BS: Non posting of judgements week.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: kendall
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 07:31 AM

No offence taken. I'm innocent.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 09:22 AM

Well to cheer you up Roger, when I was in the US asked Max how many 'clones' there are, he said "about 10", there may be more or less now, as that was last October.
I know a couple of names but that's all, and of course I wouldn't dream of repeating them to anyone else!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 09:58 AM

Thank God you aren't one!

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: GUEST,GEUST
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:13 AM

So why still the need for secrecy ?

when most modern internet forums are run quite smoothly enough
by volunteer mods and admins
who confidently accept the responsibility and status of their role
by openly & publicly disclosing their position and "board ID"
to all other members subject to their authority ?

.. could it possibly be because the average age at mudcat
is possibly more 'senior' than most other public music forums,
and members here are of a generation that grew up
conditioned by the paternalistic culural politics, suspicion & paranoia
of the "Cold War" era ?????


..or maybe not !!??


Btw, in the ouside 3D world I have encountered many voluntary arts institutions
and shared interest 'hobby' groups
where the social interaction of members is manipulated and poisoned
by the furtive behind-closed-doors intrigues, plotting and backstabbings,
indulged in by elderly commitee office holders..

..seems there are always so many vain vindictive old monsters desperate to cling to power and influence
at any cost
to everyone else but themselves..

[ even in the most petty and insignificant local social groupings ]

..but as I said, thats just Btw........

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:16 AM

"Subject: RE: New Folk Club 9in Hull)
From: GUEST,Thornton Curtis - PM
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 11:15 AM

Mr Ted and followers - congratulations - you appear to have found another thread to inhabit. Just before you succeed in killing any interest in this one, perhaps you could continue your hilarious activities on your other masterpieces - threads that will no doubt allow you to maintain the highest quality and impressive quantities of fascinating dialogue for years to come.

There's a good fellow."

2 years 4 months and counting!

G.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:21 AM

The strange thing is that while Jeri and Big Mick have made no secret about their un-paid, giving of their free time, editing status, the other names mentioned, as far as I know, have never been brought up and the Members named now become a target for ridicule due to a Guess!

They know who they are, I know who I am - the only guess here is who you may be. I really doubt if any of those posters mentioned are at any risk of becoming targets of ridicule simply as a result of anything that I may post.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:31 AM

So Thornton Curtis was you then eh McKenzie?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:37 AM

Proposal for members only posting of BS

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:48 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: kendall - PM
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 07:25 AM

BS, Members only, great idea, let's do it.

Why would you feel that you have any right to expect our forum to be changed at this stage to better suit your requirements?

If you do not like public contributions to our forum in the form that it is and has always been - exactly what is stopping you from starting a members only site that will suit your requrements better?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Alba
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 11:00 AM

I see the shelf life of this particulat Thread has been extended.
Now that's a pity.
Maybe a Mudcat Elf could oblige by changing the title in the Subject box to.."Extenstion of non posting of judgements week"
Purely in the interests of accuracy.
Thanks
Jude:)

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 11:05 AM

It is forbidden to change the title of any thread started by The Shambles.
Transgressors will be bored to death ad infinitum, ad nauseam, and add salt and pepper to suit your taste.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 11:13 AM

That will learn em.........

All that was ever requested is that a thread's originator be first asked if they minded a change to their chosen thread title before any change was imposed.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Bert
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 11:52 AM

All that was ever requested is that a thread's originator be first asked if they minded a change to their chosen thread title before any change was imposed.


A reasonable request. OK now, the week is over everyone be happy.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: kendall
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 12:47 PM

Shambles, if the bs section was open only to people with a name, you would have one less reason to piss and moan about nameless clones. That's reason enough to do it.
Furthermore, it would be an improvement, and it would not be a requirement of mine.
Notice how I stated an opinion without attacking anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 01:09 PM

BS, Members only, great idea, let's do it.
Kendall

Furthermore, it would be an improvement, and it would not be a requirement of mine.

Why would you feel that you have any right to expect our forum to be changed at this stage to better suit your requirements?

If you do not like public contributions to our forum in the form that it is and has always been - exactly what is stopping you from starting a members only site that will suit your requrements better?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: jacqui.c
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 01:21 PM

Roger

'Why would you feel that you have any right to expect our forum to be changed at this stage to better suit your requirements?'

