 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Censorship on Mudcat
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 04 Jun 05 - 10:06 AM The Investigator's Song (Harold Rome) I've got a problem that is bothering me; I've got a real unsolvable mystery; It would stun G.K. Chesterton, Foil Conan Doyle, Drive Sherlock Holmes to the wall; Stump Humphrey Bogart and Bacall; CHORUS: Who's gonna investigate the man who investigates the man who investigates me? I don't doubt my loyalty, But how about what his may be? Who'll check the record of the man who checks the record of the man who checks the record of mine? Seems to me there's gonna be an awfully long line. One more problem puzzles me; Pardon my strange whim. But who's gonna investigate the man who investigates the man who investigates him? Who's gonna investigate the man who investigates the man who investigates me? Maybe they won't like the face he's wearing; Maybe he'll have too much brass. Maybe he's a guy who's fond of herring; Maybe he drinks tea from a glass. Believe me, brother, that won't pass. CHORUS Who's gonna investigate the man who investigates the man who investigates me? Maybe they won't like the books he's reading; Or the way he wants to pray. Maybe he won't have the proper breeding; Maybe he ran T.V.A. Believe me, brother, That's out-ray. CHORUS Who's gonna investigate the man who investigates the man who investigates me? Maybe he's the kind does his own thinking; Maybe tries to use his head. Maybe he goes in for vodka drinking; Maybe his corpuscles are red. Believe me brother, Off with head. Copyright 1947, by Harold Rome |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,Yawn Date: 01 Jun 05 - 06:17 AM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: gnu Date: 01 Jun 05 - 05:33 AM Thanks for the PM Roger and I am sure Max appreciates your PM's. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: George Papavgeris Date: 01 Jun 05 - 04:40 AM Jon, you're confusing Shamble's intentions with facts. He never lets facts get in the way of a good moan, though. He just wanted to send a barb, whether fact-justified or not - he did it, and is happy now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,Jon Date: 01 Jun 05 - 04:26 AM shambles, a) Max set the rule. b) Max or Jeff added the code to stop users using the img tag to embed images. Joe can't do that. c) The embedded images you mentioned are not from other sites but located on the Mudcat servers. Right click on them and look at properties - you will see they are on Max's personal folder on www.mudcat.org. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 01 Jun 05 - 04:07 AM As usual, it's IN THE FAQ. As for technical things, Mudcatters should refrain from posting embedded pictures and sounds from other sites because this slows down the loading of threads (use clickable links instead). Obviously Max does not read Joe's FAQ. Or does not intend to take any notice of it - if he does read it. I notice also that our volunteers have not imposed their editing judgement upon this open flouting of the rules............*Smiles* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: gnu Date: 31 May 05 - 04:55 PM I haven't posted to this thread yet. I have nothing to say. I just want to make sure The Shambles doesn't miss this thread. I am quite sure he/she will want to add something. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST Date: 31 May 05 - 03:10 PM Shambles, THE LINE IS OPTIONAL for each and every registered user of Mudcat, and I bet there is a non-lined URL for guest entry as well. As usual, it's IN THE FAQ. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 31 May 05 - 02:52 PM Ebbie - Perhaps we should go back to not having the line at all? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: Ebbie Date: 26 May 05 - 02:15 PM I propose that this thread be posted above the line so that everyone may benefit from its sparkling wisdom. Besides, now and again, music is mentioned. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,Sleepless Dad Date: 26 May 05 - 02:14 PM See Joe - If it wasn't for you and your interferance the piano man would be home with family by now. Shame on you. It's all your fault. My guess is that Shambles lives in an apartment that is either totally spotless with absolutly nothing out of place - or it's a complete wreck. Shambles - am I right ? Will this thread outlive the mother of all BS threads ??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,The Shambles Date: 26 May 05 - 01:49 PM I just checked the thread now, and there still is very little music information in it. So, no, it won't be moved, even if somebody asks me to move it. -Joe Offer- Do you think that what is judged as there curently being very little music information - could be due to the fact that it is a music-related thread with a B/S prefix with other B/S threads in the B/S section? The point is that if this music-related thread was moved to where it should be -with other music-related threads - perhaps there may be more music-related information posted to it and that there may even be a chance of someone being alerted who may know who the 'piano man' may be? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,Sleepless Dad Date: 26 May 05 - 11:17 AM Shambles - Who killed JFK ? Perhaps the joeclones ? And can anyone offer proof that Joe Offer doesn't really own Area 51 ? Please search this message for the secret encoded message for your eyes only. If you can't find it - then it's been censored. Again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 26 May 05 - 10:46 AM Shambles - the point was that the Piano Man thread was STARTED BY THE ORIGINATOR AS A BS THREAD. This implies a conscious thought that originator did not WISH to place the thread in the music section. MMario - Yes that is true but if you read the thread you will see that they have changed their mind............We all entitled to screw-up. Some of us even change our minds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 26 May 05 - 10:42 AM This thread was moved from BS to the music-related section - without too much fuss............ Its not BS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,MMario Date: 26 May 05 - 10:42 AM Shambles - the point was that the Piano Man thread was STARTED BY THE ORIGINATOR AS A BS THREAD. This implies a conscious thought that originator did not WISH to place the thread in the music section. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 26 May 05 - 10:33 AM As a matter of fact, not conjecture or opinion, I have started a thread that should have been in BS but forgot the prefix. Joe has asked if it was alright with me if he moved it down, and I appreciated it. He did not "rush" to change it, as you suggest. Your image of Joe and others is so distorted and self-serving that it makes me wonder. Jerry all that I asking for is that everone receives the same consideration from Joe as you do - if that was the case - no one would need to have any complaint and would see our anonymous volunteers in the same light as you do. Until every poster's contribution does receive the same treatment as yours - my concern will be for those who do not receive the same treatment as you. Perhaps you could try and see the issue from those who are not as fortunate as you? ...................................................................... People are free to request that the category of a thread be changed. The appropriate place to ask is by personal message to Joe or Jeff, or in the Help Forum. As of this date, I have received no such request - from the thread originator, or from anyone else. Change requests posted in the thread itself are likely to be missed. I looked at the thread when it started and decided it was a human-interest thing that could be considered either music or non-music - so I left it where it was. I just checked the thread now, and there still is very little music information in it. So, no, it won't be moved, even if somebody asks me to move it. -Joe Offer- Joe - The point about the 'Piano man' thread was that it was posted to a music site in the chance that those interested in music may be able to help indentify and help the individual involved. If it were moved to the music-related section (where it quite obviously rightly belongs) - there is more chance that this help may be forthcoming. It would certainly be a shame if your personal judgement - imposed in the face of the originator's request for their own contribution - resulted in this poor soul's period of misery being made longer than it needed to be.... Perhaps you can reconsider? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: John MacKenzie Date: 26 May 05 - 03:17 AM Use a hoe and do S&M highlights? G.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: catspaw49 Date: 25 May 05 - 08:57 PM Well Jerry I suggested he do the rake handles with the G&S highlights. Anything else he could do? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: Don Firth Date: 25 May 05 - 08:55 PM I forget. What was the original beef? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: Jerry Rasmussen Date: 25 May 05 - 08:50 PM Man, Shambles! You are reallllllly grasping at straws! As a matter of fact, not conjecture or opinion, I have started a thread that should have been in BS but forgot the prefix. Joe has asked if it was alright with me if he moved it down, and I appreciated it. He did not "rush" to change it, as you suggest. Your image of Joe and others is so distorted and self-serving that it makes me wonder. Don't you have something more constructive to do with your life? This thread long ago passed beyond the point of ridiculous. Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: catspaw49 Date: 25 May 05 - 08:47 PM Sorry.....I passed out for a few there when I read this thread was in the wrong place. I'm sure you have it all documented in 5 part harmony with feeling and that you're dying to tell us all about it but I don't particularly give a shit and I doubt anyone else does either. I did try to find a more accurate category than BS where this thread might fit, but there is no category label, "Great, Huge, Smelly, Putrid and Petrified, Flaming, Gargantuan, Mountain-Sized Piles of the Finest Bullshit Capable of Being Produced By The Lunatic Mind of a Tight-Ass Broke-Dick Mamalucca Who Can Suck A Root As Long As A Rake Handle While Singing Highlights of Gilbert and Sullivan." Couldn't find that label tag so I guess I just have to figure this thread as BS! Sorry we can't be more accurate. Here, have another rake handle and sing "Modern Major General"....... Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 25 May 05 - 08:34 PM Subject: RE: BS: The way it should be...... From: CarolC - PM Date: 25 May 05 - 06:11 PM Your Socialism vs. Capitalism thread. It has been completely deleted, as of the last time I looked for it.]snip[ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 25 May 05 - 08:25 PM The fact is that this thread is in the wrong place and the originator has requested that it be moved to the right place. It is a music-related thread subject yet our anonymous volunteers seem to think that they should ignore the originators request and seem to think that current policy means that this thread is destined to stay down in the B/S. If it was judged by them to be a B/S thread on the music related section - our anonymous volunteers would have rushed to move it - on the most flimsy of excuses and without the oginator's knowledge or consent. The loyal defence of this 'jobsworth attitude' is simply making our forum look even more silly by the day.
