to not even be worthy of the bandwidth wasted. I am done contibuting to this waste as of this moment.

I still suggest you seek counseling. Your desire to save people who DON'T WANT YOUR HELP is pathological.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Bill D
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:22 AM

guest...Let Dick & Max look out for themselves on this matter...they have had LOTS of help thinking about this for several years from people who are NOT anonymous.

You are not doing anything but nitpicking and annoying the populace.

(and Ebbie..."He bought a boxcar of hammers for $1.00 each and advertised them for sale at 99¢. (Where's a cent mark on this keyboard? editor)" ...you have to hold down the 'alt' key and hit '0162', then release 'alt' to get "¢")

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:20 AM

It bothers me because information about the legal non-profit status of Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition is not given in the form of a clearly understandable Solicitation Notice, which is required by IRS law regardless of charitable or non-charitable legal status. The Solicitation Notice law applies to both charitable tax exempt non-profits and non-charitable tax exempt non-profits. See the link to the IRS page previously provided to confirm this.

The Solicitation Notice law requires you clearly and understandably make information available about your legal status as either a charitable or non-charitable tax exempt organization to the public with your solicitations. Mudcat Cafe has a solicitation page which gives information about this legal status which conflicts with the information about the legal status given on the homepage.

That is intentional misrepresentation at best, and fraudulent at worst. And THAT bothers me. It is a consumer rights issue, not a popularity of the website issue.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Celtic Soul
Date: 12 May 02 - 11:06 AM

I am referring to the post above wherein Dick Greenhaus can be quoted as saying: "The Digital Tradition is incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation in the state of Delaware. NOT one that can provide tax deduction for contribution".

I wonder at why this bothers you so, considering you have already admitted to *NOT* having made any contributions yourself. Why are you defending those who *HAVE* when they DON'T WANT YOUR DEFENSE????? Those who have contributed have all said they are *just fine* with the status quo, and trust the adminstrators with their contributions.

How utterly co-dependent of you...seek some counseling.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 02 - 10:52 AM

Celtic Soul, I'm using the definitions used by the IRS at their website. Which ones are you using?

Also, do you have difficulty reading? A learning disability perhaps? The Mudcat homepage clearly states:

"...the Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition, both registered non-profit organizations."

That doesn't not state "Not for Profit" does it?

And then, someone named Joe Offer, whose relationship to the site owners is not at all clear to me (is he a fiscal agent? a legal representative/attorney?) states that Mudcat Cafe is a sole proprietorship. Then Dick Greenhaus says Digital Tradition is a non-profit. On the solicitations page, Max Spiegal says:

"I own a company called Onstage Media, Inc. which does nothing less than finance the entire Mudcat operations. Dick finances the Digitrad with his pocket change and an occasional grant. Both Dick and I benefit a great deal from the success of Onstage. One very certain way to benefit The Mudcat and Digitrad is to refer business to Onstage Media, Inc., and its clients. "

There is a thread about bank accounts being set up in foreign countries to funnel money to the Mudcat Cafe. Yet on the solicitation page, it appears as though Onstage Media owns Mudcat Cafe, so where is the money going, to Onstage Media or Mudcat Cafe?

This is just the sort of conflicting information that leads people to suspect there may be fundraising irregularities in regards to non-profit and unrelated business income, which the IRS requires be reported too.

But the most troubling thing to me really is the claim on the homepage that both Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition are "registered non-profit organizations." When I looked further into other pages of the website, I found a whole lot of information which contradicts and conflicts with that statement. At best, that is misrepresentation, at worst, it is fraud which is prosecutable in Pennsylvania by the State Dept of Charities.

I don't give a damn how much all of you donate, or how much you love this place, or how right on you think the owners are. I see what I consider some serious discrepancies which are misleading to the public, and possibly fraudulent. Prosecutable? That isn't for any of us to decide. The Pennsylvania Dept of Charities' and IRS enforcement arms are the ones who determine these sorts of things.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Celtic Soul
Date: 12 May 02 - 10:06 AM

Guest...

