Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: smallpiper
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 07:43 PM

Mornin Harp girl

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: harpgirl
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 07:39 PM

..my goodness my dear "archaic trickster", are you still at it? Why, your persistence alone should qualify you as as an insider by this time...Your desire to engage so many of us suggests a need on your part to become a member of the community. Why not just sign on as "archaic trickster", then we can all talk privately with you about your internet behavior....and your opinions about matters of sexual politics....Sincerely, hg

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 07:19 PM

You all do appreciate that ANON.GUEST is keeping this...discussion going in order to satisfy his/hers/its own perverted desire to see everyone else running around in circles? DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!!!!

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: sponge
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 05:40 PM

Wake up and smell the coffee guys....the internet is a nasty place. People think they have a right to post what they want. people who own sites (like mudcat) always get slated for preveting people from posting what they want. If you don't like what you read, read something else. S.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 05:21 PM

So let me get this straight kat. If the thread title had been "The Yellow Rose of Taegu" and your mother had innocently opened the thread to read:

"She's the yellow Rose of Taegu, the girl that I adore. Her cunt it smells like cock juice; she's a good two-dollar whore."

...everything would be just fine?

The problem is simply with the thread titles?

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 05:06 PM

Personally, I wouldn't want to invite my mother, if she were alive, or many other older relatives to visit this site and have them see titles of threads like the one I cited above. I don't care what the content of the thread is, but I sure don't want people whom I respect, like Jean Ritchie, Sandy & Caroline Paton, etc. to come here and see a thread about "her cunt smelled like cock juice." I don't care if it is part of a song. It is NOT the title of the song, nor should it be the title of a thread, IMO. And, I am sure the Patons, Ms. Ritchie etc. have read and seen worse, probably, but I, for one, would love to attract more people of their caliber to the Mudcat and I don't believe that will happen with such thread titles greeting them when they come here for the first time. I mean, would you put that up on a sign over your front door and expect to attract anything but flies?

kat THE TITLE'S THE THING

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST,Same Guest as above
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 04:53 PM

And I meant to add, I also don't think this conversation is going anywhere productive anymore--it's spinning in circles at this point. Since I've already said what I wanted to say numerous times now, I think I'll stay out of this, unless something more compelling about the subject comes up.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Chip2447
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 04:53 PM

FER CYRIN OUTLOUD!!! If you think that a thread is gonna offend you, dont read the sumbitch.

Personally, I couldn't care any less about the shaving habits or lack thereof of any Mudcatter, but if someone wants to talk about it I won't stand in their way, on the other hand though, you'll see that I neither started that thread or contributed to it.

If enough people speak out against a thread because they are offended, and said thread is deleted, we have just allowed a group however large or small to censor us.

The minute that we allow censorship because someone is offended by a thread will be the beginning of the end of the CAT. Granted, this is a private forum that Max has graciously allowed us to visit. If he chooses to censor the Cat, then that is his business.

It boils down to the simple fact that you are your own censor. If you don't like a program on television, you turn it off, don't like rap music on your radio, change the station. If you dont like a thread title, subject, postings, or the people who have posted to it don't read the bastard, but whatever you do, don't try to tell me what I should or shouldn't read.

Rant over...
Chip2447

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 04:48 PM

I agree that no one is holding a gun to anyone's head to get them to read offensive threads. But there is something more insidious about these threads--and that is the climate/attitudes from those sorts of threads that end up permeating other threads, and the forum in general.

Now, considering the proliferation of these threads over the past week or so, there are at least two possible explanations for the current backlash against them: 1) they are getting more "in our face" or, 2) everyone's tolerance level of this sort of BS is dropping. It could be a combination of the two. It could be the doldrums of summer, and the offending posts will eventually go away. Or maybe the BS/non BS split in the forum is the real underlying issue.

