As Above So Below

Subject: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 06:02 PM

Putting the BS threads below the music thread, with the clickable link to both, is an excellent idea. So is leaving the BS alone, unless a post is a personal attack, rule breaking (as with the cut and pastes), or a tech fix. Stick with that, and not try to herd cats by controlling/consolidating based on subject/content, and you are homefree.

Also, can't one of those clickable links you are using to get to top/bottom also be used to an index on related threads by topic? A lot of forum admin softwares allow you to do that sort of grouping/indexing.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 06:13 PM

That wasn't clear. What I meant to ask was, rather than having a long list of related threads to scroll through before one gets to the actual thread, couldn't a clickable link be put at the top of a thread to click on, to get to the index of related threads at the bottom instead?

That asked, I still like the idea of having a clickable link to a subject index for related threads by topic in one location, instead of the the subject index appearing in each thread.

Keep up the good work.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Joe Offer
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 06:24 PM

We're toying with ideas for making the crosslinks more concise. Trouble is, we find that unless people have things right in front of their nose, they're likely to start a new thread on an existing topic, rather than looking around for it.
So, if a topic has lots of threads, maybe the long list will help Keep the list from getting even longer.
Maybe not.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 06:28 PM

Is the problem with thread proliferation a memory problem?

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 07:09 PM

"You can lead a horse to water...."

it sometimes takes VERY delicate pointing out that many lyrics, etc., have been asked for and posted before...

no one has quite figured out why many folk will not look further than what's in front of their nose.......I have read that many people rarely look beyond the first page of hits in a search engine.

I suspect that the only way to really make people aware that the topic or song etc, has been discussed before would be to put a big banner at the top:

NOTICE- we request you use the SEARCH facility before you post


....but then they would feel insulted.....Not an easy task to make it both clear AND convenient!

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Joe Offer
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 07:21 PM

No, actually, the main problem with thread proliferation is that it makes it hard to find information, and it makes it so the same information is repeated over and over again.

If BillD posts a well-reasoned opinion about one of his many areas of expertise, it can be impossible to find his meek and tiny voice amidst the reams of verbiage posted by our more prolific posters.

From what I understand from Max, storage is not a problem. One moderate-sized hard drive stores all the information that has been posted since its inception on October 1, 1996.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 07:32 PM

*big grin*...so THAT'S why my treatises on recaltnerant plebny get no responses!

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 07:39 PM

A search engine issue, then?

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Tinker
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 07:50 PM

It's a popular verbosity issue. I was looking for the lyrics to Boarding Party's version of Jamboree today. And began with a search. Two DT entries, neither the same as the CD and over 100 forum messages. I took the time to scan for lyric adds, but after that it was quicker for me to transcribe myself. Many folks just start a new thread to ask their question.
Thread consolidation does help. Once you find one of the tied threads you can stay on target with a particular song. There is so much overlap in folk lyrics that search criteria get iffy now and then.

Tinker

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 07:53 PM

Another, fairly serious problem with too many threads is that folks like me, who sometimes miss Mudcat for a day or two at a time, never get to see threads tthat we think are important.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Joe Offer
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 07:59 PM

Logical and literary concerns more than search engines, I think. If we have an ongoing discussion on the effects of peace marches, it's easier to have a discussion that people will follow if it's all in one thread.
If we go on to a certain point where John Q makes a statement, and then John R starts a new thread to respont to John Q, it breaks the train of throught and bifurcates the discussion.
I suppose the main reason John R started the new thread is that he not only wants to state his opinion - he wants a headline on the front page to go along with it. The Forum menu is our "front page." There are times when we need an editor to make sure no one reporter gets too much space on Page One.

It's even more important in the discussion of a particular song. If all the information is together in one thread, it's easier for the reader to get the entire picture.

It is a search matter, too - if the results of a search are scattered all over hell and yon, it takes a heck of a lot of effort to follow up on all those scattered pieces. Better to have things a bit more cohesive. Also - facts are easier to search for than concepts are. If it's a philosophical discussion, you'll never find it if it's all in pieces.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: michaelr
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 08:02 PM

Nicely done, Joe! With one swell foop you've made the main forum page loads more concise.

