Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)

Subject: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:02 PM

Those who mainly post on music related threads and especially those who choose to post as guests may be interested in the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team's latest proposed change. As this has only been announced in the BS section - you may not be aware of it.

Perhaps this thread can remain in the music related section for the benefit of those posters in this section who will be affected by this proposal?

I'm open to any and all suggestions, but it seems to me that it's time for members-only posting to BS, with membership paswords sent only to those with valid e-mail addresses, and for full review of Guest posts to the music section before they are released to public view.

I see no value in the continued combat we've had, or in our continuing to protect the anonymity of those who want to cause trouble anonymously.

If you have a better idea, express it. Try to say something new, something true, and something constructive.
Joe Offer

I have no idea exactly what this 'full review' of Guest postings will be or who will be judging what is suitable for releasing to public view - so perhaps this 'review' and the reasons why it is judged to be needed after all this time - could be explained in more detail?

It would be nice for any future contributor who may drop in to post as a Guest to have a say on this also - but this will not be possible.

---

This is part 2 of this thread. I'm not sure why a second part was started. And no, complaint threads will not be in the music section.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: Janie
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:19 PM

This is a duplicate thread. Roger started the exact same thread in BS that already has 6 posts to it. Please combine.

Janie

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:24 PM

I'd guess it will be dealt with appropriately

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:25 PM

Ever get the feeling that Shambles was the whiney kid that had to have everything his own way and ended up getting locked in his own locker in high school?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: Little Robyn
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:26 PM

If this thread is consigned to the BS section, many of us, as Shambles has said, will miss it.
Is this going to cause problems for those who lose their cookies?
I know there are some awkward 'guests' and it is easy enough to become a member, but is someone about to throw out the baby with the bath water?
Robyn

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:26 PM

Another pot to stir.....keep it up.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:30 PM

Sounds like a good idea; I'm a member with no cookie.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:33 PM

log in again and you will get your cookie back!

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:42 PM

Hmm, interesting, not only music posts, and not only guests.....

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:45 PM

Keep it up friends....

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: GUEST,Dale
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:48 PM

Well, there are some of us who just never bother. I post rather infrequently anymore and have reasons of my own for not signing in. I suppose that does irritate some and perhaps means some pay less attention to what I might have to say. If so, so be it.

I did get a smile the other day when someone made a comment which made it sound like I was new here! Actually, my first post was in 1997, and I suppose there have been a few thousand in all.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 03:59 PM

"log in again and you will get your cookie back!"

These stupid threads are making me toss my cookies. Stop all of the bickering and act like adults. I truthfully doubt that many of you can.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: GUEST,Dale
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 04:12 PM

As I see it, moving this down below the line was a regrettable decision by whoever did it. As Shambles suggested, I would never have seen it.   I wouldn't have bothered to make my small input if I hadn't wanted it to be read. I have more thoughts on the matter, but there is no use in saying them.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 04:14 PM

Sorry if you thought that was bickering guest, I offered a suggestion. You would be surprised to find out that some people do not know how to get their cookie back.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 04:32 PM

sheesh..read the quote by Joe that Roger keep tossing out...it is not new, and it is ONLY an idea, and it may not happen anyway.

*IF* it is about to happen at anytime, there will BE an announcement above the line. Roger is just trying to get his campaign in as many places at once...with a provocative header to scare folks.

Even if music posts by Guests were 'reviewed', it would not affect anything EXCEPT posts which were trying to sneak in something else under the guise of a music post.....like 'censorship' vendettas.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: GUEST,Mudcat Visual Arts Technician
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 04:36 PM

This thread can now be viewed in full hi-fi sterio.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 04:57 PM

I wasn't saying that you were bickering Ron. It's all of the other whiners who just can't stop fighting over everything. Sorry if you misinterpreted what I said as being against you.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 05:00 PM

No problem. You quoted part of my comment before you made yours, which led to my interpretation.   I agree with you, far too much bickering over issues that should be of no consequence to anyone. Mudcat can be run anyway the owners see fit and if we do not like it, we do not have to join or post.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 05:42 PM

sheesh..read the quote by Joe that Roger keep tossing out...it is not new

The bit tacked on to it about a 'review' of all Guest postings on the music section before being cleared for public view is new.

It is only an afterthought because the original proposal was so poorly thought through.