I don't know the answer. But more people do seem fed up with it, and are saying so.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 04:43 PM

Obviously, this thread does not offend radriano. This thread was not intended to be a "titilating thread" so radriano is not contradicting himself by posting to it. Your post is quite illogical, GUEST. If you are the same GUEST with whom I've been chatting on this thread, you are doing nothing to further your cause by jumping down radriano's throat.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Genie
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 04:39 PM

Actually, Guest, I used the term "porn" only to refer to what some of you seem to consider the content of some threads. I wouldn't know whether the offensive threads are mainly denigrating of women, because I seldom even open a thread that has a title like "female shaving techniques" or even "manly stubble: OK?" I didn't even check out the "womanly jiggles" thread until it had well over 100 posts. I waste enough time as it is without opening all sorts of threads that sound like just more totally inane discussions or a symposia on topics that don't really need discussing. There are at least 12 non-music threads active today in the forum which I feel no desire even to open. (Some days it's a lot more than that.) There are a few others that I've opened and then passed on posting to or opening again.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 04:28 PM

Which is why you are spending your time reading this thread and posting to it radriano?

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: radriano
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 04:21 PM

You can't tell from a thread's name what the contents are. At least not usually. When I see an offending thread I follow rule number one. JUST DON'T POST TO IT! Unfortunately idiots never seem to go out of fashion and titilating threads get all sorts of enraged comments. That is exactly what the posters of these threads want. Don't give these morons the satisfaction. Their threads are a waste of time and don't for a moment think anything you say will make a difference to them.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 04:13 PM

Or shaved pussy threads either.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 03:52 PM

Among other things, yeah, it's about that!

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 03:43 PM

It's about we don't need titles such as this for threads: "Her cunt smelled like cock juice."

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 03:29 PM

Yes, but Amos, the culture we live in has changed over time. For instance, it's no longer socially acceptable to make debasing jokes about people of different ethnic origins. Some of us would like to see the culture evolve to the point at which it is no longer socially acceptable to make debasing jokes about people of different genders! IMO, it's not about superficial "niceties", it's about respect for one another.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Amos
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 03:09 PM

I think you'll find the history around this sort of topic has been addressed to penises as much as it has to breasts and vulvae, and, really, so the fuck what!!???

Given the culture we live in you probably find that men make a good many more sexually oriented jokes than women do (although the recent song hit "Viagara in the Waters" might be the bellwether of change in that respect!) That is not a flaw in the Mudcat, though, and I see no reason to resort to straining and artifice to palliate over-picky minds and pretend to niceties we don't really have. Sharon's observation above is consistently true across the bulk of human societies, I think.

A

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 01:57 PM

See, that's what I'm talkin' about: I don't think we'd see as many females making that sort of a joke (and I use the term "joke" loosely... *G*).

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 01:43 PM

SharonA

Lemme paraphrase Bart Simpson

"There's nothing like an uncarpeted basement!"

;-)

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 01:35 PM

...and I don't suppose that a thread about shaving male genitalia would generate the same sort of "interest" or commentary as the female-genitalia thread...

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 12:45 PM

Right Genie, but the hard part of this obviously is that the "porn" threads, as you refer to them, are ones where the subjects of denigration have been exlusively women. That does complicate the matter beyond "consensus" for adult sexual material for some people.

No one in these threads has suggested that there be no sexual content in our discussions, whether BS or on-topic. What I do hear some people saying is that when many individual men cross the line of socially acceptable frank discussion, to the extent that paddymac and others did in the shaving female genitalia thread. As someone pointed out (Peg I think), a discussion of men trimming their beards isn't comparable.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Genie
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 12:34 PM

Let's see -- a guy whose "handle" is "Pene Azul" deletes a thread for lewd content. Hmmmm... . (Jeff, you know I love you. Still, that image gives me a chuckle.)

Wouldn't we have to throw out a great deal of traditional folk music if we censored all the smut? (Never mind the double entendre songs.)

Seriously, I'm wit most o' youse. It's Max's site and I'll accept his rules--as enforced by Max himself, Joe, and Jeff. Personal attacks threaten the community itself. Threads or posts that merely offend some people's sense of propriety are not in the same category. Pretty easy to spot a "porno" thread by its title and avoid opening it. Also easy to avoid going back to a thread if you've opened it without knowing what it was about.