I like it!

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 08:06 PM

is 'tech' going to stay on the main page, or go to live with BS?...I suppose we can just see what seems best..

---

Tech threads will start on top, and move below if they turn into chit-chat. Same with other threads. I don't anticipate much moving around, but there will be some. JoeClones have been notified that it's not their job to change threads to "BS." Jeff, Jeri, and I take care of that. Mostly, Mudcatters are pretty good about doing it themselves.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 08:12 PM

GUEST, Don't knock them. There was a time I knocked them for not doing things like they are trying now...

I'm not sure exactly what will be useful and probably would attempt different solutions but there NEVER is a perfect solution that satisfies everyone. Be pleased that people are willing to look at tech as a means of helping situations and try to give feedback, positive or negative but be constructive and realistic. Also be aware of the need to get along in what is a social environment.

I can't say but this may be a better format for Mudcat. Not one I'd thought of I add.

Jon

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: NicoleC
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 08:18 PM

I think it's a great idea! Not only for reading convenience, but it does help focus the forum toward music, especially when newbies come by. Some days they might mistake it for a political forum, other days it's all about socks and sandals and whatnot. A very slick solution.

On the "Tech" category, I think it seems best to leave it with the other threads. Some Tech is non-music, but some of it is, and we don't have the proliferation problem there that we have with BS. I'd hate for the music Tech to get lost in the BS.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 08:31 PM

I too vote for tech at the top.

As to the thread proliferation/consolidation issue...

First, I understand there will always be some consolidation. I've never had a problem with it in the past, until the most recent attempts at it.

As to verbosity, is the "new solution" to start editing people's posts? That seems like overkill in the extreme, would likely lead to a forum insurrection, and be an incredible waste of moderator time.

As to the issue of thread proliferation, it seems to me the main "problem" if you want to call it that, is one of popularity of the forum itself--growing pains, in other words. So how do you propose to control that?

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Joe Offer
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 09:27 PM

We edit people's posts only when they contain personal attacks, or when they have lengthy cut-and-paste copies of non-music information that is available elsewhere on the Web. There are a few other things we edit out - like Spam, for instance. We see no need to assist people in advertising non-music enterprises. We also see no need to allow people to post the very same thing in a number of threads.

And yes, there are times when people get way out of line in thread creation. I could go on and on with a list of things people do here to show how obnoxious they can be. I try to use common sense, and to do editing sparingly. But yeah, it's my job to keep the peace here, and I do what I think I have to do.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Night Owl
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 09:53 PM

GOOD job you guys!
I thoroughly enjoyed reading threads tonight. I DO LIKE this format.(Probably would have argued against doing it.)   lol

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 09:55 PM

The main list for music threads, then a list for all Tech, then the BS list might organize the forum even more efficiently, making everything easier to find. Just an idea from the peanut gallery ...

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 03 Mar 03 - 10:53 PM

Very nice. And it's all on the same page, so it won't ghettoise BS. Not that my opinion will be regarded. :)

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 12:23 AM

Aw, Lepus, we may disregard your opinion - but we think you're cute.

---

For you who like things the way they used to be, bookmark this link:

http://www.mudcat.org/threads.cfm?mixbs=yes

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: catspaw49
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 12:28 AM

Joe is being polite. Actually Lepus, a lot depends on whether or not your opinion comes with or without "50 yards of monkey cock"...................

Spaw

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 11:17 AM

I see a serious problem still with Joe and clones making "editorial" attacks on individual users of the forum, whether members or guests.

I also see a serious problem with clones masquerading as guests to post personal attacks on forum users. If forum maintainers behaved like that in the business and education discussion forums I'm in, they certainly wouldn't be forum maintainers or administrators for long. It is completely unprofessional.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 11:41 AM

It seems to be taking the piss somewhat for an anonymous 'Guest' to complain about the fact that the clones can masquerade as Guests.
Is 'Guest' trying to suggest that those who do so much to help the site, and are trusted to act as 'clones' should have less facilities than the 'Guests' themselves.
Membership has its privileges; and any 'Guest' can access them by taking membership. That they choose not to is their prerogative. The least the 'Guests' could do is identify themselves with a consistent 'handle'. That this particular 'Guest' chooses not to should not mean that his/her comments are any less valid than those of a member They are just unattributable!