And most of it would be new to those who only post on the music section. Which is why I posted it there and requested that it stay there so that they could comment on a proposal that directly affected them. Perhaps it can be returned to enable this?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 05:56 PM

and perhaps it should just stay where it is until and UNLESS it become a reality. We don't NEED 'comments' on something that may not happen. YOU want comments...and an extra forum for YOUR 'comments'.

What part of "denied" did you fail to grasp?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: katlaughing
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 06:01 PM

He's projecting, BillD. He wants to go start his own forum, but he's afraid nobody will follow.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 06:02 PM

Perhaps the formal proposal should not have been made public by the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team only on the BS section?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 06:24 PM

wasn't a formal proposal...was just an opinion. Its relevance WAS about BS and all of the layers of it he has to consider.

AND....all your 'perhaps' notwithstanding, it was his option and doesn't need to be 'judged'.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 06:30 PM

The chief of the Mudcat Editing Staff stated that he had made a formal proposal to Max - perhaps you should argue with him rather than me for it is you who are making the judgements - as usual?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 06:41 PM

For the record, I have already asked Max to make Members-Only posting in the "BS" section, and I think membership should be granted only to those with verifiable e-mail addresses (you register, and then get a password sent back to you). So far, Max hasn't said anything about being ready to make the change.
Joe Offer

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 10:01 PM

Two cents from here: I have been a member for years. I have 'no-cookie' setups on both work and home computers. It is a pain in the neck to reset my cookie every time I come to mudcat for a few minutes of browsing.   So I post as Guest unless there's some compelling reason to make myself known.

I like the fact that on the internet I don't have to be a celebrity or a member of the in-clique to say something in a discussion. While it's swell that there is a real-world group here who are best buddies and know each other's real names and addresses, I just don't think that's what the net or the cat is about.

I don't do abusive or annoying posts, I don't troll or flame. I will admit to occasionally saying something (gasp) negative as a Guest. It's usually something quite productive that the nice kind friends-in-the-real-world folks won't come out and say. You can call it hiding behind 'guest' or you can call it being free to have a more real discussion.

If Joe and Max want to remove abusive posters, remove them, block their isps. Frankly with this type of new rule I will feel like a card-carrying American of Arab descent. I'm going to get stopped and green-carded and frisked every time I turn around, because the FBI would rather restrict the freedoms of a million people than go out and find the 400 Al-Qaeda among us and deal with them on an individual basis.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 10:09 PM

" It is a pain in the neck to reset my cookie every time I come to mudcat for a few minutes of browsing. "

that is not a problem...we have very regular posters, well known and friendly, who haven't set a cookie for several years. But they take a moment to type in their name before they post...takes, what...5 seconds? It just IDENTIFIES their post and makes readers WANT to talk and share.

Art Thieme, "Dale" and several others do just fine with no cookies, though Art would, if he could make it work, I gather. *grin*

Having a cookie set 'can' be useful for certain things...if you want those features, but IT AIN'T NECESSARY!

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 10:32 PM

And, Guest who is a member, They know who you are....

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 10:44 PM

Not exactly, Sorcha...one or two of 'them' MAY know an IP address if there was long period of posting, but it's almost impossible to know 'who' unless they tell you. Let's not conjure up images of Big Brother.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 11:16 PM

Now, now .... Let's not argue and take away from these TWO Shamblecentric Threads.   I see that today, one has not been enough.

I am thinking of proposing a Shamblecentric Permathread where only Sham is the moderator......But if a complaint comes up on any other thread, it moves immediately to the Shamblecentric Thread.

Spaw.....Who reiterates that the entire premise of these two threads is complete crappola. IF it was about to happen Max would post it above the line. This was simply an new need for Shamblecetralism by the kumquat himself.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Celtaddict
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 11:34 PM

Spaw: Watch how you use the perfectly charming word "kumquat."
If you wish, try "crouton."
Or "Diphthong." Now there is a term!
Joe and Max, review away. Those who are posting music related, constructive material will have no gripe. Those who like to chat "BS" may have less trash talk to hassle them.
Those who wish to whine will, and maybe should have their own place to do so.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Amos
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 11:50 PM

Perhaps, Spaw, you could persuade the Board over at the Neil Young Center for the Terminally Screwed to start breaking ground on a new Wing, if they can find an architect who will take on the challenge -- it has to be pink, extremely to the Left yet always Right. I think that is the geometry you call Shamblecentric. Perhaps they could name it after Roger?

