BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:20 PM

Max will do what Max will do. The moderators are agents of Max and do his bidding. If Max didn't like the job that they are doing or doesn't approve of their methods he would replace them

The above sums up the situation. What is there to discuss?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: number 6
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:16 PM

What's the policy on overtime?

Also ... is there an annual bonus that is fairly calculated for all employees?

I hope this is not a scent free environment. :)

"And THAT'S the way it is,"

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:12 PM

We've been trying that for about 8 years Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:09 PM

Once again, we are using an analogy that doesn't quite fit. It is too easy to drop certain details and make a comparison to something that doesn't match in "real" life. "Does anyone wish to actually discuss the issue?"

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:01 PM

This is not a one product company, and it is entitled to try new lines, or drop old ones.
It is also entitled to hire and fire staff as it sees fit, as it is Sole Proprietor, and does not have shareholders which it must satisfy.
It is also not required to conduct business with someone it doesn't want to do business with.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 11:52 AM

And any employee who is off on his or her own agenda ought to be spoken with so that it doesn't interfere with or go against the corporate philosophy.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 11:50 AM

"Posters are not the sheep you refer to but perhaps you will agree that they will understandably follow the example of posting behavious seen to set by our 'moderators'?"

Some of us "independantly minded" regulars certainly would NOT agree with any such sweeping generalization!!!!! I make up my own mind!

Roger- you pride yourself on not stooping to name-calling and personal insults, as you note has happened to you at times, but that quoted sentence IS an insult to most of the folks who have tried to discuss this for the last few months or years!

You have taken that "seen to be" phrase into realms where it doesn't naturally venture!...most of the "seen to be" means only that YOU choose to "see" it that way.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 11:50 AM

Good point Peace, and I was trying to infer that the employer look at ALL sides.

Frankly, everyone has an agenda and that is something that should be admired. I would hope that anyone that works for me has plans and ideas and would not simply follow instructions by rote. An employee that simply follows a set of guidelines is not going to help growth. Without goals and creativity, the company will stagnate. As long as the agendas for the company, employee and ultimately the customer can co-exist, there is no need to "fire" anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 11:40 AM

If an employee had admitted that their best efforts to sell your product had failed - but they would be prepared to sell a completly different one which better suited their requirements. (Shambles)

If my employees would tell me that a change of the product (not: a completely different one, as you wrongly write) might appeal to more customers (not: suited better to the employees requirements, as you wrongly write) or better to most customers, I'd change the product.

And : If there was one customer who complained since years about my employees without giving it a break and his complaints made no real sense though he may have been wronged once, I'd fobid him to enter my shop from now on.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 11:34 AM

True. But any smart employer would also check the agendas of the employess--in this case, volunteers. As you said, Ron, the street isn't one-way. Shambles: the street isn't one-way.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 11:20 AM

Any smart employer would look at the reasons.    It is not a black and white scenario as you try to make it out.

For one thing, your words indicate that the employee is faulty based on the first sentence.   Any smart employer would realize that there is more to the story. Not everyone passes judgement based on a single incident.

There is a word that you have never mentioned - "context". You can't make an analogy or clip a statement without looking at the context. Not everything can be accepted at face value, and you have to factor for errors - either in product or judgement. No smart employer would jump to conclusions or build up walls simply because something did not happen "by the books".

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 11:11 AM

If an employee had admitted that their best efforts to sell your product had failed - but they would be prepared to sell a completly different one which better suited their requirements.

Would you part company and get a better employee?

Or would you feel you had to change your product?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 10:23 AM

bingo

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 10:21 AM

"Does anyone wish to actually discuss the issue?"

No Shambles, they don't. You don't know how to discuss an issue. You charge on ahead without listening to others. Also, there is nothing to discuss. Max will do what Max will do. The moderators are agents of Max and do his bidding. If Max didn't like the job that they are doing or doesn't approve of their methods he would replace them. You are the only one who doesn't accept this. That is not grounds for a discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wesley S
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 09:36 AM

More proof that the "BS" section should be for members only.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 09:22 AM

According to Max "Trust me, this matter will be dealt with in time. Trust me, we working as hard as we can to make this happen as soon as we can." That's about you leaving.

