Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?

Subject: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Sep 04 - 11:09 PM

I recently stumbled onto this site and I've been reading a lot of messages. In the thread about Pete Seeger especially and in many others there's a character named Martin Gibson who has the sole purpose of insulting everyone. In most groups that I belong to the moderator kicks out people who are insulting and contribute nothing at all to the group. Why is this person allowed to post messages here? He either is carrying a very large chip on his shoulder or he is totally out to hurt people's feelings. That should not be tolerated in a message group such as this.

Doesn't anyone here have the power to restrict membership or eliminate hurtful messages? This is just a question from a newcomer who is very turned off by an insulting poster.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Rasener
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:24 AM

Its a question of understanding the rules for this forum.

Basically, in this forum, you just ignore such people, and only read what you want to.

Its called freedom of expression.

Some people are unable to resist commenting back at such people and then end up in a slagging match, where they get deeply hurt.

Don't let these sort of people put you off. 99.9% of the members are great, very helpful and do not insult other members. However, that doesn't mean that they will agree with everything you say. :-)

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:53 AM

If only that were the case. The forum has no rules but: Very soon this thread will be deleted, moved or closed - with a little note like the following that was inserted into two threads that were closed yesterday.

Well, I have to say I'm getting very tired of all this animosity. It's great for Mudcat to be a place for free, open discussion, but lately it has seemed to be more like a jungle full of guerrilla warriors. How can discussion be free and open, if everyone has to keep a watch out for sneak attacks? This is a forum for exchange of ideas, not combat.

I get a lot of complaints from people about the conduct of so-and-so, usually an anonymous Guest. The trouble is, the people who complain are just as heavily involved in combat - and then they stick their tails between their legs and want me to protect them. I'm sorry, but if you insist on engaging in combat, I can't protect you. When you join the fight, you open yourself to attack, and what you receive is most often far worse than what you can give out.

So, I would ask everyone to help. If there is combat going on, stay away from it. Act as though the combatants were invisible - that's your best protection from them.

I'm closing this thread because it has become another hotbed of animosity. The topic of anonymous posting has been beaten to death the last few days, and I'm likely to delete or close anything else that gets posted on the subject for a while. Cool it - everybody.

Peace, please.

Thank you.

-Joe Offer-


Now this action has no effect on those that are causing the problems and does nothing to ensure that it won't just keep on happening. It does have a big effect on those who do believe in freedom of expression and who are trying to hold a discussion - on a fine disussion forum and are prevented from doing so.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST,Gust
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 02:23 AM

Martin Gibson is allowed here because he has valuable opinions about folk music. He also happens to like the smell of his own farts, but we're mature and we can handle that.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: moocowpoo
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 03:05 AM

I too, LOVE the smell of my own farts! a distinct bouquet of lucern,clover and daisy....mmmmm.
I think we all like the smell of our own farts, if we diddn't, there would be no cause for argument and we'd all go around smelling one anothers farts (Isn't that a beautiful Ideal???)ahh, I can but dream.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 03:22 AM

He is The Mudcat Troll, as distinct from myself who is The Mudcat Foole. We leave each other alone now - best that way. You will find lots of us little nutters hiding in the woodwork around here, like Elsie The Folk PoliceWoman, Dr Guitar, et al. It's all part of what adds to the ambience here, as well as the smelly emissions.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST,SueB
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 03:24 AM

Actually, some people do love the smell of other people's farts, I know it's true because I read it in the Savage Love column of The Village Voice ( a real eye-opener if you've never read it, I assure you.) But I'm not sure if this discussion belongs in the Barking Mad thread or the one on Strange Sexual Practices. If we could puzzle out the correct psychological term for "a person who likes the smell of other people's gas" then we could put it in the Word of the Day thread, too.   Omniflatulophile? Polygasoholic?