Genie

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 12:33 PM

GUEST: I like the idea of a comment being added by one of the moderators, but I'd like to see a comment that speaks to MAX'S POLICY on acceptable and non-acceptable sexual adult content (rather than a statement about "consensus", since we don't seem to have a consensus among all the members). I'd like to see such a Mudcat-policy statement added to the "feminine shaves" thread itself (such a statement could be posted by them without refreshing the thread to the top of the Forum list), where anyone who opens that thread in the future would read the comment. I agree that such a statement should also appear in the FAQ if it doesn't already.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Pied Piper
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 12:13 PM

Thanks Guest alowing me to view this thread.Can't tell wether I've been corrupted. Is there a test ?. PP

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 12:11 PM

SharonA, I am pretty much in agreement with everything you've said, especially where you said that the moderators choosing to let the thread sink without taking any action being a decision. Where I disagree with you, is in your interpretation of what that decision, ie to not take any action, or offer any explanation, actually means.

My opinion as to how this situation should be dealt with is to leave the thread to sink, but to make a comment regarding what the consensus is regarding "acceptable" use of the forum regarding BS threads with sexual adult content, when it bears no relationship to the purpose of the forum (ie folk and blues music). I believe it should be done in a new, totally separate thread. And then I think something could be added to the FAQ. Not anything earth shattering, but just a good summation of the best of the discussion currently going on regarding this issue. I think that would help tremendously, and wouldn't make some of us feel as if our feelings about the nature of the thread was being disregarded, for whatever reason(s).

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 12:09 PM

Amos: Hey, I like the jokes in the Reader's Digest!! (The POV in some of its articles is another matter entirely...)

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 12:00 PM

GUEST: Well, I think that calling this a "volatile issue" is putting it a bit strongly (I don't think it ranks up there with the situation in Palestine, for instance). But speaking strictly for my own personal preference, I would like to see the "feminine shaves" thread deleted. I agree with Peg's interpretation of paddymac's opening post on that thread as being of a voyeuristic nature; I think it may have been even solicitous (was he looking for a job when he asked "whether there might be a specialty niche in the various forms of the hair dressing trades for such artistry"?), rather than an innocent query about an "art form". Even if Big Mick is correct in his assessment that paddymac simply made a "tongue in cheek effort", a little joke in reaction to the beard-shaving thread, it didn't come across that way to me.

As you say, the Mudcat moderators have to decide what is best for the Forum. There's been a policy of allowing material here that would be censored on many other forums, but I don't know if private-parts discussions that could be considered titillating have been allowed or deleted in the past, so I don't know what the precedent is for this situation. Bear in mind, though, that a decision to wait and see if the thread "sinks" IS a decision.

If the thread dies a natural death from neglect, I think that that will serve as a signpost to anyone who contemplates starting a similar thread in the near future, a sign that says that the level of maturity among the posters to Mudcat is such that discussions on similar subjects won't give the gratification that one may be seeking by starting such threads. I think this says volumes more than simple censorship by the moderators would say.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Amos
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 11:12 AM

Esteemed Guest:

Your condescending, moralistic, humorless, whining and self-serving duplicity is a lot more disgusting than any use of Anglo Saxon terms, and IMHO does a good deal more to suppress the innate quality of the 'Cat as a liberal forum for discussion. What are you REALLY trying to do here? Quitcher whining, get a life, and subscribe to Reader's Digest to build up your sensa yewma.

'Course that could be just me, y'know. I've been wrong before! :>)

A

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 10:35 AM

So SharonA, what do you suppose should be done in this case? There are a number of women and men who weighed in on this and agreed with Pretty Damn Disgusted that Mudcat was not the appropriate place for the shaved female genitalia thread. A number of people have said they felt it should be deleted. Yet, it is still there, I suppose with the Mudcat moderators/censors (pick from your point of view) hoping it will sink and they won't have to make a decision as to what is best for the forum on this volatile issue.