Shambles, with all of your constant repititions and petty nitpicking I hope this happens very soon.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 04:39 AM

Conspiracy theories abound, while those who also have issues with the moderation on this site side with Shambles on a basis of 'My enemy's enemy is my friend'. Others feel the Mudcat's integrity is being threatened by this petty squabbling and point scoring, and protest accordingly.
No doubt in my mind that this is not a perfect site, but then it's not a perfect world, in spite of the efforts of our own Captain Swing, the site WILL evolve, and if members only posting is the way to go, then that's what it will have to be.

Giok

Captain Swing

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 03:06 AM

By the way, I regret some of my intolerant comments. But I reiterate. The fact that a large number of folks are tired of his crap, doesn't mean they are sheep.

Yes Mick, you do reiterate.

Posters are not the sheep you refer to but perhaps you will agree that they will understandably follow the example of posting behavious seen to set by our 'moderators'?

And perhaps you would also agree that our 'moderators' do not appear to much like the forum that results from their posting example being followed?

And perhaps you could explain why a few posters so vocally support the continuation of 'best efforts' that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team has publicly stated have not been able to make Mudcat - a pleasant place to hang out and goof off or have a good discussion?

And is the view that Mudcat is no longer a pleasant place to hang out and goof off or have a good discussion - your view also? If so - apart from the banning of one long-term named poster - what do you propose to do to address it? I suggest that a good start would be to hand in your edit button. How about it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:26 AM

Does anyone wish to actually discuss the issue?

I thought some kind of agreement had been reached that posters have a right to post their views - so what more is there to say about one individual poster trying to do just this?

Anyone wish to discuss the various attempts to restrict and prevent this and how our forum appears as a result of being seen to try justify this?

By the way, I regret some of my intolerant comments.

Not perhaps as much as those posters who are seen to be subjected to these intolerent comments from a 'moderator'.

An apology to them and our forum and some reassurance that these unspecified comments will not be repeated - and a more positive example will be shown in future would be more welcome gesture and show that some of our 'moderators' can take responsiblity for the results of their actions on our forum........

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:07 AM

Dammit! I stayed too long at Frankie's drinkin' shooters and yakkin' with Chachi and the boys and MISSED my chance to do the 1300th post! Shee-it. You snooze, you lose. Now I gotta wait for another 1392 posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:52 PM

Mick: My post was aimed at no one in particular, and certainly not at you. I have seen you stand up and say what you have to on a few threads. You did not always receive support for your actions. It just seems that a dozen folks have decided to 'have a go' at Shambles. If there is history there, so be it. However, whether or NOT there is history, it does not detract from the fact that Shambles has a few valid points. As a BTW, I do not agree with all of Shambles' points. But a few of them I agree with wholeheartedly.

Mr Freeman, thank you. "You'll be right from your side, and I'll be right from mine, and we're both one too many mornings and a thousand miles behind." (Thank you, BD.)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:49 PM

But it's this way: I do not like people who hunt in a pack. If Roger IS offensive with me, I will deal with it. NOT me and my posse. Got it?

And Peace, not at all. I really do not see any possible posse here. My own relationship with MC has been iffy, ranging from being a one time "star" here to having serious dissagreements with Max, Wolfgang has not been known for following these threads but has pointed out severe errors of logic, Mick is perhaps what I would describe as "party line", etc.

The "backgrounds" are incredibly different, the likelyhood of a posse is about nil, but the conclusions reached are amazingly similar on this.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:34 PM

Then why don't they ignore him?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:32 PM

taken over from Max by Joe Offer.

(Against the will of Max that is)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:31 PM

Fair enough, Peace, but I would make two observations. 1) A busted clock is right twice a day. 2) Just because there are a number of folks tired of this man's crap, doesn't necessarily mean it is the pack mentality. When one runs down the names, they see a fairly significant number of decent folks, thoughtful, and the furthest thing from "lock steppers". One could not accuse Bill D, or Wolfgang, or a number of others of being something other than independent thinkers. I understand the comments about me. I have gotten pretty intolerant of Roger's shenanigans, and I am one of the mod's. By the way, I regret some of my intolerant comments. But I reiterate. The fact that a large number of folks are tired of his crap, doesn't mean they are sheep.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:23 PM

The inconsistancies are the same Peace.

Sure Shambles makes some valid points. He centres this campaing around issues such as levels of censorship, degrees of power held by moderators, etc.

These are undoubtably areas readers may be concerned over - although ~I'm sure for example that for every reader that feels things are to loose here, Mr Murdoch, another will feel are too tight.

There is no right or wrong there and these points of shambles have been noted for years.