Nigel

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 11:55 AM

"Is 'Guest' trying to suggest that those who do so much to help the site, and are trusted to act as 'clones' should have less facilities than the 'Guests' themselves."

No, 'Guest' is suggesting that those who maintain the forum have a duty to do the job fairly and without prejudice.

"The least the 'Guests' could do is identify themselves with a consistent 'handle'."

I believe you forgot to add "in my opinion" to that statement.

"That this particular 'Guest' chooses not to should not mean that his/her comments are any less valid than those of a member They are just unattributable!"

That isn't exactly correct, though I thoroughly agree with your conclusion. The remarks are attributable to Guest 04 Mar 03 - 11:17 AM. Every post is attributable to it's author by simply identifying the post, rather than it's author by a name or label. A number of reasonable people who post here, who don't wish to get involved in the flame wars over guest identities, have been doing just that for a while now. It seems a reasonable compromise, in my view.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 12:07 PM

"That isn't exactly correct, though I thoroughly agree with your conclusion. The remarks are attributable to Guest 04 Mar 03 - 11:17 AM. Every post is attributable to it's author by simply identifying the post, rather than it's author by a name or label."
That does not attribute a post to its author, merely to where it was seen. There is no consistent way to decide whether one is seeing a continuing conversation or a series of separate inputs from separate individuals.

"No, 'Guest' is suggesting that those who maintain the forum have a duty to do the job fairly and without prejudice." But at the same time insisting that the 'clones' cannot, for whatever reason, post anonymously.
I take your point that there can be valid reasons not to identify ones own postings, but cannot understand why you expect those who have some responsibilities here must forgo the rights you espouse.

Nigel

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 12:39 PM

"But at the same time insisting that the 'clones' cannot, for whatever reason, post anonymously."

I didn't say that. I said "I also see a serious problem with clones masquerading as guests to post personal attacks on forum users."

If the clones wish to post anonymously to participate in conversations, I have no problem with that whatsoever. What I am objecting to is a specific behavior of Joe and some clones, seen (as but one example) in the "Thread Proliferation Control" thread. Objections to Joe and clones personally attacking specific forum users, both members and guests, was commented upon by a couple of members and myself in that thread.

Here is the deal. I participate in a number of discussion groups. Forum admins and maintainers do sometimes participate in the conversations. But I have never seen forum admins and forum maintainers attacking forum users as I have here.

It seems to me that this place could take a few lessons from someone like Guy Libido, the moderator of the eFolkMusic.com forums. Which, BTW, doesn't require membership, and allows for anonymous posting too. Without any rancor, flaming, etc. I might add.

Flaming and insulting Mudcat forum users is a privlege afforded the Mudcat Royals, which includes Joe and the clones. My point is, what is good for the goose should also be good for the gander. Personal attacks by Joe and the clones shouldn't be tolerated any more than personal attacks by anyone should be tolerated.

Unfortunately, there is a culture of viciousness, that celebrates flaming particular marginalized posters in this place that is being fostered from the top down.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 01:26 PM

If I went to a party thrown by neighbours on my street
And the hosts were serving food I couldn't force myself to eat
And the partiers were smoking stuff I couldn't bear to smell
And the music called up demons from the very depths of hell

If the things that they discussed really drove my spirit down
And I thought that the whole lot of them were trite sadistic clowns
I'd probably forego the urge to preach how they should change
And leave for greener pastures so I wouldn't get deranged!

daylia

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 01:32 PM

daylia, you may wish to read Jack the Sailor's eloquent comments on this issue. It may change your mind.

Jack the Sailor's comments

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 01:57 PM

Thanks Guest. I like what Jack said. And I probably haven't been around here as long as you have, so I haven't developed any painful Mudcat 'issues'.