It has already been stated that this is a "Not for Profit", not a "Non-Profit". There is a *HUGE* difference. Also, *no where* on this site does it claim to be a "Charitable Organization". Accepting donations DOES NOT make an entity a "Charity".

You need to find out what the definitions of the words you're using are. It makes all the difference in whether or not you have a point.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 12 May 02 - 08:12 AM

Small donation en route, I try to give some time, to chase queries, and possibly amuse with the occasional quiz.
Bit I still feel I am well in profit from my use of the 'cat.
In a nautical sense, any chance of bringing back "the cat" for certain offences ?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 May 02 - 05:39 AM

When you drink a glass of country cider, you don't worry about how many rats drowned in the barrel while it was maturing. You enjoy the flavour and the "body" of the drink. So dear guest while we all enjoy the flavour and body of our beloved Mudcat. Why don't you go look for a cider farm, it's about the only chance you have of adding to anybody's enjoyment.
No need to thank me!!.....Giok

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: katlaughing
Date: 12 May 02 - 05:29 AM

I'd be happy to, Don, just let me know which you want to do...same as before or something new...your call, darlin'...and thanks!

kat

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Banjer
Date: 12 May 02 - 04:39 AM

Well DougR, I too was replying mostly to my fellow Mudcatters, not so much to 'it'. I tried to turn 'its' negativity into something positive. You know' 'If life hands you a lemon, make lemonade.' Sort of taking the wind out 'its' sails by making it work FOR the 'Cat rather than against it. In fact if we made it a ritual that each time one of these trolls posts like this we donate more to the 'Cat think how strong we would soon be! They might soon get the idea that each time they rant, we get on the bandwagon and rally!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: DougR
Date: 12 May 02 - 02:19 AM

Why, oh why, do you feed these guys folks? All you have to do is note "who" starts the thread. If the question posed is intended to cause turmoil, don't fuckin' reply! Seems simple to me.

And for the record, I'm replying ot my fellow Mudcatters, not GUEST.

DougR

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: DonMeixner
Date: 12 May 02 - 12:33 AM

Sounds like it's time for another bracelet to be auctioned off. Kat, would you put up the art for me? Same style as before or shall we go for something new and different?

DonMeixner( Thats my very own name. I'm proud enough of it not ot hide in anonymity and snipe from the shadows)

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 May 02 - 12:16 AM

Banjer, there's also the story about a farmer. He worked hard all his life and finally just had to give it up. He decided to go retail.

He bought a boxcar of hammers for $1.00 each and advertised them for sale at 99 cents. (Where's a cent mark on this keyboard? editor) He developed a flourishing business.

A friend discovered what he was doing and expostulated. "You can't do that. You're losing money!" he said.

The farmer shrugged. "Beats farming," he said.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Hrothgar
Date: 11 May 02 - 11:28 PM

Guest, why don't you donate $25,000 to make sure the Mudcat is in the regulatory area about which you seem so enthusiastic?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Dani
Date: 11 May 02 - 11:03 PM

You know, this guest is just too darn effective. How do we know that Guest isn't really Dick, or Max, just reminding us to send money? Have you bought any plane tickets to Antigua recently?

Dani

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 11 May 02 - 10:33 PM

If I were bright, DigiTrad would be copyrighted and sold, not distributed free of charge.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Banjer
Date: 11 May 02 - 10:22 PM

It's damned hard to make money when you give stuff away

That reminds me of the story of the two not so bright brothers that tried to make aliving selling watermelons. They would buy them for $1.50 a piece and sell them for $1.00 each. When the one brother allowed as how they didn't seem to be making any money the other brother said that the obvious solution was to buy another truck so they could sell twice as many....

So maybe, Dick, if you was to give away more, you'd make more???

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Banjer
Date: 11 May 02 - 10:15 PM

Yeah, Kendall and Dani, that's teh spirit!!! Let's get the ball rolling and send Max some help while it is fresh on our minds...encourage others to do likewise!! Just so none can accuse us of having a non-music thread here allow me a paordy of a few verses of a popular song of the Civil War era:

Yes we'll rally round the 'Cat boys, We'll rally once again,
Shouting the battle cry of Mudcat, We will rally from the hillside, we'll gather from the plain,
Shouting the battle cry of Mudcat!!