The same could and has been asked of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 01:27 PM

sheeeeeeeesh If an individual - and the three or four others who have enough respect for that individual's views to follow him- is unhappy with the ways thngs are, why shouldn't that individual be the logical one to start a website that would better suit his needs? Rather than perpetually proposing that every one else leave?

Another odd thing is that when changes are proposed, that individual suddenly becomes fond of the way things are.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: kendall
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 01:29 PM

Listen Mate, My opinion does not need your approval.
What I'm suggesting is simply a suggestion, not a right. Stop reading into it what is not there.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 01:53 PM

'Why would you feel that you have any right to expect our forum to be changed at this stage to better suit your requirements?'

The same could and has been asked of you.

And when it has the answer is clear. I do not have any expectation of any change to better suit my requirements. These requirements were perfectly met when I first started posting to our forum, which is why I continued to post here. Any changes have been imposed to suit the constantly changing requirements of others.....And these others are still not satisfied......

Now they propose to formally change our public discussion forum into a private members club - to better suit their requirements.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 02:00 PM

It's not really OUR public discussion forum though is it Roger?
This is why you're on a hiding to nothing on this one, it is a private (owned by Max} discussion forum, in which we are allowed to participate.
If you take that as the starting point then you won't go far wrong.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 02:02 PM

Subject: RE: Explain the BS rules
From: Max - PM
Date: 26 Oct 99 - 12:40 AM

Since you are with us, you get to help us make the rules. Of late it seems that it is used for non-music related questions, comments, thoughts and stories. It may be like just a light conversation piece, or just killing time, or getting through a bad day, or anything non-academic (if you will). Or, just don't use it. It is what you make it. Don't sweat the rules, cause there aint none.

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=14726&messages=56&page=1&desc=yes

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 02:05 PM

[PM] Joe Offer BS: Censorship on Mudcat (1009* d) RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat 31 Mar 05

Well, I have to agree with Shambles that Max seems to convey the idea that this is "our" forum. However, it also seems quite clear that very few of us want "our" forum to be taken over by those who would wish to make it a place of combat and chaos.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 02:06 PM

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-

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: GUEST,GEUST
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 02:13 PM

Issues of importance which can impact on an entire community,

eg. control and censorship of a 'public' forum

should not be identified with just one individual 'malcontent'.


We all should know by now how much easier it is for 'power elites'
to retain control and strive to defend a dubious status quo
by personalising issues.

Insecure and defensive institutional elites often seek to discredit and dismiss
progressive movements for positive change
by the expedient strategy of coniving to associate 'new & better' ideas
with the 'rantings' of 'known agitators & troublemakers'.

Any others who may pose a similar threat to destabalise or potentially directly challenge
the ruling order
will be likewise publicly belittled and disrespected
as simple-minded 'easily lead followers' of the higher profile
'mad extremist revolutionary ringleaders'..

.. and you know what.. this always works nearly every time !!!!!!


Now then, you over there in the corner hiding behind your computer monitor
with your eyes shut, and your fingers in your ears
chanting "la, la, la, la,la.."


..its ok, you can safely resume scanning through the posts
to only read the ones from friends you know you can agree with..

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 02:13 PM

And despite our best efforts, Mudcat is no longer a pleasant place to hang out and goof off or have a good discussion. So, I think something has to be done.
Joe Offer

In this thread Proposal for members only posting of BS

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Peace
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 02:15 PM

God created the whole flippin' universe in six days. On the seventh S/he rested. Is this part deux?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 03:11 PM

GUEST GEUST I hope you're not accusing Roger of being a "known agitator & troublemaker"
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Bill D
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 03:44 PM

I have something positive and complimentary to say about Shambles.....I ...uh...suppose this is a judgement.


begin positive remarks
WOW....what a memory and cataloguing system! I will never understand how he manages to locate all those old threads & posts and keep track of relevant ones.
end positive remarks

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: kendall
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 04:16 PM

All you agitators should be glad this isn't a democracy. You would be voted off the island.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Jeri
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 04:58 PM

Kendall, don't you have a saying about knocking on a dead man's door? Do you have a saying about the sort of people who would keep knocking?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Peace
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 05:16 PM

Has the makings of a song, Jeri . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 05:37 PM

All you agitators should be glad this isn't a democracy.

Your definition of an agitator of course would be those who constantly post to judge the worth of their fellow posters and feel they have some entitlement to shape our forum to their tastes and to gang-up, be nasty and try and drive those with different tastes away?

