 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Guest Postings
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Bill D Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:38 PM "..The point is that we are not communicating as equals." if your point is that one who HAS an edit button has more 'power' than one who doesn't....of course! When the forum grew past what Max could deal with personally, he decided to trust several others with varying degrees of responsibility. On the whole, I think he made fine choices! You, Shambles, have practically made a hobby of regular complaining and nit-picking, with Joe as your major target; and you seem bewildered that so many seem to continue believing that Joe does a pretty good and basically honest job! this comment.. "..all his personal prejudices about what he will allow the forum to be." is just plain BS! Look at what utter nonsense and general crap ARE allowed everyday! If you want a forum where anything is allowed without oversight, YOU can start one ...and have the devil's own time running it. and this-- "I do not believe it is the spirit that Max intended" ...ask Max! You don't think he communicates with Joe and the clones about how things are done? I have been in a room with Max, Joe, Pene Azul, and two other clones (on more that one occasion) and have spoken to them all, and I KNOW that they all do an astounding job of shepherding this amazing forum with minimal expression of their own personalities. I, for one, am amazed that Joe 'usually' keeps his personal feelings so well controlled. I am not sure that *I* could approach all these issues with so much equanimity!..and I'll BET that you couldn't! It is not an easy job, and it is a VOLUNTEER job, with many more hassles than benefits. Since I am not required to try to keep MY personal opinions neutral, I will note that I am pretty weary of this interpretation you seem to espouse that says, essentially ..if a decision is made counter to what YOU think should be done, it indicates power-mad despotism and rampant censorship! I truly cannot comprehend how someone can find cronyism and favoritism and elitism and personal vendettas in the relatively low-key and mild way in which this forum is overseen. Yeah, I should spend an hour or two editing and polishing my little speech for errors and detailed referents...but since it will either be ignored or passed off as the babblings of one of Joe's bootlickers....here it is. (Joe...you GOTTA start using a better brand of boot polish!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Blowzabella Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:37 PM Shambles uses the phrase 'our forum' a lot and I suspect that he deliberately chooses those words. However, and I am not a particularly regular poster, I was under the impression that this wasn't a co-operatively owned forum, but a sort of gift - not a complete gift, but something one had to look after, show that one knew how to look after or the owner would step in and take over - seems reasonable to me...(waffling now, but I know what I mean...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Joe Offer Date: 17 Dec 03 - 07:57 PM
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: The Shambles Date: 17 Dec 03 - 07:50 PM Well, Sham, I am sorry to say I find your arguments unfounded and a bit whingy. Joe never said being from the uK was undesireable, and you know it. He just wondered why the current lot of spitting and hissing was coming from there. So you're altering what he said, for rhetorical purposes. Amos I am sure you realise that Joe and I have had a number of exchanges over the years and my view of Joe is not formed only on his comments in this thread. You may not have been party to all of these exchanges but I am sure you have the ability to read between the lines and perhaps you could address some of my points? For this is not personal - it is a serious point about the forum and about power. Joe's seemingly limitless power to do and say exactly as he wishes on our forum - and our lack of power. Joe knows full well that my beef is not the deletions of my postings. He is now sure that the only posts of mine that he has deleted were the ones he refers to - the last time he contacted me he was not so sure. However, the point is that I am bloody sure that I have not deleted any of Joe's or anyone else's postings and I do not have to try and justify the grounds on which these were made. The point is that we are not communicating as equals. On the forum, my views and yours Amos - are just that. Joe's views have slowly over the years become - the word of Mudcat law. Not just on abusive guests but on all his personal prejudices about what he will allow the forum to be. That is not the spirit of forum that I was attracted to many years ago and I do not believe it is the spirit that Max intended. I just question if it really has to be this way? Many years ago Joe had his same wishes for the forum but confined these to suggestions, encouragement and by setting an example for others to follow. My wish is simply that he offers to hand back his edit button and returns to this model. For the example that he is now setting and others are sadly following is one of passing judgement and of minding everyone else's business and one of deleting rather than contributing. Amos you still have not come up with any ideas or alternatives on how the forum can deal with its abusive guests without resorting to the clumsy measures which started this thread. For is it not possible that Joe's authoritarian posturing actually causes many normally peaceable posters to intentionally find ways of tripping him up? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Mickey191 Date: 17 Dec 03 - 07:15 PM I'm wondering how many people read the two posts (on two different days) which were directed at one person. These were clearly defamatory. One post had been up about 6 hours - without a challenge, till myself and another asked that it be deleted. I'm just wondering how many people read it and made certain assumptions as to its' veracity. It was scurrilous and hurtful - had it not been deleted I'm sure the coward "Guest" would have posted more. Feeling emboldened because he'd gotten away with it. We're not talking about a guest saying Joe Blow is a lousy singer or a terrible fiddle player. We are talking about someone's core--their heart-- being raked over the coals. By a coward of the first order. A shadow person, afraid of the light. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 17 Dec 03 - 06:49 PM It was pointed out to me when I was very young and impressionable, that my running around and ranting about the evil motives of others largely involved projecting onto others my own suppressed fears of what I might want to do. The brainwashing was mostly successful. Robin |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Amos Date: 17 Dec 03 - 06:42 PM Well, Sham, I am sorry to say I find your arguments unfounded and a bit whingy. Joe never said being from the uK was undesireable, and you know it. He just wondered why the current lot of spitting and hissing was coming from there. So you're altering what he said, for rhetorical purposes. As to what the Mudcat Forum is "all" about...it is about the interchange of ideas and viewpoints. Firstly musical ones, and secondly, others. Not all of its contributors are interested in that -- some are interested in undermining each other. Some don't know the difference between carping and communicating. Some don't know the difference between understanding and drooling gleeful madness. But we (I mean Mudcatters in general to the degree I have observed them) try to be as tolerant as we can. And I think by and large we do pretty well at it. That's my opinion. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: The Shambles Date: 17 Dec 03 - 06:14 PM The issue has never been Guesthood, or even anonymity. It has been craven covert hostility which uses anonymity as cheap cover. That is a very different thing. It is one thing to post a controversial but genuine communication. It is quite another to post generalized bad news, exagerrated condemnations, attacks on persons, and so on, and use anonymity to do so without responsible for the effects one is creating. Slaggers who foul up a decent forum with indecent communication do not particularly deserve protection, IMHO. Yes we would most probably all agree with the above but the first post asked if we had any ideas on how to combat the problem you well describe. The only answer proposed by our guardians - that of clumsy and ill-directed censorship - risks throwing the baby out with the bath-water and of making things worse. Not even considering any alternatives and just carrying on with this approach enables control freaks - who may be considered as well-intentioned - to plough on in shaping our forum to their own personal tastes and value judgements. All under the cover of protecting us from guests, trolls, flamers and just about any other form of bogey-man you can think of. It is a tactic that has always been used whenever someone wishes to seize and exert power or to deny us our freedom of expression. I am surprised that many here tolerate this but I am absolutely staggered that many appear to actively support it or appear frightened to even politely question it. For Joe's ever increasing list of undesirables now seems to include anyone posting from the UK as well as all of his other little pet hates. Those he will not allow and will delete mainly because it offends his personal concept of order or because of those he can't 'figure out'....... What will be next on the list? Yes hostilty is a problem but this hostility is not confined to anonymous guest postings. The hostility that concerns me is hostility expressed (if disguised) towards posters on the forum from those who feel they are in a position to pass final judgement and who do not hesitate to take frequent action based on that judgement. Is this really what the Mudcat Forum is all about? Surely it should be about all of its contributors - not the just the opinions of its self-appointed Witchfinder General? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Free speech portal Date: 17 Dec 03 - 06:07 PM And we Brits were under the impression Americans had no sense of irony! Well spoken Mr Offer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Joe Offer Date: 17 Dec 03 - 05:38 PM I hear all sorts of comments about Guest posts, but Max and Jeff and I still think we need to accommodate posts from people who don't want to register. We think it's the only way to keep this a growing, vibrant community instead of an inbred group of people drowning in their own smalltalk and inside jokes and bickering. However, that being said, if a nasty note is posted anonymously, there's something more frightening and ominous about it. Even if it isn't intended, an anonymous message of disagreement tends to take on a leering, threatening tone. There are very few messages from registered Mudcatters that are frightening, but such is often the case with our anonymous posts. If a person posts anonymous information about music, or makes a positive comment, almost everybody can accept that easily. Anonymity is disagreeable only when the text of the message is disagreeable - and then that anonymity tends to amplify that frightening nature of a message. Shambles can say whatever he likes about me, and it's very unlikely that his messages will be deleted - despite all his complaints about deletions, the only Shambles messages that get deleted are the duplicate ones he posts in two or three locations. I may not like what he has to say and I may be convinced that he's an idiot and a troll - but at least he has the courage to use his own identity when he speaks, and I respect that. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Amos Date: 17 Dec 03 - 05:24 PM Well, Nameless one, I was obviously expressing my own point of view. I don't know any storm of ire that has been aimed at anonymity per se. It seems to me it has always been touched off by the abuse of anonymity -- using it for anti-social purposes, sniping, undercutting, ad hominem blathering and running down the participants in childish or evil ways. I think if you look at every case where this damn issue came up it was prompted by this sort of abuse first -- and conversely if it had not been for the abuse, the issue would not have been meaningful enough to anyone to carry on about, it seems to me. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:36 PM To say "the issue" is or isn't or was or never was x, y, or z, ignores the giant hodge-podge of hundreds of viewpoints expressed here over time. To say that the issue has never been "Guesthood, or even anonymity," means you can only be speaking for yourself. There are many, many paranoiacs for whom the issue is and always has been mere anonymity. -guest That said, I'd say yes, it's been a long while since this fun topic has surfaced. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Martin Gibson Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:34 PM I am a guest who always uses the same name. I have been an active folk, country, and bluegrass musician for 40 years. That's why I read and post here when I have a comment or an opinion. Regarding profiles, who I really am is really no one's business. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Joybell Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:15 PM On a silly note. Has anyone else noticed that the adds on this thread in trying to be relevant are for information about brain tumours and Eco FRIENDLY advice. I know they change so I'll keep looking - compulsive reader that I am. Joy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Joybell Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:09 PM Amen Amos. Joy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Yet another unwelcome guest Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:03 PM The ability to post without any sort of handle just makes threads confusing at times. On the other hand it is the registered catters with silly nicknames who are the most abusive in my experience. Always ready to flame a Guest for being "anonymous". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: John Routledge Date: 17 Dec 03 - 02:15 PM Can I repeat Amos's last post in capital letters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Another Unwelcome Guest . Date: 17 Dec 03 - 02:11 PM If "guests" are not welcome, then do not allow the facility to be one. I will retain my right to guestdom, until the thought police find a reason to delete guests. And for the record I did not know there was a facility for members to provide profiles. But then again I am not interested enough to read them . I use this as a public forum, and my extent of involvement ends there. I may respond to a thread that interests me, and enjoy reading the other responses. But do not wonder about your jobs, location, family etc, anymore than I feel the need to detail mine. Obviously I don't have the time to dedicate to this as has been deemed proper, just like to occasionally pop in and out. Please ignore me....I am not worthy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Amos Date: 17 Dec 03 - 02:08 PM The issue has never been Guesthood, or even anonymity. It has been craven covert hostility which uses anonymity as cheap cover. That is a very different thing. It is one thing to post a controversial but genuine communication. It is quite another to post generalized bad news, exagerrated condemnations, attacks on persons, and so on, and use anonymity to do so without responsible for the effects one is creating. Slaggers who foul up a decent forum with indecent communication do not particularly deserve protection, IMHO. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Free speech portal Date: 17 Dec 03 - 01:55 PM Guests need to be loved too you know! Paranoia amongst the fully paid up members of this excellent and indispensible group would become extinct if not for us! As i see it there are very few GUESTS prepared to lower themselves to directly slagging other MUSICIANS off. Only personal insults or slanderous remarks should be deleted. Cheer up and read this. On a golf tour in Ireland, Tiger Woods drives his BMW into a petrol station in a remote part of the Irish countryside. The pump attendant, obviously knows nothing about golf, greets him in a typical Irish manner completely unaware of who the golfing pro is. "Top of the mornin' to yer, sir" says the attendant. Tiger nods a quick hello and bends forward to pick up the nozzle. As he does so, two tees fall out of his shirt pocket onto the ground. "What are those?, asks the attendant. "They're called tees" replies Tiger. "Well, what on the good earth are they for?" inquires the Irishman. "They're for resting my balls on when I'm driving", says Tiger. "Feckin Jaysus", says the Irishman, "BMW thinks of everything!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: The Shambles Date: 17 Dec 03 - 01:26 PM Perhaps someone can explain to me why the preocupation now seems to have changed to one of deletions and lists of what is not allowed on the forum rather than contributions and what is to be encouraged or at least accepted? It has been a subtle change over a period of years but I don't see it as being a change for the good or as one that cannot be reversed. It is mostly up to us but it will not get any better if we keep asking for threads and other people's posts to be deleted - as it is pretty obvious that Joe Offer does not have anything better to do than to eagerly respond to them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: pdq Date: 17 Dec 03 - 12:20 PM I seems like a natural progression to go from GUEST to regular GUEST to member, but people who drop their ID to post ad hominem attacks are another story. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST Date: 17 Dec 03 - 10:55 AM Another guest - who cares? But as Mr. Brooks stated - it is fun |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: harpgirl Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:20 AM I personally, enjoy a good dust-up about GUEST postings. It's been ever so long since we've had one. In organizations, structural changes usually solve personnel problems, as I have said to Max before. Of course, I would disagree with further censorship, however! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Dave Bryant Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:17 AM I have swapped PMs with both Joe and Bill D about this issue, I was happy about the thread deletion from the start and I am quite satisfied that the deletion of my "Birthday Greeting" posting was due to a mis-understanding. Khat has had a PM from Pene (who's the more technical guy when it comes to ISPs and IP addresses) apologising for the acusation which started this thread and PMed me to say that she was impressed - as well as stating that she's content in the posting after my previous one. I saw (and objected to) the original posting on the deleted thread and realise that this probably started a protective chain reaction. I would rather have one of my postings deleted than cause distress to another 'catter - well there are the odd exceptions: Mr Wellington-Jones of Twillingsgate - and then of course Breezy, McFat and Raggy are so bloomin' thick-skinned . . . . . . :-) . . . . Let's get back to Folk Music. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: artbrooks Date: 17 Dec 03 - 08:09 AM This thread is silly. Silly is good. Carry on! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: The Shambles Date: 17 Dec 03 - 07:39 AM I can't speak for the other 30 or so contributors to this thread so far or the ones that may yet wish to make a contribution but I can see no reason at all why this thread should be deleted. If certain individuals wish their own contributions to be removed they can certainly vote for this if they want to but I was unaware that we had a vote to remove the postings of others or indeed a vote at all. The key is for us all to be tolerant and just to finally accept that is not necessary for Joe or anyone else to struggle "figure out" why people from the UK or anywhere else post what they do. It is just necessary for Joe and us to accept that we all post the way we do and try to enjoy our cutural differences and our occasional differences of opinion. All the means that have been used to exert editorial control and make value judgements by Joe Offer about what Joe Offer will "allow" to be posted on the forum will fail and the attempt to do it is pretty obviously counter-productive and presents far more threat to our freedom of expression than any of our guests have ever done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Catherine Jayne Date: 17 Dec 03 - 05:12 AM I think it should be deleted too. The matter has been delt with and I would hope that I still have the friendship with Joe and Pene that we had already established. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Dave Bryant Date: 17 Dec 03 - 05:07 AM I think that this thread has said all there is to say on the subject and vote that it should now be deleted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Linda Kelly Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:30 AM As one who has always believed there is a greater reality outside of Mudcat than within, it seems fair to say that most UK Mudcatters have first hand knowledge of each other, have indeed introduced other catters here over the years and have an agenda based in the British folk scene rather than on screen. We have geographical rivalries, romantic rivalries and musical rivalries, all of which are based on real situations. We are probably unique in the Mudcat world that our friendships or otherwise, do not come about from our dealings in cyberspace, but from knowing and sometimes hating each other. Were the States a smaller place, then undoubtedly this would also be true over there. I changed my name from ickle dorrit because in reality many catters in the uk knew me by my real name and it always felt wrong as would using GUEST. I don't find Joe's remarks offensive just somewhat niave. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Another Guest. Date: 17 Dec 03 - 04:12 AM The above goes some way to explaining why not everyone leaves a profile. A little information in the wrong hands is a dangerous thing. I personally would not appreciate being emailed and accused of something I did NOT do. And Joe's ungracious comments has done nothing to change my opinion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: The Shambles Date: 17 Dec 03 - 02:17 AM I see that an apology was given by Jeff but I do not see one from Joe. Just the usually justification. Actually, I didn't make any accusations. I just asked Cat if she was one of the people making anonymous posts, and if she was, could she please stop. Now if Saddam were asked if he was responsible for using chemical weapons on his own people and if he had, would he stop doing it - we may well consider that to be an accusation. Unless Joe is still maintaining that it was the individual he accused - it was a wrong accusation. Perhaps he could be gracious enough to offer an apology rather than to find fault with all UK mudcatters? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Cluin Date: 16 Dec 03 - 11:44 PM Bitch, bitch, bitch... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Jeri Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:43 PM The last GUEST posting pretty much sums up my opinion very well and with a lot fewer words than I'd probably use. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:40 PM I usually add my name at the bottom of the post - unless I am just chi-aking around - like my hangle - er handle.... (Typos!) My personal beef is poor spelling, but then who cares about that?!!! And anyway my micro motor control hassles annoy me when I DO know teh corect speeling and stuff it up anyway! In a BS thread, like the preface suggests, I mostly ignore posts from anonymous posters labelled GUEST, unless I want to have some fun... Posters who are not "members" but adopt a regular "handle" - I do envision them as real "virtual individuals" - do gradually acquire some legitemacy in BS discussions. Posters in "music threads" who remain totally "Anony-Pompous" are a pain - you can't PM to ask them to please expand on what they said in order to find out if they really do know what they are talking about, or if they are just spouting ignorant crap! So perhaps you shouldn't post in a "music thread" without a handle! - some interesting technical issues there.... (now that doesn't mean that no facetious or misleading humour statements!!) But that would only just give Max, Joe, Jeff, et all, a new different "set of rules" to work under... :-) And from my experience in the real world, there are enough real hassles ... "sticks and stones can break my bones: but words can never hurt me!" ------ although words CAN hurt... Perhaps it is the British roots in Australia culture that mean that we can see the difference from Americans. It's not unusual for Aussies to appear to be abusing each other but be close friends... The Aussie folkore about the word "bastard" is elucidating here - it's probably already in a thread here somewhere, I'd be surprised if it hasn't been raised here before. The problem is that throwing aound all these "friendly insults" can get out of control and backfire... turning "friends" into "enemies"... who carry on the same abuse - one can only tell the difference by the intensity... Personally I have always wondered about the alleged sincerity of alleged "friends" who want to express their alleged "fondness" for me by "abusing" me and putting me down instead of expressing some genuine respect... Robin (still fitering the crap - "after all these years"!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:24 PM As often as this subject comes up, it must mean the topic is a very popular and satisfying one! No one is ever going to change the opinion of another, and no one should try. It's such a waste of time. Those who post anonymously will continue to, regardless what argument is levelled against them, and those who don't post anonymously will continue to hold their own opinions of anonymous posts, good or bad, regardless what argument is made to change their opinion. The words that made Rodney King famous come to mind ....... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Raedwulf Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:23 PM Why not take a look at Amnesty International for real abuse, instead of moaning about an internet messageboard? You might save a life... Thank you for offering me a handle by which I might identify you, Ed. Without having checked your link, I will unreservedly concede that you are probably right. However, I am not a humanist (by choice, I support animal charities, not human ones of any description). To each their own. I respect your p-o-v, but reserve the right to speak on topics that move me. I cannot empathize with the gross & anonymous mass of humankind represented by the internet. I can identify with the more specific mass represented by Mudcat. Perhaps I may save a life by more indirect means? Is this more or less valuable than subscribing to AI directly? Your call, I have no evidence on which to bae an opinion... Regards Raedwulf |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Russ Date: 16 Dec 03 - 08:01 PM Thanks for the gracious invite Mrs. Duck, but I remain a GUEST on principle. Russ (the unrepentant GUEST) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Cllr Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:59 PM Terry (leadfingers) is rriight as usual, Cllr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Leadfingers Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:56 PM The simple solution is for Catters to NOT respond to the inflammatory posts from anonymous guests. I started in here as a Guest and adding the Leadfingers as an ident,as it has been part of my gigging name for longer than I care to remember,then decided it was worth joining. I would not deliberately slag off any other catter, and definately not anonymously.It just would not occur to me.If a thing is worth posting, my name goes with it.Then if you disagree you know who you are disagreeing with. And if you're not sure , check my profile. If you have nothing to hide,whats the problem? If you post anonymously, I for one will almost certainly ignore you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Cllr Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:52 PM I love maggie thatcher *snigger* Cllr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Mrs.Duck Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:51 PM Don't be shy Russ join us we don't bite (well only sometimes) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Russ Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:48 PM Gosh, is it time for another GUEST bashing already? Time sure flies. Russ (still GUEST after all these years) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: John Routledge Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:38 PM I don't think that we UK'ers bicker much more than others but boy when we do!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: The Shambles Date: 16 Dec 03 - 07:24 PM I've been trying to figure out why there's this constant bickering and pettiness among UK Mudcatters who are otherwise very nice people. I've seen similar conduct in only two other places - in orchestras, and in church choirs. Could there be a connection? From your saintly position of never having 'bickered' or been 'petty' with anyone - Joe you may have missed the obvious connection that Joe Offer was present and sitting in judgement, at all of the examples given above. Am I really alone in finding these generalised and insulting comments about UK contributors more offensive than anything I have seen from any of our guests? Comments that only tell us where Joe Offer is coming from. Are the witches only to be found and hunted in the UK? I rather think not but the UK witches do rather mess-up the ideal vision that Joe is trying single-handed to impose upon the forum. UK folkies (I suspect like folkies every where) are very nice people who have just always bickered and been petty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,free speech portal Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:50 PM Right on Clinty babe. Do you support the use of eugenics too Brucie? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:28 PM Freedom is frequently abused almost everywhere by immature people, and they pay a heavy price for so doing (but not necessarily right away). That's life. We all deal with it as effectively and creatively as we can. If our freedom were never threatened in any way, we would never develop the muscles and the maturity to defend it, and we would never even know we had it. To surrender freedom in the name of "security and order" can lead to something far worse than the random immaturity of a few people here and there. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: akenaton Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:10 PM Raedwulf....Your attack on my opinions in another thread ....Without puting forward your own,was extremely "bad mannered"....Ake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: GUEST,Ed Date: 16 Dec 03 - 06:01 PM but freedom can also be abused, particularly on the Net, & it often seems to be here, sadly. Raedwulf, Why not take a look at Amnesty International for real abuse, instead of moaning about an internet messageboard? You might save a life... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Guest Postings From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Dec 03 - 05:56 PM Some people would like to legislate a "perfect world"...meaning: a world in which everything is always exactly the way they want it and nothing bad or disturbing ever happens. They will never succeed in that endeavour. Thank God. If they did, it would be hell. If you want it all your way all the time, though, you can always become a librarian or a dictator, I suppose, if you meet the qualifications and there is a position open somewhere. (Come to think of it, Iraq needs a new dictator right about now, don't they?) - LH |