CHORUS:<
Our Mudcat forever, Hurrah, boys, hurrah,
Ban the bean counters and fill up the jar
Whle we rally round the Mudcat boys, yes rally once again
Shouting the battle cry of MUDCAT!!

Hip, Hip, Huzzah!!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 11 May 02 - 10:12 PM

For the record, The Digital Tradition's income has never exceeded $4000 in any year, and that was in a year in which we reeived a $3500 grant for a new computer. In terms of other income, if we reach $200 in any given year, we're amazed and delighted.

T-Shirts and patches, while they may have provided some income to Mudcat, are a net loss to DigiTrad: I lay out the money for them, and hope to get most of it back. Contributions are something else, though I doubt if we've received $100 in toto since 1988.

It's damned hard to make money when you give stuff away.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: kendall
Date: 11 May 02 - 09:57 PM

I just did Dani, as I have always done, and will continue to do as long as Max provides me with this excellent site. I have gotten more than my money's worth, and I don't give a rodent's rump what some bean counting nit picking pain in the ass thinks.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Dani
Date: 11 May 02 - 08:40 PM

Thanks for the reminder to send some more cash!

Dani

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Gray D
Date: 11 May 02 - 07:52 PM

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Banjer
Date: 11 May 02 - 07:47 PM

End of the story my happy ass!! The only thing that has ended here is your IRS attitude. If anything it causes me to want to make yet another contribution to the Mudcat, and how much is NONE of you efffin' business!! Your kind is the very reason I HATE anythiing to do with officious pompous assed government officials.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 02 - 07:38 PM

I think that is sound advice Gray. No one but the site owners are qualified to respond to these questions. Which begs the question, what the hell do all these interlopers think they are doing, poking their noses in where they have no business being to begin with?

As you say, there is no need for further correspondence here in the forum on these matters. Potential funders and donors will quickly see the discrepancies on the website regarding the financial information, and act accordingly. Those who wish to receive further information about these organizations can contact the Pennsylvania Department of Charities directly, now that the information on how to contact them has been provided to people here. That department is the proper authority for investigating charities fraud and abuse claims and queries, and so further correspondence should be directed to them.

I agree, as this is the end of story, there is no need for Mudcat members to carry on this thread any further.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Gray D
Date: 11 May 02 - 07:22 PM

People, people, on this side of the pond this process is known as a "wind up". You had a troll alert on the other thread that "Guest" started. Answering is not mandatory.

Can I bring to bear my considerable gift as a "thread-killer" and suggest that, as of right now, you ignore any further "Guest" postings on this matter.

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POSTING.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 02 - 07:16 PM

Actually artbrooks, on June 22, 2001, Pennsylvania House Bill 672 was signed into law, which raised the limits as follows:

"Amends the "Solicitation of Funds for Charitable Purposes Act" by, among other things: (1) requiring that the financial report of every charitable organization that receives annual contributions of $125,000 (previously $100,000) or more be audited by an independent certified public accountant or public accountant; (2) requiring every charitable organization, with exceptions, which receives annual contributions of at least $50,000 but less than $125,000, to have a review or audit of their financial statements performed by an independent certified public accountant or public accountant; and (3) making an audit or review optional for any charitable organization that receives annual contributions of less than $50,000, or is exempted and receives annual contributions of less than $125,000. "

However, as you noted, nonprofits are still required to both file and disclose form 990 only if their income is over $25,000. So the only relevant questions are whether Digital Tradition's legal relationship to Mudcat Cafe is treated as combined income as a single non-profit entity, and if the income of Digital Tradition exceeded $25,000 in any year since it's incorporation.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 11 May 02 - 07:09 PM

Well, 'GUEST' I'd venture to say that our vitriol towards you is because of your transparent attempt(s) to cause us some small annoyance by pretending ( - to nobody but YOURSELF, actually, as we arent fooled) to have a genuine & normal curiosity about funds, but SOOO quickly turn it around to an attack on us.

