 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Review: National Folk Festival, Canberra, 2006 From: GUEST,Porn Date: 07 Aug 06 - 06:51 PM Hi, man! Your rock! look for my site - porn for free, http://porn-station.blogspot.com - porn, [url="http://porn-station.blogspot.com"]porn[/url], and last, but not least - [url]http://porn-station.blogspot.com[/url]. Best Porn Links - every day.
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:04 AM Shambles still here and why? Deleted posts & closed threads The above two threads have been subject to imposed closure and the following explanation provided in an inserted editing comment. OK, this has gone on long enough. By popular request, this thread is closed. It's getting nasty, and "Nasty" is indeed suitable grounds for thread closure. -Joe Offer- Perhaps those posters who are interested in this subject can be permitted to continue the debate on this new thread - without such flimsy excuses needing to be found - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - to close this thread too? How exactly was this 'popular request' determined? For such action is certainly not popular with me. And as the originator of one of these threads and the subject of the other. Perhaps I could have been consulted before any form of action was imposed? If any posters make request to our 'modertaors' for any threads be closed - cannot they just be told not to open them? As both of these threads were (originally at least) clearly titled. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: gnu Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:43 AM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Joe Offer Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:55 AM Nope. didn't take long.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Big Mick Date: 09 Aug 06 - 09:12 AM SSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 09 Aug 06 - 10:49 AM So LOCK this one too!!! D'uh Why won't you mods do your jobs??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: number 6 Date: 09 Aug 06 - 10:56 AM Oh no .... sorta like one of those annoying neighbours who come over to chat and complain endlessly about nothing you are interested in everytime you go out to cut the lawn or just want to sit on your porch alone and enjoy life. sIx |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,jOhn Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM Shambles-you piss me off. A third of the worlds population dosn't know where there next meal is coming from, there is homelessness, child neglect etc, half the middle east is killing each other, and loads of other real problems, yet you witter on all day every day about cencorship on a folk music website! get a fucking life, if you feel the need to campaign, at least choose a worthwhile cause, its just a website. anyway= max said if you dont like it leave= "shambles you are a big moany, shut up moaning or leave" (Max, ages ago) anyway=you never post nothing nice, or funny, or intersting or helpfull, you just moan, and make everybody fed up, loads of people left mudcat, i bet some of them left becase of you moaning. you wont answer me, becase you havent got a good anser. john |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM Please delete him permanently. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM Ya... I have a bb gun for neighbours like that.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Bill D Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:36 AM "imposed closure" is redundant. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:43 AM OK, this has gone on long enough. By popular request, this thread is closed. It's getting nasty, and "Nasty" is indeed suitable grounds for thread closure. -Joe Offer- Is this thread judged to have gone on long enough or to be 'Nasty enought to close yet? Or is there not enough of a 'popular request' for it yet (how is this determined BTW)? Is there no chance now of any joined-up thinking being undertaken on the part of our 'moderators' - before their knee-jerk reactions plunge our forum into yet more chaos? For of course the message is now clearly being given here, as to how any poster who wishes a thread to be closed, can go about this. And our 'moderators' can place rather big hints which threads on what subjects they would prefer were not publicly discussed. For of course this action is in fact telling posters and encouraging some of them (intentionally or otherwise) that the posting to any thread - of offensive language, abusive personal attacks and anything that could be judged as 'Nasty' - will not result in any action on the offending posts or against the offending posters - but will result in the threads closure and the prevention of the discussion contained in it. Now if our 'moderators' are really interested in the prevention of abusive personal attacks and general 'Nastyness' - the latest message given-out by this action - is just about certain to increase such things. As this action is claimed and justified by being a response to a popular request - it will also ensure that mean-spirited posts judging the worth of fellow posters and calling for censorship action to be imposed on them - will also only increase as a result. Rather than these posters being told to concentrate on their own posts and to mind their own business. Most witch-hunts, burnings and lynchings are said to be undertaken due to what is claimed to be by 'popular request'. Another term for this would be mob-rule. When some accurate means of obtaining and demonstrating the wishes of the majority is undertaken before any action is taken - this is called democracy. We are now told that our forum is not a democracy and that is fine. But perhaps from now on - any pretence that action is imposed due to 'popular request' can end - unless some real attempt is seen to be made to ascertain what the majority actually do wish - as opposed to acting on the wishes of noisy and unrepresentitive mob (only when these are the same wishes as our 'moderators') and claiming this is due to 'popular request'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,jOhn Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:50 AM See, you havent got a good anser! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:56 AM What was the question? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Georgiansilver Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:08 PM The question has to be "WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE"? I have known some thick skinned people in my life. I have known some stupid people in my life. I have known some pathetic people in my life. I have seen many people and known of many people (in that I include myself) being ignorant of protocol in certain situations and behaving thoughtlessly as a result. You(The Shambles) are by far the first person I have come across who does not know when to give up! I have nothing against you personally but have seen what your postings and indeed your threads consist of. I have also seen many others comments which you do not seem to take on board. You are engineering some sort of personal crusade against the very people who actually have some authority on mudcat (as you certainly have none, but for the grace of those who tolerate you). I stick mainly to the music threads now as I have been fed up with seeing your attacks! Please Shambles, either settle down and find a place you can be happy with on the mudcat...without trying to change it to suit your own requirements...or if you cannot settle to it, please depart and allow the others the joy and peace that can be found for the most part in BS. Best wishes, Mike. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:17 PM He owns the site and asked you to leave......shouldn't be anymore justification needed. But I gues you're just "special" aren't you Roger?.....LOL........ You really ARE mental Dude! Spa It does look as if the thought processes of one of us are more than a little confused.. For when the reports of my death had been greatly exaggerated or rather when you wrongly assumed that Max had actually stopped me from posting – you made this (rather touching) plea for my re-instatement….. Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 12 May 06 - 11:15 AM >snip< My bad of course for messing with Roger. He doesn't see he's been messing with us for years, but.........And to some degree, your bad too. He's used an old quote hundreds of times and I know you'd like to have it that way (no rules) but it doesn't work once a site grows past a certain point which Mudcat has. Responding to Roger earlier might have saved some of this. I dunno'......So how about reinstating Roger and I'll agree to quit messing with him? Just ask him to back-off the campaign against Joe. No more censorship complaints. If he understands that we are all playing under the same rules perhaps......maybe he might........well its worth a shot isn't it? Roger has written some beautiful poetry and songs and staying in that vein, he needs to be a part of this community. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,Art Thieme Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:21 PM Seems it shouldn't be so hard to understand. The folks that run and keep the site going have the right and duty to moderate the threads. This is a matter of what is and ought to be, and those that don't like it have no grounds to stand on. And it is no threat to anything on any level whatsoever. Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: katlaughing Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:37 PM PLEASE CLOSE THIS ONE, TOO!!
But if I close this one now, Shambles will just start another thread, and another after that, and another. I have no desire to do battle with him. I wish people would ignore him so maybe be'd be talking to a wall and get bored and talk about something else, or go away. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:41 PM PLEASE! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,jOhn Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:47 PM QUICKLY! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Lepus Rex Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:50 PM Or, maybe, you fucking whiners could just quit feeding him? "WAAAAAHHHH! MAKE HIM STOP, MOMMY!!!!" You're shrieking louder than he is. You knew what this was before you opened it, and yet you opened it anyways. Why? Just to whine? To demand it be closed? Ignore it. Or can't you resist opening it, and reading it? Because, like Shambles, you just have to have some idiotic cause to bitch about? ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 09 Aug 06 - 12:55 PM So you come in here and join us in whining? Take your own advice before you try to hand it out, Lupus.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Lepus Rex Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:14 PM But I'm not bothered by any of it, really. And I'm not asking anyone to close a thread. I saw the thread title, thought "Huh, what's Shambles complaining about today?" Not terribly interested, but so bored with reading the endless "Gaza" thread that I imagined I'd find better entertainment elsewhere, I opened the thread. Read a bit of it. "Ah, same thing, then." Shambles doing the usual Shambles thing, and his usual detractors either trying to shout him down, or to reason with him, as if this time, he'll get it. Blah, blah, blah. I cut to the end of the thread, saw there you three jackasses braying in unison, and thought I'd ask what, exactly, Shamblesphobic individuals such as yourselves are even doing on this thread. Not a good question? ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Georgiansilver Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:18 PM And Lepus Rex..what are you feeding? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: artbrooks Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:32 PM Well, I read Shambles threads because they're pretty funny, but I don't normally contribute. Yet, that one was closed down right after he responded to my otherwise mild comment. Perhaps I do have a purpose in this universe after all! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Lepus Rex Date: 09 Aug 06 - 01:38 PM Hopefully their little hive minds, Georgiansilver. Like artbrooks, I read these for entertainment. Shambles may be annoying, in some ways, but I hate seeing people try to shut him down. He's not hurting anyone, and, for the most part, he keeps this sort of thing in his own threads. And although Shambles seems to be beyond accepting any kind of advice, the others may bemore receptive. Or so one would hope. ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:16 PM The question has to be "WHY ARE YOU STILL HERE"? If you are really interested - you will find the answer contained in the following (but now closed thread). Shambles still here and why? You are engineering some sort of personal crusade against the very people who actually have some authority on mudcat (as you certainly have none, but for the grace of those who tolerate you). Mike - if anyone were doing such a strange thing - the reasoning behind why someone would just up and decide to just do such a thing would possibly be something to query. Many would agree that the idea that someone would just up and do such a thing is a stange concept to accept and be ready to condemn such a thing - so why would you or anyone accept such a strange suggestion at face value to be the truth? The fact that some here would like you to believe such a strange concept would of course let them off of the hook and relieve them from any responsibility. So how likely is it that such a strange concept is all or even part of the truth? But is questioning - if the purpose nature of any authority is achieving its stated aims, considering that it may in fact be counter-productive and making suggestions as to how these aims may be achieved by less intrusive displays of this authority - to question that overall authority? I feel that any delegated authority that felt that the correct response to such suggestions should be a hostile one and make constant attempts to supress public discussion of this subject - would be one that was insecure and unsure of the ability of their authority in achieving its stated aims but determined to hang on to this authority - regardless. It is clear that any personally motivated 'crusade', campaign or special treatment has been engineered against my contributions and justified as something far more noble. What is then being encouraged to be judged harshly - is the fairly understandable reaction to this. Mine is a determined reaction but a fair one. I do not resort to the name-calling and abusive personal judgements that are the example of acceptable posting set by the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and subsequently justified, minimised and excused. And I do not respond in kind to the many that are encouraged to be posted at me and which I receive no protection from. I simply try to inform our forum of this - despite the attempts to prevent and restrict this. I am often urged to concentrate on music related threads. If the assumption is being that my posts will be safe from the special attentions and imposed judgement of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - this assumption would be wrong. Do you not also think it strange that whenever I produce the evidence of the examples set by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, in posting the many name-calling abusive personal judgements of me - some noble sounding reason is found (by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team) to close that thread? OK, this has gone on long enough. By popular request, this thread is closed. It's getting nasty, and "Nasty" is indeed suitable grounds for thread closure. -Joe Offer- The case for the many forms of selective and personally motivated special treatment imposed on my posts by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - is a strong one to anyone with an open mind. And perhaps should be addressed before too many harsh judgements are made of any reaction to them? Based on the number of threads on this subject that he has found reasons to close - the case that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team simply does not wish this subject to be discussed on our forum - is a pretty strong one also........... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:23 PM Blah... blah... blah... blah..... Shambles.... your 'voice' continues to be muffled by your buttocks |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 09 Aug 06 - 02:57 PM Shambles. NO ONE CARES!!! There is not one other person who is constantly complaining here. Why should anything be changed because one person out of many is unhappy? You are the lone objector to the so-called editing. Why not channel these complaints and your never give-up actions to something worthwhile like fighting hunger or getting us out or Iraq. Persistence would be respected in a battle like that. It's just laughed at when you spend so much time complaining about editing meaningless threads. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Big Mick Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:33 PM SSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Clinton Hammond Date: 09 Aug 06 - 05:36 PM You sprung another leak Mick? At your size, I'm not surprized! :-P Heh |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 06:49 PM Nope. Until Max pulls the plug on him, Shambles gets his one complaint thread to express what's important to him. If it gets out of hand, I'll close it and he can start another thread. But if I close this one now, Shambles will just start another thread, and another after that, and another. I have no desire to do battle with him. I wish people would ignore him so maybe be'd be talking to a wall and get bored and talk about something else, or go away. -Joe Offer- You may have missed the above editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread. But too much notice should not be taken of these type of