But if and when I do, and the people who run this forum refused to meet me half-way at least, I WOULD leave rather than flog a dead horse so to speak.

"Life is very short, and there's no time
for fussing and fighting my friend.
I have always thought that it's a crime
So I will ask you once again

Try to see it my way ..."
-Lennon and McCartney

But if you don't (or won't), then it's YOUR loss, not mine, when I leave!

That's my philosophy, anyway.

Personally, I don't want to see you go, Guest. But I'd rather see you leave than stay here if the place upsets you so much.

daylia

PS are you the same GUEST who hated me so much on the war and peace threads a few weeks ago? Just wondering.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 02:32 PM

I don't hate anyone daylia, although there are plenty of my detractors who will claim otherwise. I also am not miserable here. If I were, I assure you I wouldn't stay.

What I have been is a thorn in the side of management and the Mudcat Royals, trying to make the case for THEM to reform their behavior, which I believe is the main cause of forum misery, and why so many worthwhile contributors have left.

I agree, life is too short to be or stay miserable. But you shouldn't assume that just because someone is opinionated (which I and many others here are), and because I voice dissatisfaction with management and some aspects of Mudcat culture, that I'm unhappy.

I actually think the forum is improving. The biggest change for the better is the tech fix we saw yesterday, with the division of the music from the BS. It just *felt* so much more peaceful, the first time it displayed on my home screen.

I also think that newcomers are forcing management to look at some very negative dynamics that manifested when another tech fix was implemented--the member/guest log-in--to "solve" the problem of a malicious troll assuming the user name of another forum user. That tech fix created a guest underclass here, and that is at the root of the problems you so often see here, IMO.

I like the way the eFolkMusic.com log-in works. There is a place to type in a user name (required), and a space for typing in your email address (which is optional) on their log-in page. If you don't type a user name in, the default setting shows the user name as "Anonymous Folkie". THERE ARE NO COOKIES REQUIRED! I insist upon that as a minimum standard for discussion forums I participate in.

Another thing that is much better there, is that all you have to do to communicate with the forum moderator is click on his name in a side bar at the top of the forum home page, and you get his email. Here, the site owner, forum admins, and forum maintainers (ie Max, Joe, Jeff, and the clones) don't allow that ease of private communication for all forum users. You must join as a member to communicate privately with them via the PMs.

Not very user friendly to guest users, many of whom don't want to use cookies. So only member users are "allowed" to privately communicate with the people who run and maintain the forum. That is a real disincentive for me to join the community. Any time site owners and admins set up barriers to communication between themselves and ALL their users, you have a management accountability problem, IMO.

You can go here and have a look at the eFolkMusic.com discussion forums page. At least it would give you something to compare this system to, and maybe help you understand that the worst problems here aren't impossible to solve. But it will require a change of heart by management, and a serious attitude adjustment among some entrenched Mudcat members who have been here a long time and have very negative attitudes towards "guest" users.

http://www.efolkmusic.com/forums/

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Max
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 04:10 PM

I can assure you that Mudcat Administrators and volunteers never masquerade as guests. That is a ridiculous claim.

I will also mention that I run this site with the help of a few very dedicated volunteers. That is our management, that is our leadership. We have no one else to answer to. We are not run by committee. We run things as we see fit, and considering everything, I feel very comfortable with the job we do. We provide a lot of great stuff to a hell of a lot of people and constantly work to improve our free, no obligation resources.

Your comments on efolkmusic.com are fine.   They do some things that I don't appreciate, like their pop-up ads, and how they say in their privacy statement that they won't sell your email address, yet offered to sell me, and anyone who asks, over 28,000 of them on their advertising page. That's fine. I just take that for what it is and make my decision of whether I'll spend time there based on all that it is.

You can communicate with me via the forum or help forum without registering. Even easier than email, which is [e-mail] by the way. It's on our support page, and my home phone number is on the contact page. What's hard about that? Barrier to communicate?