I looked at the thread when it started and decided it was a human-interest thing that could be considered either music or non-music - so I left it where it was. I just checked the thread now, and there still is very little music information in it. So, no, it won't be moved, even if somebody asks me to move it. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: catspaw49 Date: 25 May 05 - 08:20 PM Congratulations! A NEW ISSUE!!! This one makes no fuckin' sense either but who cares? It's bullshit of the first magnitude all laid out to make perfect sense in Roger's World. Anyone who has ever watched this place for any period KNOWS that when a non-music thread is posted in the upper section, within 15 minutes someone has posted on the thread and also generally in the Help forum that they are incensed and that the thread isn't "Music" and should be moved. Invariably this happens well before Joe or a clone arrive. I've posted back on a few of these myself saying, "Relax and give them a chance!" Ask Uncle Dave-O. Add in Jon's point above plus the stretch you had to go to to even imagine this one as an issue and I figure you're worn to hell out! Put this one along with the others where the sun don't shine and go do something botanical or metallurgical or just mecahnical. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,Jon Date: 25 May 05 - 08:12 PM Shambles, you seem to forget that there are old threads marked BS: that don't have the tag set. Also (at least last time I looked) if someone, not realising, omited the prefix but gave the thread title as BS: it would not have the tag set. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 25 May 05 - 07:47 PM Current policy is that if the originator of a thread designates it as BS: it is left as BS , or moved there if the tag wasn't set. This complies with volunteers not imposing their judgement on others. I would think you would be pleased joeclone So if an originator does not make the optional choice of a prefix - volunteers can rush to impose their judgement upon others - to send a thread to the B/S section without the originator's wishes. All for the common good But the current policy is that even when the originator later posts to say they were unsure and now wish the thread to be in the music section - our volunteers will ignore the originators wishes - this request and the fact that the thread is obviously in the wrong place? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: George Papavgeris Date: 25 May 05 - 03:42 PM No - they just please themselves. Or did I mean "pleasure"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: John MacKenzie Date: 25 May 05 - 03:11 PM There's no pleasing some people. G.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 25 May 05 - 02:03 PM You may suspect from its title that the following thread The piano man is a music-related thread. However, perhaps partly due to not wishing to have our anonymous volunteers rush to impose their judgement and demote this thread to below the line - the originator used the B/S prefix. Is it possible for our anonymous volunteers to move this thread from the B/S section to join the other music-related threads? Or is this not possible? It seems to work quickly enough - the other way around?
Current policy is that if the originator of a thread designates it as BS: it is left as BS , or moved there if the tag wasn't set. This complies with volunteers not imposing their judgement on others. I would think you would be pleased joeclone |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 23 May 05 - 07:18 AM There is a sound clip of some fine guitar picking by Justa Picker in an otherwise pejorative BS thread down below (Bobert/MG slugfest). I would like to see and hear more of this type of music posted up here in the Music Section. Justa Picker's sound clip |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: JennyO Date: 23 May 05 - 06:57 AM I think terminal stupidity is more like it. my post on "Please close this thread" And it's not lost forever. It was only closed, not deleted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,The Shambles Date: 23 May 05 - 06:54 AM Perhaps it is a matter of who is asking - and who is being asked? And who is not being consulted at all? But why ask for a thread to be closed or deleted? If you don't open a thread and do not post to it - for you - the thread is is closed. Why deny other posters the opportunity to try and improve it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,Jon Date: 23 May 05 - 04:30 AM Another closed thread - despite some fine music being linked from it. Bobert v. Martin Gibson Pickers Duel.... The last post is: Subject: RE: BS: Bobert v. Martin Gibson Pickers Duel.... I try again Shambles (read the post and) ASK MAX |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: John MacKenzie Date: 23 May 05 - 04:18 AM I see this scum has risen to the top again! Can one die of terminal boredom? Giok |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 23 May 05 - 03:54 AM This one hasn't been closed (yet). Despite having no music links. Please close this thread? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 23 May 05 - 03:44 AM Another closed thread - despite some fine music being linked from it. Bobert v. Martin Gibson Pickers Duel.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,jOhn Date: 19 May 05 - 03:43 PM shambles is bloody moan to mutch. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: George Papavgeris Date: 19 May 05 - 11:29 AM It's back from holidays, refreshed and reinvigorated. Civilisation is safe again. Excerpt from Cavafis' "Barbarians": "Why this sudden bewilderment, this confusion? (How serious people's faces have become.) Why are the streets and squares emptying so rapidly, everyone going home lost in thought? Because night has fallen and the barbarians haven't come. And some of our men just in from the border say there are no barbarians any longer. Now what's going to happen to us without barbarians? They were, those people, a kind of solution. " Hai shiktir |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 19 May 05 - 10:57 AM From: brucie When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Re the Mudcat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST Date: 19 May 05 - 10:47 AM yep |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 19 May 05 - 10:43 AM Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted. Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass. -Joe Offer- From the following thread. http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=56969#894819 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST Date: 19 May 05 - 10:40 AM Why? despite anything you may think neither Max nor any of the people HE has delegated the right to perform work on this site owe you any explanation for any action of theirs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 19 May 05 - 10:34 AM Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST,Joe Offer - PM Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:28 AM Well, I can't log in, either, so I don't have access to proof one way or another. Generally, the 100th/200th claims are a no-no in music threads and in many serious discussions. People have come to think of them as obnoxious. I don't know why, but that's what they think. I don't bother with them, but they're fair game for the Clones. -Joe Offer- Are they still - officially "fair game" for our anonymous volunteers? Or has something changed? If something has changed - perhaps this can be made clear? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: GUEST Date: 19 May 05 - 10:31 AM *sigh* ALMOST seven days |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 19 May 05 - 10:24 AM Yes - I have to admit - its all my fault. I am really sorry that I now appear to make life so difficult for our volunteers...... However none of us ordinary posters are perfect and as someone who felt qualified to do this - whilst imposing judgement upon their fellow posters - once said 'learn to live with it'. Someone also said: 'If you don't like the heat - why don't you get out of the kitchen'. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Re The Mudcat I asked the following question in the above thread. Not had an answer yet. Perhaps I will get one in this thread? Subject: RE: BS: Re the Mudcat From: The Shambles - PM Date: 19 May 05 - 03:16 AM Clinton...and all you cowardly assholes who won't USE your names...shut the fuck up and let 'em work on it, and be glad you can use the place MOST of the time! Perhaps it can be explained why the abusive personal attack and anti-social behaviour above from Bill D - is safe from censorship - when the following in the same thread is not? Subject: RE: BS: Re the Mudcat From: Martin Gibson - PM Date: 18 May 05 - 11:11 PM Ebbie, I believe you when you say you are slow. I also [bleep] (for antisocial behavior) believe |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: Bill D Date: 12 May 05 - 01:36 PM yep |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: Joe Offer Date: 12 May 05 - 01:26 PM The closure of the three Damien Barber threads should have been discussed here, rather than diverting the discussion of the issue in the Barber threads by turning it into another self-serving Shambles campaign. It would be nice if I could be able to admit that I wasn't completely happy with the outcome of the Barber fiasco, and it would be nice to have a calm, reasonable discussion of what should be done the next time. If I had to do it over, I would have re-titled the first thread to make it seem to be less of a direct attack on an individual, and then I might have left it at that - but hindsight is 20-20, they say... But no, discussion of things like that is not possible at Mudcat, because Shambles sees a campaign issue in every click of the "edit" button. I can't admit misjudgments, because Shambles saves my every word for future "ammunition." He doesn't really care about free expression or improving things around here - all he wants is to impose his will by bullying everyone with his smothering blanket of copy-paste babblings. He'll go on and on for weeks about the how unfair it is that certain titles get ten spaces and others get 14 (hint: if you use a preformatted tag like "lyr req," you don't lose those 8 spaces in the title box, so your title will be longer - and there are still two spaces for the editors to play with). He paints even the most innocuous editorial action as some sort of conspiracy. There ARE valid editorial issues that I'd like to discuss with the community in general, but any such discussion gets buried in the babblings and accusations and repetitions that Shambles dumps on us. I'd really like to answer valid questions, but Shambles has forced me into a corner where I can't answer any of them because he asks the same question in three different threads on the same day - and then raises the very same question in three more threads, three weeks later. That being the case, it's best for me to just keep my mouth shut, and just let Shambles babble on without my answering. But that means that people with reasonable questions don't get answers. The worst is that Shambles took his campaign from the Help Forum to the general forum, and now he thinks he's entitled to hijack other threads with his campaign. So, in his perverted campaign to promote his narrow vision of "freedom," Shambles makes all of us a bit less free. It's too bad, isn't it? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: Georgiansilver Date: 11 May 05 - 06:15 PM One person on this thread seems to be inebriated with the exuberance of their own verbosity to the detriment of the site as a whole. I have sometimes had to eat dirt on the "Cat" as I have said things I should not have....may do well for one or two others to do the same! What a shambles!!!!!!! Best wishes, Mike. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat From: The Shambles Date: 11 May 05 - 03:06 AM The imposed closure of 3 threads is discussed in the following. Complaints vs mudslinging |