assurances - grandly made for public consumption - that are provided in editing comments by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team. The following will demonstrate that he is not a man who believes he needs to stand by his word. This thread is to be kept open, so Roger can say whatever it is that he needs to say. -Joe Offer- The above assurance was given in Do you need to be censored? before the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team subjected it to imposed closure and (along with all the other threads on this subject) - it is now closed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:03 PM So as not to risk providng any excuse for any further form of imposed censorship - I will not copy and paste the evidence here, that usually results in this action - but simply provide a link to it - in the already closed thread. http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1804754 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:10 PM http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1804666 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: katlaughing Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:15 PM PLEASE CLOSE THIS USELESS THREAD! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:15 PM The thread is NOT useless for Shambles. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Bert Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:42 PM Some other folks seem to be enjoying it too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 09 Aug 06 - 07:56 PM Sham sez - "You may have missed the above editing comment as it was inserted into an existing post and did not refresh the thread. But too much notice should not be taken of these type of assurances - grandly made for public consumption - that are provided in editing comments by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team." If Joe is grandly making these statements for public consumption then why is he inserting them into an existing post so that it does not refresh the thread? Hmmm? Awaiting your reply Roger. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John O'L Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:11 PM Same old posse eh? You supply the bread & butter, Shambles supplies the bullshit, you eat the sandwich. Carry on. You deserve each other. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:22 PM If Joe is grandly making these statements for public consumption then why is he inserting them into an existing post so that it does not refresh the thread? Jolly good question. I don't know......... Why not ask him........? Seems it shouldn't be so hard to understand. The folks that run and keep the site going have the right and duty to moderate the threads. This is a matter of what is and ought to be, and those that don't like it have no grounds to stand on. Seems like it IS hard to understand. Would you view your Government is such an open and trusting way? For you are prepared to take on trust that this moderation is acceptable, when you currently have no way of being informed of the true nature and current level of imposed censorship on our forum. Possibly you are prepared to do this because its abuses are being inflicted on me and other posters but not on you? The issue is not one of me questioning the right to moderate (or not) this forum. It is one of questioning the nature of it and if what is claimed - matches up to the reality of what is actually happening. Whether the posters have protection form any personally motivated bias and whether 'moderators' have any protection from accusations of this. Whether what is lost – is worth what is gained. The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team often justifies action against something simple like a post appearing in more than one thread – as being unfair. But does not seem to see that imposing 'silent deletion' as a first and only resort to such things, may be thought to be disproportionate, mean-spirited and equally unfair. The following indicate a number of problems that tend to get brushed aside in the rush to judge this complicated and thorny issue in simple black and white terms. OK, this has gone on long enough. By popular request, this thread is closed. It's getting nasty, and "Nasty" is indeed suitable grounds for thread closure. -Joe Offer- If there really were grounds - the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team should be prepared to take full responsibility for whatever action he felt forced to take. And be prepared to defend it on those grounds. If not – no action should be imposed. There should be no need to hide behind the idea that his authority came from the posters - if his authority comes from Max. For it is clear that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is left to act as he wishes but is insecure enough to feel that some appeal must also be given for some public support for his actions. The impression currently being given by this, is of a strange mixture of 'mob-rule' and carrying out the commands of a strict faceless dictator whilst at the same time maintaining some pretence that none of this was really happening. And then there is the type of action chosen (I have detailed my views already in this thread on thread closure). This is totally ineffective. It is used mainly as a means to look as if some action was being taken when all it amounts to is, a futile display of power – which just proves how powerless those using this method are but which divides our forum, like nothing else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,Jon Date: 09 Aug 06 - 08:48 PM Oh well had typed this up earlier but decided to leave alone. Only posting now as John O L rekons (at least some of) the usual suspects were not leaving alone... This follows a comment from the why here therad. I think several of us who eventual post only post a fraction of what we feel like posting... Perhaps as this method - by the current Chief of the Mudcat editing Team's own admission, has not suuceeded in imposing the peace he requires