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 03:45 AM

Methanophile.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 04:48 AM

I think it was WH Auden who said some poets like reading their own poems in the same sort of way others enjoy immensely the smell of their own farts.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:09 PM

Personally I don't find Martin Gibson to be as annoying as some of the GUESTS..and by the way GUEST....what gives any of us the right to judge or criticise Martin Gibson. He may have a false name but at least he has one. He also shows certain character which many may not like but accept it for what it is. Please just live with it. We have enough people attacking others without another GUEST joining them.
Best wishes.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:20 PM

Martin is himself very sensitive and his "attacks" are only a kind of first strike as part of his defensive strategy. He cares deeply about folk music and regularly posts above the line (in the non-BS section), furthering with his eloquent postings a deeper understanding of the tradition in the rest of us. He is a sweetie, really, and don't you denigrate him.

(Mmmm... this is good grub, dear - where did you say you picked them mushrooms?)

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Once Famous
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:22 PM

In other words, Guest, go fuck yourself.

thanks to others on this thread!

Time to start another decent music thread!

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:24 PM

Why? Because he would be here anyway as a Guest, and because as a member we can have delightful offthread discussions in PMs that I, for one, would really miss now that I am getting to know him a bit. When I see his flamier posts now they seem different, in the context of who I am coming to know offthread.

He's not the first unreconstructed sort to find a community here. Mudcatters-- well, we are capable of getting along with just about anybody, cuz all musician's are a bit, um, different!

And who among us does not have some characeteristic that makes us hard to accept easily???? No stones in MY pocket!

~S~

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:28 PM

As Shambles points out, we are aware there's a problem and we've been trying to do something about it. It's not just Martin Gibson, though - there are far too many people here who do battle on a daily basis. If I confront them about it, they blame Martin Gibson or anonymous guests or some other scapegoat, and they rarely seem to realize that they're just as wrong to do battle as anybody else. They seem to think that as long as one anonymous guest is fighting, they have an obligation to respond in kind.

If one person posts something to provoke a fight, I can delete it. If others take the bait and join in the fight, it gets messy. So, don't be a sucker. Don't take the bait. Leave the trolls alone.

I regret what happened to the Pete Seeger thread. It should have been a nice discussion. Not everything Martin said in that thread was combative, and it may be that the thread became a fight because people took some of Martin's comments as provocative when they weren't meant that way. Martin has expressed some good, well-reasoned positions on a number of things. I just wish he and everybody else would take their combat somewhere else.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:31 PM

He is also racist, sexist and homophobic. But evidently a few people like that here. No accounting for taste.

Enter MG stage left.........

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:32 PM

Of course this thread stinks. Because:

a) either the GUEST who started the thread is an offensive prat who barges into a new group and swiftly isolates an individual for an attack,

b) or someone who had a run-in with Martin and has chosen this underhanded way to hurt him.

Long may you call a spade a fkucing shovel, Mr Gibson!

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Once Famous
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:34 PM

Joe, you are right really about some things as being provocative, but that comes with being brutally honest about feelings I suppose. I have revisited the Pete Seeger thread with some addtional comments that I hope might clear that up.

and WYSIWYG, "wink wink"

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:42 PM

There is always the possiblity that the guest who started this thread (in the music section) was perfectly straight in what they said. It is probably best to assume this until or unless you have some firm evidence to the contrary.

For there wiil be some reading (especially in the music forum) who will assume this first post was exactly what it purported to be.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 12:55 PM

MG, are you calling me a WINKY???? :~)

Seriously tho--

being brutally honest about feelings Not every feeling really has to be acted upon, or acted out. On a good day I even remember that, myself. :~)

~Susan

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:01 PM

MG's main problem is he thinks every opinion of his is of interest...and he has not learned the art of finesse. There are ways to express negative opinions as he has without resorting to crude, rude, and denigrating remarks.

Pot-stirrers should always be ignored.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:03 PM

IMO sh*t-STIRRING should be ignored, but when someone posts reasonably I try to take it at face value and respond if there is a response stirred.