I really think that Peg and Nicole are dead on the money. It is my opinion that if several women chime in to say they think the thread goes beyond what should be acceptable in this particular forum, that their concerns should be taken seriously. At this point, with the offending thread having been left in the forum, I don't see that their concerns are being taken seriously.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: SharonA
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 10:21 AM

To those who say that the nature of the thread entitled "forms of feminine shaves" was obvious to anyone before opening the thread: Actually, I interpreted the title to mean that the thread was a harmless poll asking ladies if they shaved their legs using a blade, an electric razor, depilatory or Epilady. The shaving-of-private-parts aspect never entered my mind until after I'd opened the thread. But then, that's the sort of prude I am.

While I found some of the comments in that thread offensive (notably the "very tasty" remark), I understand that the moderators of the Forum need to draw a line between what is offensive to some readers and what is downright pornographic. As others have noted, there have been many, many threads posted to the Forum that are offensive on one level or another to one person or another, but I disagree with the "Pretty Damn Disgusted" Guest's assertion that these offensive threads are equivalent to threads that attack an individual on a personal level. The presence of a thread can be tolerated if the majority of readers are not offended by the subject matter, but a personal attack is a threatening behavior that cannot be tolerated.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 08:05 AM

Pied - here it is wicked thread

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Pied Piper
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 07:23 AM

I've not read this thread, and it appears to have been removed. I'd like to make some comment about it but, I guess I'm better of not being exposed to it in case I get corrupted. I'm so glad that "the management" makes these moral judgements for me because (at the age of 44) I don't think I have enough experience to deal with these dangerous issues for my self. As to all sexual references in humour being disparaging to women; bollox.PP

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST,danielriverwind
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 06:23 AM

I haven't been on here in a while, but the whole world is getting pretty much like this. You take the good with the bad.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 06:20 AM

Thanks for the filter link George. Now I can put Mudcat on my favourites list again..

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 06:18 AM

Actually - from a brief look at the top of the threadlist - considerably more than 30%.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 06:17 AM

But I thought the "offending" thread was a genuine question (rather than some of the scatalogical humour we see around here from some established members) - and answered it as such.
AND - I certainly didn't see it as sexist. Its not an exclusively male activity, nor just for male titillation.
Its certainly not worth getting irate about! OK its off-topic, but so is about 30% of mudcat content anyway.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: smallpiper
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 05:47 AM

Nope Joe - the offending thread is still there.
Glad to hear you're having a great time keep at it.

---

Well, if a thread that's remaining is offensive, the one that was removed was worse (something about cunts and jock juice). I will agree, however, that there were a number of crude and stupid threads started in the last day or two, and the shaving thread was one of them. I didn't consider deleting them, but I think they're better left unread. Still, crude and stupid people must have an outlet for self-expression...
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Aug 02 - 03:57 AM

I was sightseeing in London yesterday, and I guess I didn't see the thread in question. It's gone, so I suppose Pene (Jeff) deleted it. I saw all sorts of messages complaining about some thread or another, but couldn't determine what people were talking about until I got a personal message from a friend.
As Kat said, only Pene, Max, and I have authority to delete threads and objectionable messages - and usually it's Pene and I who handle it. If there's something you find objectionable, the best way to handle it is to send a personal message to both Pene and me. One of us is likely to be on duty and able to deal with it.
We are usually quite reluctant to delete things, but we do feel a need to control things on occasion. The thread in question did seem to be a good candidate for deletion.
Thanks.
-Joe, having a great time visiting Micca-

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: X
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 09:50 PM

What a waste of time, I was looking for the porn.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: smallpiper
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 09:30 PM

Guest don't forget Girls will be girls.

Live and let live I say and avoid things you don't like the look of its your choice either to read the threads and be offended or to avoid them and not be offended.

Taking a musical turn look what happened in Ireland when the british took offense to traditional music - should we start hanging people?

I actually think that this is not a decent topic for the cat but I defend peoples right to free speach and try very hard to turn what could be offensive into somthing humorus. If you take offense at that then I'm sorry.