and is proving somewhat counter-productive The only person making causing problems with the current system is you. If you won't leave, try taking a break for 6 months and see what happens without you. Unless Bert decides to try to prove a point on your behalf, 99% of the problems you complain about will go. - it is time for a new Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and a more stylish method? Interesting to see that you want new methods now. It was a return to the old before. Let's face it, it's not about improving Mudcat anyway - that's been obvious for years. At least you have been a little more open in calling for Joe Offers head this time. We get closer to the truth there but I still (other that I believe you are sick) believe that drives you towards your continued abuse of him and the volunteers. It's a good job you are not doing the equivalant at the Annexe or Folkinfo btw. Pip and I were brought up in an old fashioned way whereby abusing "volunteers" would be considered a far greater crime than constantly having a go at ourselves. You would have gone a long time ago anyway as reasoning is impossible but repeats of that sort of behaviour would have hastened your departure. Fortunately for you, Mudcat seems to work the other way round. Anyway, back to new ideas. Although the bbc moderation system is by far the most screwed up I've seen. they have one idea that I think is great for dealing with persistant pests. Such posters find themselves on "pre-mod" this means that while other posters messages appear in "real time" (and may be subjected to moderation afterwards), the trouble maker's posts have to be read by a moderator and approved before they can be read by others. The situation is only a temporary one and users are returned to "post-mod" if they post "normaly". On the other hand, if they chose to continue, they find themselves banned either temporarily or permanantly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 10 Aug 06 - 02:59 AM At least you have been a little more open in calling for Joe Offers head this time. We get closer to the truth there but I still (other that I believe you are sick) believe that drives you towards your continued abuse of him and the volunteers. It's a good job you are not doing the equivalant at the Annexe or Folkinfo btw. Pip and I were brought up in an old fashioned way whereby abusing "volunteers" would be considered a far greater crime than constantly having a go at ourselves. You would have gone a long time ago anyway as reasoning is impossible but repeats of that sort of behaviour would have hastened your departure. Fortunately for you, Mudcat seems to work the other way round. Jon - it is unfortunate for me (and others) that it works the other way around. For the clear facts (that you chose to ignore) that it is (some of) these 'volunteers' especially the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, who are the ones posting abusive personal judgements. And more importantly, setting the example for others to follow, that this is acceptable posting behavior. Do you consider that 'moderators' making abusive personal judgements and name-calling is acceptable? If it is not judged as acceptable for others - then it should not have been done and continue to be done by those who should know better. My 'crime' - if it is one - as a victim of thise - is to try and demonstrate the reality of it - rather than the 'spin'. I consider that my posting record is better than many of those who would feel themselves qualified to judge me and other posters. And yes - I judge that the example shown by (some of) these 'moderators' should disqualify them from imposing their judgement on others but there is nothing personal in this. How can there be - our forum is not trusted to know many of their names. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 10 Aug 06 - 04:44 AM Am I wrong to consider the imposed censorship action detailed in the following - as a continuation of personally motivated and selective treatment by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team? http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1804627 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 10 Aug 06 - 05:17 AM Subject: (thread title change complaint) From: Joe Offer - PM Date: 10 Aug 05 - 01:19 PM Well, I suppose it depends on what you think of the Forum Menu. Shambles believes in a right to free speech - and I think most of us do. He thinks that the Forum Menu is a vehicle for self-expression and that the right of free speech should extend to the Forum Menu, and I think the Forum Menu is merely an index. Shambles is a pioneer here, because he was one of the very first to attempt to use the Forum Menu as a platform for expression. When he started his PEL campaign in 2001, he worked hard to ensure that several PEL threads were visible on the Forum Menu at any given time. He'd refresh several PEL threads, all with the same lengthy message, to keep his PEL campaign in the people's eye. He even started threads that had the sole purpose of directing people to other PEL threads. He worked hard to fight for "turf" on the Forum Menu, making sure his PEL campaign stood out above all other topics of discussion. His PEL campaign was a very worthy cause, but his technique got to be too much. He was flooding the Forum with words, crowding out others who weren't so wordy. He often titled threads with deceptive titles like the ones you find in virus and advertising e-mails - the ones that try to trick you into opening them. So, a number of things were done to hold Shambles back a bit, since he didn't seem to be able to control himself. His PEL threads were given PEL tags, and they were crosslinked so he wouldn't need to keep repeating things that people could easily find in other threads. So, yes, many of the Shambles threads were retitled - they had a PEL tag added to them. Some (but not most) of the lengthy duplicate messages he posted were deleted - but one copy of each message was always left intact, and only the duplicates