Point is, you disagree with some of our stuff, that's fine. But we're not some big company or academic institution. We are not driven by money and we don't seek popularity. We are a simple bunch of folkies who do what we do because we like it. We provide a resource because we think it is important to preserve and provide. We do it with what means we can muster without compromising our ideals. If we appear unprofessional, that may because we're not professionals. I'm not apologetic for that because I never claimed I was or promised I would be. I guess I've always just thought that Professional and Folk were contrary concepts.

You spend a lot of time and energy being negative and proving that you are right, even when you are not. If you don't like it, you can always go hang out at efolkmusic.com or start your own forum. If you "insist upon that as a minimum standard for discussion forums [you] participate in", why are you participating here? Why are you so afraid of cookies? Can you think of one thing why having a Mudcat cookie could cause you harm in any way?

And just to be clear, I am not attacking you, I am only being frank because I happen to disagree with everything you said in this thread. Your research is thin, your theories about the Mudcat Royals is way off, and simply ma'am, you are wrong. You take things out of context, fear things of which you know not, and speak in half-truths all to avoid being wrong. That is not a demographic we strive to preserve.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 04:21 PM

Thanks for making your feelings known about the issues I have raised, Max.

As to my being wrong, I think it would be more accurate to say that we perceive the problems here differently, as well as the solutions.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: denise:^)
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 04:49 PM

Music at the top; BS at the bottom--looks great to me!!

Editorial work on redundant/vicious posts?

Sounds fine from here...

(I don't remember ever reading *anywhere* that this forum was a democracy...)

And, after all the complaints that this was hardly even used as a music forum any more, isn't it great to see how many music postings there actually are?

It all suits me fine!
Denise:^)

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 04:53 PM

"Unfortunately, there is a culture of viciousness, that celebrates flaming particular marginalized posters in this place that is being fostered from the top down."

Seems you just proved the above point, Max.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 05:07 PM

Why has the post from Max, responding to my 04 Mar 03 - 04:21 PM post, been deleted? The post from Max that said "maybe you are just wrong Janet"?

I would like the record to show that my post of 04 Mar 03 - 04:53 PM, was a response to that deleted post, and is NOT in reference to Max's post of 04 Mar 03 - 04:10 PM .

Or are we now playing a power game, rather than communicating?

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Amos
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 05:15 PM

Jeeze, Janet, maybe the whole circle needs a rest. Can I offer a suggestion which I honestly think would help?

Take a break from the 'Cat for a little while, as it obviously upsets you and you don't need that in your life. Take walks and make friends instead. Focus on eating good stuff, finding pleasant things to look at, spend some time in places you feel safe and happy in.

Thanks,


A

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 05:32 PM

Funny Amos, I was just thinking I must really be getting to the management, if Max felt the need to respond to me personally.

BTW, what makes you think that voicing my opinions, which obviously bother Max, Joe, the clones, and certain members, means I'm upset? I do believe that me voicing my opinions here is upsetting to certain members and management, but that isn't the same as me being upset with Mudcat.

But that seems to be a cognitive block some of you have whenever you read one of my posts. C'est la guerre, c'est la vie.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Max
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 05:38 PM

You are a classic troll, you always have been. If I thought for a second you had anything useful to offer us, I wouldn't be communicating with you like this. While most of us come here to enjoy folk music or political conversations or humor or happiness, you come here to argue and incite. Your track record and posting history proves that beyond a doubt. You have no value to this community. You are merely an irritant. Posting as a GUEST cannot help you, I know who you are with every one of your posts. So you can't hide behind your false argument about hostility towards GUESTS, because I know I am only being hostile to you.   

You perceive a "a culture of viciousness" because you create it with your hostile hobby of disrupting discussion forums. Well I have a hobby too...

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: NicoleC
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 05:47 PM

Shall we just move this thread to BS? It's just degenerated into another spastic plee for attention from our rude GUEST.

Subject: RE: Thread Proliferation Control
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 06:00 PM

Well, I think most of us are here to have a good time, and really have no axe to grind. We look on each other as friends, and tend to give each other the benefit of the doubt. I guess we're not really prepared to deal with people who are unhappy about the way we do things, or to defend ourselves for something we did with the best of intentions, thinking we were making things better. Most of us are here to have fun, not to fight battles. We don't really think we should have any need to defend ourselves, or to give reasons behind every action we take.