No one has ever accused me of either being insensitive tiowards women or of oppressing them in any way and I object to your tone and accusation, but once again I believe it is your right to make those assumptions no matter how wrong they are or perhaps I could call you names instead?

Which would be better?

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 06:23 PM

~~~~~~########.....||||||||||||||||||++++++^^^^^^

....and so on..(and you may quote me)

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Genie
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 06:19 PM

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: sponge
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 06:12 PM

Guys, Fact: 'someone' owns the Mudcat servers. Fact: They allow us, the community, to share our thoughts on them. Fact: It is _entirely_ up to the owners of the servers what they allow and disallow, what they delete and leave for all to view.

This kind of debate (happens all over the internet on any discussion groups/chat rooms/call it what you will.

Personally, If the owners of Mudcat don't like a thread or post for any reason, then I have no problem with them deleting it.(except this one )

If I don't agree with that decision, then that is MY problem, not theirs and I have to get a life. Sponge.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Susanne (skw)
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 05:25 PM

I gave the thread in question a wide berth - and I know now I was right, and will continue to do so. I wouldn't go as far as demanding its removal (as I haven't read it) but some threads we could indeed do without! Also, I believe not every removal of sexually offending material should be denounced as censorship - but as the line between the one and the other is very fine, and depends on individual sensibilities, I'd rather not attempt to draw it. Instead, I'll include this thread in those I leave untouched in the future.

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 04:56 PM

I've said it before, and I'll say it again...

This place needs a bran muffin...

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: Amos
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 04:08 PM

I would say anything to Peg I have ever said to anyone, and be happy to do it; I consider her a special and fine lady, and would even go out of my way not to offend her. But as she herself says she's not unduly precious about anything, and just because she doesn't like longshoreman's vocabulary, is no reason to soncider her anything but a fine person in my book. As for being hateful and mean and road-rage, let me just say, after due contemplation of the subtle ramifications of this arcane characterization, that I am forced to respond for lack of other meaningful choice, go piss up a rope, and don't be so goddamned delicate. And, oh, by the way, if I have given offense, please accept my apologies.

A

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: NicoleC
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 04:08 PM

Apologies for feeding the Troll, but folks, the Troll is right this time.

I don't get offended easily, and I'm not going to be "offended" by any of the silly BS threads. Nor do I think any of the Joe Clones should have to be the morality police if someone mentions sex or a "dirty" word. But I do think there are far more appropriate places to discuss the so-called art of shaving. Like under the bleachers at the local high school. At a slumber party.

Who said this was an ADULT forum? That doesn't wash when one of the first things you see is when you come to this site is "Mudcat for Kids." We can talk about encouraging kids to enjoy and play music, but creating a music community that excludes them is not practicing what we preach.

C'mon, folks, show some restraint. There are numerous places on the internet to discuss sex, do we really need to make this one of them?

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: RichM
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 03:48 PM

Sure, I'm joking...but ain't it sad that I have to say so? Sex is a part of life--as is talking about it...and I certainly have respect for Peg--as a person, as a fellow mudcatter, as a worker in whatever trade she pursued with honesty and respect.

Rich,
(feeling puckish today)
...that's spelled with a "p", not an "f"

:)

Subject: RE: Mudcat Cafe: New Folk Music Porn Site?
From: katlaughing
Date: 13 Aug 02 - 03:43 PM

Sure members know that they don't have to open an offensive thread and read it. I've said this before when the "N" word showed up in a title of a thread: how about First Impressions to a visitor. What does it say to them if they come to the Forum and see so many inane BS threads, some of them offensive in the extreme? They wouldn't know if the thread has taken a turn towards music and probably wouldn't even want to look to find out.

I know it will seem ironic to some for me to be saying such things. People change. Lately the sort of BS we've been having is truly offensive in that it is just plain stupid.

Joeclones do not delete threads unless they are duplicates. Pene, Joe and Max are the only ones authorised to delete threads. In this case, I think any stupid, inane thread which is started anonymously should be deleted. I'd hate to add up the number of postings taken up by responding to such.

kat