~Susan

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:06 PM

"You're so vain, I bet you think this thread is about you - don't you - don't you"

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:07 PM

So pleased to see that imflammatory remarks by Guests are being addressed (mostly) in a fairly head-on but sensitive way. Or as Martin will understand....in the Words of Shelley....Who broke that beautiful teapot on a Guests head?. LOL.
Best wishes.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:10 PM

Any unnamed GUEST starting a thread like this has to be trying to stir up trouble. That opening "I recently stumbled onto this site" strikes me as highly unlikely in fact to be true. I'd suspect this was someone who's been around a fair time, either as a member or as a GUEST.

I'm glad that apparently Martin is posting some stuff worth reading. I stopped looking at any of his posts some time ago, because I found them randomly and needlessly nasty to a number of other people, in a way I found distasteful. I think that is a better way of responding than crying out for censorshop or getting into personal flame wars, of the sort that the nameless one who started this thread is evidently trying to provoke.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:15 PM

"MG's main problem is he thinks every opinion of his is of interest..." , "sh*t-STIRRING should be ignored"

You folks don't get it. I have been on the receiving end of Martin's comments a few times, but I still think that his contribution is an important one and I welcome his posts. Sure he can be crude and it appears he doesn't think before he posts. I am sure he says things that he would never say in person. If we were in a bar together, I am sure Martin would have lost a few teeth after some of the things he has said.

With that said, I think Martin is a very intelligent man (or maybe woman, we really don't know for sure). If the threads on Mudcat had everyone agreeing with each other, it would be very dull.   Sure, he gets too personal and vulgar, but that is life. I don't believe in segregation and freedom of speech is too important to start censoring. What Martin has done on Mudcat is give everyone reason to think.   You will notice that the thread on Pete Seeger was very quiet until he spoke up. We all get our fur up, but he is making us think about our positions and then we have an opportunity to present the truth.

Martin has become that elderly uncle that the whole family is embarrased to associate with, but we will sure miss him when he is gone.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:17 PM

oh yes, the first quote - "MG's main problem is he thinks every opinion of his is of interest..."   IF you think about it, every single one of us is guilty of that.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:20 PM

Just think of him as a hormonally imbalanced menopausal mad aunty. Then he is laughable.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: freda underhill
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:22 PM

..because we're all allowed here.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST,shameful secret
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:32 PM

I spent a lot of time reacting, being upset, being outraged by Martin Gibson's posts, being offended by shocking horrible things he said, especially to a couple of really nice catters. Then one day something strange happened. When I read them I started laughing, and have kept laughing. This is my guilty secret.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 01:59 PM

Personally, I have no desire to "get to know" a racist like MG, and anyone who does is tainted by their association with him, IMO. But I'm glad that he's allowed to post here. I value diverse opinions, even racist ones like Martin's. Plus, since I'm strongly anti-Israel, I really enjoy the little bit of damage MG does to his own cause with every uninformed, bile-choked post. You don't even have to argue with him... Just wind him up, and watch the hate and vulgarity fly. He does all the work. :)

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Peace
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 02:09 PM

Martin is allowed here because he's a good guy. It's that simple. He has a name. He contributes. He has more right to be here than a nameless GUEST, IMO.

Hello, Martin.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 02:11 PM

Exactly Lepus Rex. He is so dumb he can't see that. I wouldn't want to be championing his cause.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 02:19 PM

I don't think MG has a cause, in particular, or that he IS one, either. He sure doesn't need championing. People can and do make up their own minds. I sure don't post my opinion or view with the expectation of anyone agreeing.

~Susan

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 02:25 PM

Let's just agree to differ Susan. I don't count sexist, racist, homophobes as people I wish to communicate with.

Each to our own though. There are too many nice people out there.

The demographs of this thread are speaking for themselves, thankfully.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: alanabit
Date: 14 Sep 04 - 02:26 PM

Martin Gibson is here because he is a member and he wishes to post. We all have the choice to read or not read his post. We all have the choice to be upset or not to be upset by his posts. We all have the choice to respond or not to respond.
We all draw the line of what we think is acceptable in different places. If Mudcat is to remain a broad church, we should include the Martin Gibsons of this world.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 01:59 AM

I don't think MG has a cause, in particular, or that he IS one, either. He sure doesn't need championing. People can and do make up their own minds. I sure don't post my opinion or view with the expectation of anyone agreeing.