A

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 02:25 AM

Responses to bullying

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 03:03 AM

I may disgree with what you say

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 03:22 AM

As said by the Master…

One of our smallest, most plain, usually skulking and often overlooked birds - the Wren - can make a remarkably loud noise when singing and wishing to draw attention to itself.

And also note the post that follows.

John

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 03:34 AM

I should have said "the post that follows the one linked." I really hate being ambiguous when quoting "The Master."

but The Master Speaks Again

It is largely a matter of practicalities. Would it be acceptable to say that if all of our current legislaton was always enforced to the letter - that the attempt would be laughably futile and counter-productive?

It is hardly rocket science. But if any of it is to be effective in practice - the enforcement of legislation must always make choices.

The rest of us attempt to live in an ideal wourld (or *cloud cuckoo-land) and can sit in judgement upon those choices but it would be foolish for us to pretend that in the real world these choices do not have to be made.

If you can't enforce all the current legislation to the letter - does it really make much sense to demand and continue make even more legislation that you will also be unable to enforce? For that is generally what is happening to answer public concerns.

* "He" knows all.

John

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 03:36 AM

Non posting of judgements week

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 04:18 AM

Why all the closed threads?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 04:20 AM

Do we need to curb the troublemakers?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Gedpipes
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 05:40 AM

And don't give me that BS about "you don't have to read it"...the real point is, "you don't have to write it...and if you do, on a privately run site, management reserves the right to edit or delete stuff deemed objectionable....even if their definition of objectionable is narrower than yours!"
That is how it works...and the large majority of members have no problem with that.

I presume that BS means Bull Shit? So its ok for you to be offensive to people who don't agree with you Bill D? Perhaps a case of double standards.
And what is all of this about management? what Management. An assumption that there is somekind of managerial perogative - the right to manage?
Cheers
Ged

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 06:30 AM

You may have missed this as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread.

This is part 2 of this thread. I'm not sure why a second part was started. And no, complaint threads will not be in the music section.
-Joe Offer-

Perhaps in future any proposal made that will affect all of those posting to our forum can be made where all of our forum can see it?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: MBSLynne
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 08:11 AM

M Ted, you voiced what I was thinking (in the other thread) Can't see any difference really between being abused by an anonymous guest and being abused by a member, except that at least the member has the guts to do it under their own name. And to some extent you know who your adversary is. Otherwise I guess it's a bit like guerilla warfare.

Wesley S...I can't remember now what I posted when I was first here as a Guest.

Love Lynne

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 09:14 AM

Music posts by Guests to be reviewed   after being moved from the music section has finally been subject to imposed closure.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 09:21 AM

It is about time!

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: MBSLynne
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 09:21 AM

Closure because there were two threads. Seems reasonable to me. I didn't know which thread to follow or post to. Why did you start a second one?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: catspaw49
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 09:26 AM

Because you just can't have too many Shamblecentric threads!!!

Actually, Joe moved it to BS (which it is.....if it were being considered by Max and about to be implemented, you can be assured it would be on the whole forum) but Shambo couldn't take it up with Max or take no for an answer so he started a second one.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 09:29 AM

The more I read this thread, the more I realize that Shambles is a blooming a-hole. Give it up buddy. The bosses are going to do what they are going to do. Stop whining. It's because of those like you that Mudcat has gotten to this stage. If you don't like the way it is run GO SOMEPLACE ELSE. I bet no other site will put up with your silliness.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 09:31 AM

Perhaps this thread can remain in the music related section for the benefit of those posters in this section who will be affected by this proposal?

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.
From: GUEST,Dale - PM
Date: 19 Apr 06 - 04:12 PM

As I see it, moving this down below the line was a regrettable decision by whoever did it. As Shambles suggested, I would never have seen it.   I wouldn't have bothered to make my small input if I hadn't wanted it to be read. I have more thoughts on the matter, but there is no use in saying them

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 09:31 AM

Sorry Shambles, but you are coming across as the type of person that would re-arrange the furniture if invited into someones home.   I can't fathom why you wish to spend so much time and energy on something that you have no control over. Way too many public demands on a website that is not meant to be controlled by the users.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: The Shambles
Date: 20 Apr 06 - 09:45 AM

Way too many public demands on a website that is not meant to be controlled by the users.

This website is not meant to be controlled by its users.

But what you seem to have failed to grasp is that is exactly what our forum is meant to be controlled by.

Don't take my word for it - ask Max?