Forgive us (if I can speak for 'us', cos I shouldnt phrase it that way really) for being on our guard when somebody anonymous tries a half-arsed attempt to cast doubt on the integrity of people here, but thats because we have found that because when nameless people come here asking questions that THEY think will make us feel uncomfortable (or that will make newbies and/or occasional visitors think twice about this place) then they are invariably Trolling.

Now, can I ask, are you JUST trying to irritate us (though as you are coming back, its evidently not just a 'hit-&-run', so the least you are trying to do is see how many have 'taken the bait') or do you REALLY think you can do the Mudcat some harm, either so your site has less competition, as Lonesome EJ has speculated, or do you simply feel you'll be a bit better off by making others worse off?

- Inquiring minds want to know...

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Rolfyboy6
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:56 PM

Anon. guest clearly has that bureaucratic mindset. Anything not prohibited is required. Real chickenshit.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:55 PM

Mudcat Cafe is in Pennsylvania. Digital Tradition solicits funds and conducts business through a website registered (according to the "Help Support Mudcat" page) in Pennsylvania, and so is subject to the laws of that state regarding charities.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:50 PM

Anon guest also asks for a filing in PA, although Dick Grenhaus clearly states Delaware. We should quit posting since this troll is not only repetitive but ...!

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:34 PM

ANON.GUEST, since he/she/it is such a tax expert, is no doubt aware that non-profit organizations with annual gross receipts less than $25,000 are not required to file IRS form 990.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Susanne (skw)
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:32 PM

Guest, you seem to have all the information that you were after. Will you now accept that us others are simply not interested, and stop posting? BTW, the hostility you perceive is not, I think, caused by your request for financial information but by your insistence on remaining anonymous and your persistence in the face of indifference. It reeks of a hidden agenda, whatever you may have in mind.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:23 PM

You know folks, I can understand your loyalty and desire to defend the site owners, as all of you feel you are deriving great benefits from this site for free.

But where do you think your hostility towards perfectly reasonable requests about the non-profit status of this website business, which is actively soliciting on-line for donations as a non-profit organization, is going to lead?

The on-line complaint form, easily filed with the Pennsylvania Dept of Charities can be found here, BTW. I suggest if you have complaints you start there:

http://www.dos.state.pa.us/Form/chemail.htm

Your virulent protests at this supposed "snooping around" by me and other guests looking for this information only makes things look more suspicious.

How helpful to Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition is that?

Dick, I neglected to thank you for being forthcoming about the status of Digital Tradition so quickly. Since you are incorporated as a non-profit, I'm sure you know and understand the legalities of 990s as public records.

For those of you not familiar with non-profit financial records as public records, you might want to go to the excellent website of Guidestar, which not only explains this, but also has a search engine to thousands of organizations' financial records which are viewable on-line. I expected to find Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition there, but didn't. So I asked for the information here.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Devilmaster
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:19 PM

My apologies to Joe Offer, but his response from another thread was deserving of this thread:

Subject: RE: Can we have some Mudcat accounts?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11-May-02 - 04:19 PM

Well, my nameless friend/friends, I'll be glad to discuss music with you, without you revealing who you are. However, I have no obligation to discuss finances and legalities with anonymous persons. Pene Azul and I handle the day-to-day operations for Max, but Max is the owner of the Mudcat Cafe. If you need legal or financial information, contact him personally.

Regarding the status of Mudcat and the Digital Tradition as organizations, neither entity has claimed tax-exempt status, so no accounting is required.

As I have said above and as I have explained in the FAQ, the Mudcat Cafe is run by Max, with help from his friends. The Digital Tradition is run by Dick Greenhaus, with help from his friends. These are not businesses - these are things that Max and Dick and their friends do for their personal enjoyment. If you're not a friend, don't bother contributing.