Now if one WAS presumed to have a 'cause' - it would be thought OK by some to accuse them of being on a 'crusade' and to be encouraged to make personal attacks upon them. It does rather depend on what the 'crusade' actually is. Many pedantic posters are 'championed' when pedants (as we know) generally need no encouragement to mind everyone else's business. And even some valued memmbers, who intentionally post to make what they even state in their post are offensive personal attacks, are championed and congratulated by other members on their 'crusade' (or counter-attack) against the perceived 'crusade'.

Martin Gibson is here because he is a member and he wishes to post. We all have the choice to read or not read his post. We all have the choice to be upset or not to be upset by his posts. We all have the choice to respond or not to respond.
We all draw the line of what we think is acceptable in different places. If Mudcat is to remain a broad church, we should include the Martin Gibsons of this world.

I think I would go along with this too but it does not happen does it?

The current practice of moving, closing and of deleting entire threads that contain posts that are judged by our volunteers, to be too offensive to remain - results in the loss of many invited and more positive contibutions. Perhaps there is a better way than to keep throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 03:11 AM

Lepus Rex - I totally agree: I really enjoy the little bit of damage MG does to his own cause with every uninformed, bile-choked post. You don't even have to argue with him... Just wind him up, and watch the hate and vulgarity fly. He does all the work. :)

Give him enough rope and he hangs himself, time and time again.

He is not a "good guy" brucie, he is a dangerous man full of hateful stereotypes and subjects many mudcatters to his ignorance and vulgarity. To placate him and make excuses for his lack of compassion is exactly the way hate mongers gain power. Standing by silently while a bully does damage is exactly why the U.S. is in the trouble it is today.

Actually he is the the ugly American and he wallow in his own shit.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 05:24 AM

Should "Martin" be allowed to post here?

A singularly stupid question.

Answer: yes, of course.


Anybody who doesn't think so should do one or all of the following:


1) Get a thicker skin
2) Get a command of English
3) Get a life.

With any of the above you can easily deal with "Martin Gibson.

Martin" is truly amazing--a classic Jekyll and Hyde if there ever was one.

In music threads he's sweetness and light, spreading worthwhile information, and with good thread ideas.


Here below the line it's something completely different.   But obviously, when anybody responds to him below the line, it's because they want to; nobody is forced to post.

When "Martin" is in "gutter mode", who is he ridiculing?   Himself. It's not the language I would choose, and it's a true tragedy that "Martin" thinks so little of himself, but, hey that's his business. Far be it from me to stand in the way. I look forward to "Martin's" employment as Mr Bush's press secretary, and hope it happens very soon. There's no question he'd be perfect for the job.

In sum, GUEST, if you can't stand the heat.....


Also: to all:


Can't imagine why anybody wants to waste time shadow-boxing with a GHOST (GUEST).

"Martin" is a helluva lot more fun.

I think the operative assumption should be that any non-music thread started by a GUEST (below the line I think they should all be labelled GHOST) is worthless and should be ignored by everybody. That way they would all die quick merciful (yet deserved) deaths. That is: "although it's been said many times, many ways": don't feed the trolls. Every non-music GUEST (no handle) should be assumed to be a troll. If they aren't, they'll get a handle.


I've only commented on this thread since I have a passing acquaintance with the subject.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST,Martian Gibbon
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 06:33 AM

Right thats it, you've sent me over the edge, I've changed my name because you don't like me.

You won't know it's me anymore, so bollocks I'll see you all in hell.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST,Yamaha Fender
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 09:28 AM

Why? Because his wit, eloquence and readiness to engage in badinage with all and sundry helps show up the morons from Hull in their true colors. Give me a dozen Martin Gibsons any day

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 09:31 AM

Because freedom of speech has to apply to those you disagree with for you to be able to claim it for yourself.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 09:41 AM

Yamaha Fender = Amos

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST,Martian Gibbon
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 09:44 AM

Amos fuck off

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Peace
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 10:03 AM

Martin belongs here more than guest.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST,GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 10:04 AM