were deleted. Shambles went overboard, and kept on going overboard for months. Finally, he was subjected to a few controls - although not one of his words was deleted unless it was a duplicate of another statement he posted. So,Shambles has been having a tantrum since 2001. And as he went overboard on the PEL campaign and actually served to make his issue look ridiculous by the outrageous quantity and exaggeration of his remarks, he also does the same with his campaign against the editing work done at Mudcat. Gee, he even compares me to Hitler, and that's SO unfair. I have much nicer facial hair. So, that's the story. That is one side of the story - based on many groundless assumptions and pointless personal judgements. But it does demonstrate the difficulties created on our forum when the personal likes and dislikes of a fellow poster are mixed-up (by some) with the role of 'moderator'. Surely the first requirement of any 'moderator' to be seen to be acting impartially and not to be seen to be justifying the setting of poor examples of posting behavior and of openly encouraging support for their position from the mob? What is required is an end to division and a example set that encourages all posters to feel safe to contribute. Rather than the current example introduced - which confuses and inhibits posting by encouraging the posting only of personal judgements of the worth of fellow posters. When it is what is said that is important - not who may be saying it. The requests made about the PEL posts are being followed - but the same punishments are still being imposed. The new and selective restrictions that apply to my posts only, which have been imposed by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team are being followed - but still the same assumptions and personal judgements are being encouraged to be made.......How many times should a poster be punished over and over for the same old alledged 'crime'? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 10 Aug 06 - 05:31 AM We get closer to the truth there but I still (other that I believe you are sick) believe that drives you towards your continued abuse of him and the volunteers. Jon - I have provided evidence here for (only some) of the abusive personal attacks, persoanal judgements and name-calling, that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team judges is a good example to set to the rest of our forum as acceptable posting behaviour. Are you not going to pass judgement on this abuse and speculate on the reasons for it? Can you supply any similar evidence for your accusation of my 'continued abuse of him and the volunteers'? If you cannot - perhaps you will withdraw that accusation and apolgise? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 10 Aug 06 - 05:40 AM http://www.mudcat.org/Detail.CFM?messages__Message_ID=1805977 The above link is to a post about our 'war on terrorism' - with which sentiments I entirely agree. Some may maintain that it has little or no relevance to this debate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,Jon Date: 10 Aug 06 - 05:43 AM Shambles all the evidence I have seen points to you harrasing the admin team. I will grant you that Joe has on more than one occassion bitten back but while one could argue he shouldn't have, I'm not surprised this has happened given your daily provocation for years. The real shame is that the whole business has been allowed to go on so long that Joe has snapped, enabling you to add to your "evidence of persecution". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 10 Aug 06 - 06:24 AM I will grant you that Joe has on more than one occassion bitten back but while one could argue he shouldn't have, I'm not surprised this has happened given your daily provocation for years. Jon - your accusation was - your continued abuse of him and the volunteers. If you cannot supply evidence of this 'abuse' - perhaps you will withdraw that accusation and apolgise? Perhaps as you excuse the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team for having - on more than one occassion bitten back perhaps you credit me (and other posters) for not following his example that such biting back - was ever acceptable posting behaviour for any poster on our forum - and especially not any trusted with an edit button. You appear to support the multi-standard of conduct which is at the very heart of this debate. but while one could argue he shouldn't have There is no argument. No 'moderator' can afford to be seen to ever do this, even once................For the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to be seen to repeatedly do this - repeatedly attempt to minimise, justfy and excuse it - is just total hypocrisy. It is now a case of do as I tell you - not as I do. It is only going to clearly demonstrate that there is now one rule for those who feel themselves qualified to judge and another for the judged. And that any defence of this and any attempts to shift the blame, will discredit and bring into question the honest efforts of all involved. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,Jon Date: 10 Aug 06 - 06:27 AM Jon - your accusation was - your continued abuse of him and the volunteers. If you cannot supply evidence of this 'abuse' - perhaps you will withdraw that accusation and apolgise? Shambles, I repeat the accusation and I will point you to your posting history over the past years as evidence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 10 Aug 06 - 06:37 AM Shambles, I repeat the accusation and I will point you to your posting history over the past years as evidence. Such as? If this so-called abuse was as you have publicly alleged - it should not be too difficult to provide as least as many examples of the abusive personal judgements and name-calling from me - as I have provided from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to me. There are many more such examples of these................. I ask again - if you cannot provide any support for your accusations - would you please withdraw them? |