-Joe Offer, a friend-


Steve

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:13 PM

What makes you think anyone wants YOUR money? If we knew who you were, we could throw it back at you. Try getting a life. (it's the wife)

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Dicho (Frank Staplin)
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:11 PM

Sure, exercise your rights by not making a donation. We will now exercise our right to ignore you.

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: RichM
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:11 PM

How about becoming a member?
That will cost you nothing.

Then you can use Personal Messages to discuss this directly with Max.

Rich McCarthy

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 02 - 06:07 PM

Actually, it is the hostility with which the members posting here have greeted the request for financial information that has piqued my interest.

What I want to know is the exact legal non-profit status of Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition, so that I may make an informed giving decision about donating to Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition.

The exact information I am seeking is outlined at the PA Dept of Charities website as follows:

"To Obtain Information About Charitable Organizations Consumers have the right to know basic information about charitable organizations that will allow them to make better, more informed charitable giving decisions. This information includes:

· the official name of the charitable organization and its principal place of business; · the organization's registration status with the Bureau of Charitable Organizations;

· an accurate description of the organization's charitable purpose;

· how the organization intends to use donated resources; and

· financial information, such as:

· the organization's financial statements and IRS 990 returns that explain how donated resources were used for a given fiscal year."

In other words, what is on my mind is to exercise my consumer rights regarding charitable giving to non-profit organizations soliciting on the internet.

Do I need to make it any clearer than that?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 11 May 02 - 05:45 PM

Guest: You apparently have a point to make. However, you are oblique and rather snide. Having gone to some trouble to look up the status of the Mudcat, hadn't you better say what's on your mind? What would you have the members do? Is it closing the site, perhaps? Maybe you have a site of your own and are trying to kill the competition? It's really rather hard to guess. So, instead of being an anonymous weasel, speak up. There's many of us who would love to find out what, exactly, you're after. Two years have gone by since the initial thread, so whatever it is you want must still be burning a hole in your gut. It's obvious to me, and I am by no means a regular Mudcatter, that all the 'catters are good friends. If a friend wants to help another friend with a small donation, where's the harm? It doesn't appear that Max is doing anything illegal or harmful and is giving a great deal to all the people who congregate on this site. So, Guest, do us all a favour and say what you mean/want or just bugger off. Lion (LEJ's wife)

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 02 - 05:45 PM

So Dick, where can one view a copy of DigiTrad's 990s then?

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 11 May 02 - 05:42 PM

The Digital Tradition is incorporated as a not-for-profit corporation in the state of Delaware. NOT one that can provide tax deduction for contribution.

DigiTrad's has received two grants for computer equipment fronm the Philadelphia Folk Song Society since its inception in 1988. Other income (minimal) is from the portion of T-Shirt and Patch sales that go directly through DigiTrad. Outgo is also minimal, consisting of office supplies, computer maintenance etc. What's not compensated at all is labor, which has been considerable.

My books indivate that contributions (cash) account for about 30% of DigiTrad's operating expenses; the rest come from my pocket.

I can't speak for Max, but I do know that Mudcat has a much higher cash outflow: Equipment maintenance and upgrades (Mudcat is a growing thing); power and T1 lines, to mention a few. The labor to maintain the site is also voluntary, and the value of that labor contribution is considerable (what do you think is the average hourly wage for computer technician types?)

Subject: RE: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: kendall
Date: 11 May 02 - 04:10 PM

The more you stir a turd, the worse it stinks. Why are you being such a pain in the ass? What is your problem?

Subject: Clarification on the Mudcat's financials
From: GUEST
Date: 11 May 02 - 04:06 PM

I notice that Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition are, on page 1, referred to as non-profits. But on the "Help Support Mudcat" page, it states they are not.

Which is it?

Neither Guidestar or Pennsylvania Department of Charities has the two in their databases.

One "Joe Offer" (whose relationship to the site owner(s) is unclear to me) states that Mudcat Cafe and Digital Tradition are sole proprietorships. If that is so, it might be a good idea to remove the "nonprofit" sentence from page one.

PA Dept of Charities has an on-line site for making queries about non-profit organizations operating in it's state. Their website is:

http://www.dos.state.pa.us/charities/charities.html