Here's another anonymous post from one of we guttless GUESTs. I used to hang out in the fringes of the Mudcat forum, but I haven't been back in well over a year, mostly because I got sick of all the slams, snide remarks, and smug, egotistical opinions from GUESTs and MEMBERS alike. Although I may have expressed disagreement with some of the esteemed and revered Mudcat members, I was never anything but pleasant in my posts. But some of the posts in reply to my own often made me feel unwelcome. I'd be willing to bet money there are a great many potential members out there who have been made to feel the same by the likes of Martin Gibson, Ron Davies, and other Mudcat personalities best known for their snottiness. Like me, they are probably reluctant to come back. Ron, your post makes you out to be a prick, quite frankly, at least in my humble opinion. Nevertheless, who am I to judge? We all have opinions. The difference is, some of us are nice, amiable folks. You know, the sort who like the smell of other people's farts. Then there are those like Ron. Conceited and arrogant. I'll bet he loves the smell of his own farts. I haven't read any of Martin Gibson's purportedly inflammatory posts, so I can't rightfully comment. I do perceive that at least he (or she) must be a guitarist of good taste, or someone who appreciates quality instruments, judging from their clever use of the names of two of the best guitar makers in the business to form their Mudcat moniker. So MG can't be all bad, yeah? By the way, I am at my work PC and I'm not comfortable with registering for a Mudcat membership here. Maybe I'll come back when I'm on my system at home. Then I'll register with my identity. I have nothing to hide.

Cheers all,

Snotrag   

P.S. That's a hint to my identity, by the way.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 10:26 AM

Any unnamed GUEST starting a thread like this has to be trying to stir up trouble. That opening "I recently stumbled onto this site" strikes me as highly unlikely in fact to be true. I'd suspect this was someone who's been around a fair time, either as a member or as a GUEST.

Yes you are probably right......

But as you do not know for sure is it not unwise to judge the poster's motives and proceed on that basis? If you really feel like this and can't give the views expressed the benefit of the doubt and treat it at face value, probably is it better not to post to the thread at all?

For if you ARE right - you will not have then brought the thread up to the top and played your part in what you consider to be the intended 'stirring-up' of trouble - the thread would quickly fall off of the bottom and any intended trouble-making, would have been minimised.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Midchuck
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 10:31 AM

There are two possible reasons not to allow MG here:

1) His opinions don't conform to the standard of conventional modern liberalism, that folkies in general accept as the only truth. (I tend to favor late-18th century liberalism, myself, but that's beside the pont.)

2) He can be rude and abusive in expressing himself.

If he's to be kicked out for reason #1, then the Mudcat has become a mutual admiration society, not a discussion forum, and is probably not worth anyone's time.

If he's to be kicked out for reason #2, then everyone else who's guilty of the same thing should be, including this poor old harmless 'chuck. That would certainly make the Mudcat run more smoothly, since the number of posts would drop by 50% at least.

Peter.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 11:09 AM

I can't follow Shambles' logic there. If this were a thread which had been drifting off the page, and one which I was happy to see go, refreshing it would be indeed be counterproductive.

However it was clearly a thread which was not drifting away. Moreover I was posting to express a point of view which I hold, that it is often better to accept and ignore the posts of people who abuse the (qualified) freedom we have on the Mudcat, rather than seeking to extend the scope of censorship.

My comment expressing scepticism about the motives of the person who started the thread was a side issue, even though it came first in my post. I felt this was probably an attempt to manipulate members for the sake of stirring, rather than a genuinely helpful thread. "Face value"? - but with a nameless GUEST poisting there is no "face" involved.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 11:09 AM

Wow, Midchuck! You're like Dennis Miller without the references. You should be on TV! You're not a racist, I know. You just "tell it like it is," without all that crazy liberal "political correctness" nonsense. You have converted me with your irreverent, straight-shooting style. We should totally fucking nuke those towelheads. And if some damned hippy dares to call advocating the extermination of all life if the Middle East "racist," nuke them too.

Martin should thank his god that he has friends like you, Peter.