Or is that your definition of your ideal poster? If it is - will you and those who may agree with you - please start your own private members club and leave the rest of us to be finally free from your judgement and efforts to shape our forum to your taste.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Alba
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 05:54 PM

Rofl...I believe that you believe what you post Shambles. So I have pondered this very fact for about...oh...3 minutes and here is what I have come up with.

For me. I think the best response that I can make in reply to your posts, not matter what you say or how you say it, whenever you post or start a thread..is simply....

ok Roger, your right, your always right and you always will be right, forever and ever and ever

....*sigh*......
Having reached this decision I seem to have attained an inner calm of surprising strength and serenity.
This week's NPOJW will be a good one for me I feel.
May the force be with the rest of you on THE forum:)
J

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 06:04 PM

May the force be with the rest of you on THE forum:)

When you and your fellow malcontents have set THE forum up - I hope you will all be very happy - you will not be able to judge any of my posts there for I will be staying here as a contributor to OUR forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Peace
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 06:31 PM

Will there be a YOUR forum?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Peace
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 06:35 PM

Shambles, IMO you had a good idea. I said that in the first few posts. Good luck to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: kendall
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 08:37 PM

Yes, Jeri, "On a dead man's door you can knock forever."

Nuff said.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 08:44 PM

So Kendall, this would of course include the brain dead I assume?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: catspaw49
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 09:02 PM

Mama, take this badge off of me
I can't use it anymore.
It's gettin' old and I'm bored to tears
I feel like I'm knockin' on Shamble's door.

Knock, knock, knockin' on Shamble's door
Knock, knock, knockin' on Shamble's door
Knock, knock, knockin' on Shamble's door
Knock, knock, knockin' on Shamble's door

Mama, put my guns in the ground
I can't shoot them anymore.
He's repeatin' that same tired shit, a mind has flown
Now I'm just knockin' on Shamble's door.

Knock, knock, knockin' on Shamble's door
Knock, knock, knockin' on Shamble's door
Knock, knock, knockin' on Shamble's door
Knock, knock, knockin' on Shamble's door


Spaw (with apologies to Dylan)

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: jeffp
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 09:55 PM

ROTFLMAO (a judgement to be sure)

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:14 PM

let me remind all you relative newcomers...most of the clones become so because they were the biggest complainers and troublemakers, whiners, tattletales, and general malcontents, with the exception of Bert. Max couldn't be bothered with their complaints so he gave them limited editing powers. Now they are all power mad, with the exception of Bert. They have created the most ongoing problems, IMHO.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:52 PM

Bert? Is that you, Bert? :)

Nah! that wasn't me, Bert

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 01:09 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Vote Mudcats most boring thread!
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:43 PM

Aw c'mon Hawk.....Lay off ol' Clinton. You got nuthin' on the boy and shit like that coming from some broke-dick mamalucca like you is at the very least a bit disingenuous. So fuck off.

Your turn.

Spaw

As I have already been called everything - it should be apparent by now - that no form of personal judgement posted by any other poster will have any affect other that to encourage others to follow this example and inflict these posts upon every other poster.

It is time for those who are not happy with the fact that Max will rarely (if ever) try to exclude any poster - to form another forum which is run on the terms that they require and to finally leave the rest of us in 'peace'.

Some may no doubt post that they consider Catspaw's posting to be an attempt at as 'humour'. That may be so - but it is still setting an example for others to follow and when they do follow this example - other less-favoured posters will risk being subject to judgement and imposed censorship.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 02:07 AM

Good grief.

"It is time for those who are not happy with the fact that Max will rarely (if ever) try to exclude any poster - to form another forum which is run on the terms that they require"

Shambles - how apt!- if the one you are describing is not YOU, who is it?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 02:38 AM

Shambles - how apt!- if the one you are describing is not YOU, who is it?

I think you know who you are.   

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=89872&messages=77

The idea tends to be encouraged that if other posters choose to post something that you do not like - that this is then open to public judgement and it is they who should change their tastes to suit yours or be asked or expected to go away.

Rather than just be encouraged to ignore it and concentrate of the only thing that any poster has control over - the content of their own posts.

Like any other party - who is invited and who is asked to leave - is a matter for the host and not your fellow guests. The main responsibilty an invited guest has is to try to tolerate the other invited guests and set a good example to their fellow guests.

If any invited guest cannot tolerate their fellow guests and are unable to set a good example to them and don't like the host's party - they are free to leave. They are also free to host a party where they can invite who they wish and on their requirements.