There are some who take everything so darn seriously, and they get all bent out of shape if things aren't done exactly as they specify - or they twist words and then construe them as offensive. I try to do a good job keep a sense of humor, and to deal with everyone as equitably as I can, but I guess there are some people you just can't satisfy. If they attack me, I feel justified in responding at least occasionally with a smart-aleck comeback. After all, I'm just here for the fun of it, just like Max and Jeff and the JoeClones are. Nobody pays us a salary. Money that's donated goes for equipment and ISP charges and the like. I don't see myself as having any great power - I'm the guy with the broom and dustpan who's here to tidy things up a bit. That's all. It's no big deal.

Most of us are here because we enjoy each other very much. I do feel bad for those who are unhappy here, those who may feel excluded from this circle of friends. This is a very open circle, but it's like any social group. Those with axes to grind get excluded. Nobody likes a nasty person.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Ralphie
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 06:20 PM

Hate to intrude on this one, but.
A couple of points from the UK.

1.Without the Cat, I would have found it infinitely harder to track down very important research material. (thanks to the DigiTrad Chaps)
2.Of all the various News groups around, this is by far the easiest for a non computer literate chap like me, to negotiate.
3.The Cat has enabled me to inform people on many continents of (IMO) very important subjects (Spec, Nic Jones) that could have far reaching effects on artists everywhere.
4.But, Most importantly, I've communicated with people, most of whom, I'll probably never meet, but, who have offered freindship, help, and the occasional bad joke, without asking for anything in return.

To all these people Many Thanks.

To all the Guest (Whoops sorry!) Rest .......Oh, Just Get a Life.

Max, Joe et al...Can I stay?? I've still got a lot of questions to ask!!

Kind Regards Ralphie

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Amos
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 06:31 PM

Mudcat members who have been here a long time and have very negative attitudes towards "guest" users.

Ya know I said I wan't gonna say this again but I am, sorry. You are not a guest user, you are actually being a guest abuser. What makes people mad at you is the abuse you dish out. The fact that you consider yourself at war with the Cat kind of demonstrates the point. If you were civil and communicative, instead of abusive and disruptive, it would be a different story altogether! This mythology of anti-guest sentiment which you ooze out is just a Big Lie, kid. Come off it.

A

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 06:44 PM

Smart move, Joe. But might it be better to find a word with wider scope than "music" for the phrase "BS/non-music" (or make it a longer phrase!) - just to make it clear for first-timers that discussions such as the recent one on "segosha" are welcome in the top half of the forum?

While you are tidying up your front page,could I suggest you move the explanation about opening long threads from the bottom to the top of the list? Even some seasoned Mudcatters have not yet cottoned on to this facility - but then anyone who is easily sidetracked is never going to make it right down to the bottom of the list.

Lastly a quirky detail: any chance of restoring the robust tint/colour that formerly graced the lyrics & knowledge search panel? On one of the PCs I use, the present feeble tint looks more like a smudge on the monitor screen.

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 07:28 PM

Hi, Fionn - I think we'll leave some things unexplained, and explain them to people when they have a need for explanation. I renamed the "segosha" thread to give it wider exposure - that was easier to do than typing an explanation that people may not read.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Mar 03 - 11:09 PM

Well all of this has certainly been educational for a newcomer to the WWW like myself. Thank you all so VERY much!

GUEST (Janet?) even though I've been on-line for a only a couple months, I know that the forum posting policies on Mudcat are very lenient, compared to other sites I've 'surfed'.

Look at these rules at the Library of Knowledge, for example. No-one can post a message or reply to a thread unless they log in and register. There are very stringent guidelines about what and how to post, including

"We are assuming everyone here is capable of handling themselves in a social situtation. As such, moderation of content will only occur when it is obvious that a poster's sanity or maturity has failed them.

Bans, deletions, modifications, and rewriting are at the sole discretion of the administrators and moderators and will be imposed without warning if guidelines laid out here are in any way breached.and the site owners state quite bluntly that they will exercise their own judgement in matters of editing/deleting messages and banning unwanted posters without notice, as they see fit."