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Midchuck
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 11:29 AM

Gee Whiz! And I thought my point in that thread was about admitting your purely emotional reactions, and distinguishing between them and what you actually advocated doing.

But a really good liberal has no violent emotional reactions - or rather, he/she buries them so deep that they're not recognized as existing at all, until they cause the liberal to get ulcers or an early heart attack - or break out and cause him to borrow a gun and go postal - so it's logical that the point would be missed.

P.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 11:32 AM

So, it's only racist if you act on your violent racist fantasies? Aha. Got it.

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: M.Ted
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 12:05 PM

The reality is that the rude/offensive/vulgar and deliberately disruptive posts tend to define the place for for anyone who drops in, like our GUEST above--the regulars know to "get over it" or "ignore it"--but not the folks who just drop in--

for quite a while now, many of the threads are really just old threads that have been resurrected from the past with a couple of posts(in many cases, the posters don't realize they are responding to comments made years ago) --and a fair number of the rest are "insider" threads, running jokes, and ongoing feuds--not enough to entice new people to participate, especially given that a new thread, no matter how well intentioned, runs the risk of being turned into a mudslinging contest--

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 12:27 PM

Lepus Rex

Alan Dershovitz describes in his book "The Case For Israel anyone who is anti-Israel as an international bigot and anti-semetic. I agree with him about you. His creditionals are quite impeccable. what the fuck are yours?

I also think that you are an encrusted asshole.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 12:36 PM

And Lepus, it's all about you.

Everything I say or do here is because it's all about you.

To quote a popular phrase:   "you and your ilk."

Regular posters who put on their masks and pose as Guests, it's all about you, too.

To the ones in this thread who fit that description, your anal pore sucks wind.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 12:50 PM

Spin, hate dreidel, spin!

And, actually, Martin, I think Alan Dershowitz, like most Jews, knows how to spell "anti-Semitic" properly. I'll take your word that he wrote something to the effect of "anti-Israel = anti-Semitic," though. (He also endorses the use of torture, but that's a different matter.) And? So he says that. It would have been more impressive had you actually explained how my opposition to the existence of the state of Israel would make me a racist, but no: It's just "Squawk! Alan Dershowitz says! Squawk!" And, as usual, followed up with multiple references to anuses, which seems to be a bit of an obsession for you... Anyways, unimpressive. You lose.

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Midchuck
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 01:28 PM

So, it's only racist if you act on your violent racist fantasies? Aha. Got it.

Well, uh...Yes.

There are no evil thoughts. (Unless you accept the existence of a supernatural being who monitors are thoughts and punishes the wrong ones. But I've never found any hard evidence of such.) Only evil deeds. Thoughts are a person's own property. Whether speech is evil in and of itself is a harder question. When it's specific, like defaming an individual, it almost certainly can be. When it's in generalities, and expressly about abstract propositions, I doubt it.

The nasty thing about conventional "political correctness" is that it teaches people to feel guilty about their private thoughts, when there's no reason to unless they act on them.

At the gut level, we are all racists, and sexists, and homophobes (or heterophobes, if there's such a word. I suppose there would have to be.) Being civilized involves building a veneer over those feelings. Claiming they aren't down there somewhere is lying - whether to yourself or to others.

That's how it seems to me, anyhow.

P.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 01:29 PM

I used to know a Martin Gibson, but I don't expect to see him much anymore now that he and Lepus Rex have discovered each other. :~)

~S~

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 01:40 PM

Midchuck do you really believe what you just wrote? The world isn't full of people supressing hatred in themselves so as to present a flowery picture to the world. It really isn't.

Don't delude yourself to make your views ok. They are only ok to those with similar views to your own. But people who harbour those thoughts invariably seek each other out and then agree with each other. It doesn't make it acceptable. If it was, why hide them?

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 01:44 PM

" we've been trying to do something about it"

Bull...

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 02:03 PM

Re: "PC" I like what Frankham had to say once upon a time: click here for all of it. Here's an excerpt:

The problem as I see it is that the term "Politically Correct" which emanated from the left wing movement as a criticism of itself became a political tool for those who adovocate hate politics.