I have always liked Max's Party and the terms on which I was invited. My arguments have been with some my fellow guests who feel they have some right to judge the right of their fellow invited guests to be present and to shape Max's party to their requirements.

This has now come to a head as some of my fellow guest feel they are entitled to ask Max to limit who is invited to Max's party and in effect bring Max's party - as we have always known it - to an end.

Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 03:39 AM

Mummy mummy, I build a castle out of my building blocks and Johnny said it was a rubbish castle, please tell him to go away!
If Johnny doesn't like your castle it doesn't matter, if you're happy with it then that's fine.
Mummy I didn't build it for him to criticize, I built it for him to admire, and he won't admire it. Tell him to go away
Not everybody likes your castle as much as you do dear.
Well if they don't like it they should go away and play in another playground.
This is everybodys playground dear, not just yours.
It's my playground, and I say who can play in it.
No dear you must learn to share.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.
There there, don't cry dear, be a brave little soldier for Mummy, and she will give you a special kiss and make it all better for you.Close your little eyes and dream that there is nobody else in the playground except you.

There there.


G.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: GUEST,GEUST
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 07:43 AM

but you can't have been there..

or maybe little Johhny aint exactly telling his mummy all the truth..

.. just ask one of the more sensible kids in the playground
who can usually be trusted to report what he/she witnessed
as truthfully as possible when asked by a fair-minded playground monitor..


you see, Johnny is not only just saying the other kids castle is rubbish..

the sneaky little sod is also waiting until the other poor kiddie
turns his back for a few minutes
so he can pull out and take away for keeps
some of the other kids
lego blocks
in a spiteful attack to undermine the structure of his victims castle..

now if that dont make Johnny a nasty litle bully..

what does ?

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: kendall
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 08:07 AM

I personally know 6 people who have the authority to delete or edit, and not one of them is a "power hungry monster." That's crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: GUEST,old bloke walking dog near playground
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 08:13 AM

I blame the parents, blindly doting on their spoilt evil little brats !

.. and if the little buggers dont stop tormenting my jack russell every time we walk past the playground
I'll let him off his lead to shit on the playground grass..

..ha ha, wipe them worms out their eyes.. that'll teach 'em !


Bah !!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Non posting of judgements week.
From: catspaw49
Date: 30 Mar 06 - 08:20 AM

Aw hell Sham.....Why not post the whole thing? Here ya' go!

Subject: RE: BS: Vote Mudcats most boring thread!
From: Scoville - PM
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 04:52 PM

Any thread that degenerates into a personal one-on-one between two Mudcatters, exclusive of the rest of us who would like to have a civilized, though-provoking discussion.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate - Delete Message - Edit Message - Xfer Message - Unanswered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Vote Mudcats most boring thread!
From: Little Hawk - PM
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:40 PM

Hmmm...yes, I seem to recall one or two threads where that happened.........

yeah...

Screw Clinton Hammond! ;-P The jerk.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate - Delete Message - Edit Message - Xfer Message - Unanswered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Vote Mudcats most boring thread!
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 10:43 PM

Aw c'mon Hawk.....Lay off ol' Clinton. You got nuthin' on the boy and shit like that coming from some broke-dick mamalucca like you is at the very least a bit disingenuous. So fuck off.

Your turn.

Spaw


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate - Delete Message - Edit Message - Xfer Message - Unanswered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Vote Mudcats most boring thread!
From: Little Hawk - PM
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 11:18 PM

Yeah? Go ream yourself out with a rusty pipe wrench, you hosebag!

How's that?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate - Delete Message - Edit Message - Xfer Message - Unanswered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Vote Mudcats most boring thread!
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 11:25 PM

anything involving Amos.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate - Delete Message - Edit Message - Xfer Message - Unanswered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Vote Mudcats most boring thread!
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 29 Mar 06 - 11:29 PM

Not bad....so let's see...........

Hawk, you're such a complete and total wanker that words alone are not enough to describe the totality of your assaholic behavior and crappola postings. The only thing you have contributed to Mudcat is the "Shatner Proof" where you established Shatner as the living proof that caribou butt-fucked buffalo.

I'm going to bed. See you in the morning.

Spaw


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate - Delete Message - Edit Message - Xfer Message - Unanswered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry to hear you are suffering from humor impairment. Perhaps it is because you judge it as humour and not humor.

Spaw