And even

" Administrators and moderators reserve the right to lock, edit, redact or just plain delete posts or threads for reasons including, but not limited to: disruption of discourse, unrealistic claims*, libelous remarks, inflammatory speech, and racial/gender slurs and/or epithets.

This action is not open to debate or appeal.

Administrators and moderators reserve the right to suspend or cancel accounts of individuals for reasons including, but not limited to: disruption of discourse, unrealistic claims*, libelous remarks, inflammatory speech, and racial/gender slurs and/or epithets."

Your posts can be censored even for "*Claims that utterly defy common sense, logic, reason and reality and do not provide any other support other than, "I say so. If you don't understand me or believe me that is due to your own narrowmindedness".

If you are who I think you are, you'd have been booted out of there long ago, if you even got in the door to begin with!

Seems to me that the Catter's are a pretty easy-going bunch indeed! I'm very grateful for this forum and to all the people who volunteer their precious time to make it possible.

daylia

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 02:55 AM

If I could remember aphorisms better, I'd have an answer for everything. I heard one last week that said something like, "The people who make us angry are the ones who help us see our faults." If there's somebody we just can't tolerate, it's because WE have a weak spot that needs work.
Something to philosophize about in your spare time. How do you deal with a pain in the ass, and not become one yourself?
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: *daylia*
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 01:01 PM

"How do you deal with a pain in the ass, and not become one yourself?"

Good question, and one I've dealt with quite a bit! Gonna ponder it as I shovel the darn drive again Joe. But for now, this is what I've come up with to date:

Practice being grounded and centered.

Keep the focus on who I am and what I want to create in my life.

Know what my 'boundaries' are, and exercise them - with love - as required.

Practice emotional detachment. I'm not responsible for any thoughts, feelings or behaviors except my own, cuz those are the only ones I can control and change. Others simply can't "upset me" unless I allow that to happen. My feelings come from my thoughts, and only I choose my thoughts!

Practice the art of humour - especially at myself! "Against the assault of laughter, no-thing can stand!" (I forget who said that, sorry.)

Say this affirmation a LOT when things get rough (thank you SO MUCH, Louise Hay):

"I love myself, and so I now choose to think and behave in a loving way toward ALL people, for I know that whatever I send out returns to me multiplied."

I use that like a mantra sometimes, almost like self-hypnosis or something, till I can settle myself down.

And I really like this Ann Lander's suggestion - before you say anything to anyone, ask yourself 3 questions. Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? If you can answer 'yes' to all three, say it. If not, button it buster!

daylia

Subject: RE: Tech: As Above So Below
From: GUEST,Vulcanus Rex
Date: 05 Mar 03 - 04:54 PM

Y'know, I think the Mudcat management needs to take a long vacation. There are real problems in the world beyond this too precious website...get a grip Max and Joe. The only thing your nemesis is guilty of is criticizing you. And hitting the nail on the head doing it.

Subject: RE: As Above So Below
From: Hrothgar
Date: 06 Mar 03 - 03:14 AM

Let the trolls rave, Max. Don't rise to their bait.

... and do what you like. It's your site.

Subject: RE: As Above So Below
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 06 Mar 03 - 01:47 PM

Joe, OK, I go along with that to a large extent. But the point about "segosha"-type threads is that their logical place (and where people might expect to find them) is in the lower list, as the lower list is presently defined, whereas I think they deserve better. Presumably your renaming included putting on the info-req prefix, and presumably again, this takes it into the top half, even though it has no connection with music? (Couldn't see any info-req threads just now, so couldn't check where they now sit.) If so, you have "promoted" the thread as it deserved, but put it where your present definition says it should not be!

Subject: RE: As Above So Below
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Mar 03 - 04:16 AM

Hi, Fionn- there's a new "Folklore" category that's supposed to cover things like "segosha" - people will get used to it sooner or later, and we can change the ones that aren't right. It's no big deal to change thread categories.
-Joe Offer-