Refraining from referring to someone by a derogatory name is not "political correctness" as I understand the term.

...In short, the term PC is now being used as a political weapon by those with malice. They know they offend and sort of roll in it like a pig in you know what.

I applaud Rick's "Ethically Conscious" like to see this being added to the dialogue.

There is this: those who defend the use of inappropriate racial slurs because they follow a system of logic that says it's ok for them to do it could also be called PC. It cuts both ways.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: harpgirl
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 02:27 PM

But just who really is Attila the Hun's ggggggggggggg grand nephew?

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: The Shambles
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 02:44 PM


My comment expressing scepticism about the motives of the person who started the thread was a side issue, even though it came first in my post. I felt this was probably an attempt to manipulate members for the sake of stirring, rather than a genuinely helpful thread. "Face value"? - but with a nameless GUEST poisting there is no "face" involved.

Side issue or not - posting to pass judgement on the worth or otherwise of a unknown poster is never really helpful as it just encourages others to do this or feel that just posting to do this is acceptable. This in turn encourages exchanges that, very easily can turn into the trading of insults.

As for namelesss guests having no face value - again this is another judgement. Face value simply means discussing (or ignoring) what view is being expressed. This has always been considered to be more important on our forum, that speculating who is, or who may be saying it and what their motives may possibly be.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 02:53 PM

Hecklers may in fact be friendly and even helpful in their intention, but no heckler is ever entitled to object if the person or people heckled assume there is a hostile intent.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Once Famous
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 03:26 PM

No Lepus Rex the Wonder Horse

You can't even compete. You never made a fucking spelling error typing fast? I thought your name was really Loopy Loo.

Alan Dershowitz's book on anti-semetism and Israel bashing has sold many copies and has a great arguement.

you calling it "squack" for lack of any intelligent word sure shows that you didn't go to the same Harvard Law School that he did, so you lose big time.

You Mr. Loopus Rex the Wonder Horse are obviously a Jew hater, probably a Nazi, maybe a skin head, obviosuly not going to get anything for Chanukah this year.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 03:48 PM

Up above someone wrote: "I spent a lot of time reacting, being upset, being outraged by Martin Gibson's posts, being offended by shocking horrible things he said, especially to a couple of really nice catters. Then one day something strange happened. When I read them I started laughing, and have kept laughing. This is my guilty secret."

Several years ago I wrote something of the sort in response to a different situation. I just want to make it clear that the above poster is not I.

I have learned to gloss over MG's posts but they certainly do not make me laugh.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: MaineDog
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 04:01 PM

Back in the sixties the Harvard Ed school ran a class that went something like this : 6-10 students who didn't know each other were put into a discussion group several times a week with no rules or assignments except that they should totally ignore each other except in the meetings.
They were to report on what they did at the end of the class. The results were predictable. A leader always arose, and a clown, and a victem, and a reformer, etc etc. About half way thru someone always suggested that they should get naked and see what would happen next. Someone always used too much profanity, someone always got religious, someone always whined, etc. I wonder what they would have done if they knew that there was a graduate level class going on in the next room, watching them thru one way glass?

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 04:06 PM

For the same reason W Anderson is. Because.

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 04:07 PM

You have to love Minnesota, right???

Subject: RE: Why Is Martin Gibson Allowed Here?
From: GUEST,LDB
Date: 15 Sep 04 - 05:25 PM

I think Martin Gibson serves one of the most important roles here on Mudcat. He is the only one who smashes Lepus the asshole Rex and his/hers/its stupid comments to bits. The only problem with that is that Martin Gibson is so much smarter than Lepus the asshole Rex that Lepus the asshole Rex doesn't even know that he has been smashed by Martin Gibson.

Keep up the great work, Martin Gibson. And remember, Lepus the asshole Rex is an asshole.

---

OK, so I suppose it's time to close this one, too. I don't know what the solution is, but I do know it doesn't have anything to do with everybody calling each other asshole.
That kind of stuff makes it really difficult to carry on an adult discussion.
-Joe Offer-