The problem with the shambles viewpoint is that he has the ship single handedly taken over from Max by Joe Offer.

That is where you will find his illogic creeps in. He is not about genuine concerns but twisting everything to fit a grudge.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:14 PM

GUEST, Jon: You are addressing two issues in one sentence.

1) The fact that I had a run-in with Roger about 1 1/2 years back has bugger all to do with the fact he's correct with some of what he says on this thread.

2) Roger has not been offensive to me here. I don't think he will be. But it's this way: I do not like people who hunt in a pack. If Roger IS offensive with me, I will deal with it. NOT me and my posse. Got it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:10 PM

Thirteen hundred!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 08:01 PM

Aw c'mon. Let's ban guests in the BS section - what would it hurt.

Besides,1300 is the new 1,000.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 07:39 PM

I've never in a long time seen anything so funny as Ron Olesko's reactions coupled with Peaces comments. Do these people really not think many of those who got caught up in "shambles" things have not been there.

Can they not now admit they now know why what seems to be instant judgements to them have occured over a 6 year campaign...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 07:35 PM

That is true BiLL - I still have roots that were spread 5 or 6 feet from the trunk. Tough to get them out of the ground.   It was amazing to see it when it fell over - the base was huge.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 06:33 PM

Southeast Alaska's topsoil isn't deep and we have LOTS of rain so almost all of the trees - and we have LOTS of them - pancake instead of sending their roots down to much of any extent. (On the other hand, we also have giant trees, primarily of spruce and cottonwood, so we also have a certain amount of downed trees.)

Just about any lawn up here has a network of roots outlining the tree's system. I remember a few years back when the house museum I was living in got new sodding, a new lawn from start to finish. For a few months it was smooth and even but very quickly the roots became evident and mowing once more became a problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: number 6
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 05:55 PM

OK Ron ... you are correct ... the roots of a willow tree don't go down deep ... but they sure as hell spread out and will grab hold of anything they can.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 05:27 PM

I did not think that willow trees grew much higher.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 05:21 PM

Sorry, Ron. I'm in forestry country. A fifty-footer is just a sapling.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 05:03 PM

I'm not sure about the willow tree.   From what I know, they do not have deep roots which is why they thrive near sources of water. They are strong to support the massive bulk of the tree, and they do spread, but they are not very sturdy.   Two years ago an approximately 50 foot willow narrowly missed my home when it crashed during a noreaster.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: number 6
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 04:38 PM

"Willows survive Canadian arctic winds because they learned to bend a little."

Also .... the roots of a willow tree are strong, wide and deep .... keeping it stable and secure.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: number 6
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 04:29 PM

I'm am certainly not laughing at Shambles .... or at anyone who posts to this thread ... I just find it very entertaining.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 02:05 PM

Ron,

That's the payback you get for trying to befriend Shambles and defending him more then most people do. He obviously intends to disagree with anybody and everybody. It would probably be in your best interest to refrain from trying to engage him in a debate since it is obvious that he does not know how to debate. He is way too stuborn to even contemplate that his ideas may not be 100% right.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 01:30 PM

People with no sense of humour often post as Guest!

[BTW Guest this post is just as accurate as yours.]

G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 01:22 PM

People who think they are funny are generally the bane of those suffering their 'wit.'

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Pseudolus
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 01:17 PM

For what it's worth, I think Spaw is VERY funny....

And Ron? You're a good man, I feel your pain....

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 01:12 PM

Shambles: Ron has been the fairest poster here with regard to your 'campaign'. IMO, you owe him an apology. It is a bit disheartening because I too agree with very much of what you say. Willows survive Canadian arctic winds because they learned to bend a little.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 12:48 PM

Obfuscation is Shambles middle name Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 12:42 PM

"If you judge what I have posted to you to be an attack - then how would you judge some of the regular posts from the likes of Mick and Co?

We've been throught this. I answered this weeks ago. I agreed with you.

Enough with the repeats. Stop making accusing me, I'm not accusing you. You make it hard to stick to the issue when you do this. Don't try to invalidate me, I'm not doing that to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wesley S
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 12:10 PM

I rather laugh at someone who thinks we should care about the insults and opinions of a nameless "guest". Or should I say troll?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 12:08 PM

There you go again, twisting my words. I don't know why you call it "judging your worth" when someone offers criticism or suggestions. That is a slimy way to garner sympathy and you are certainly not a martyr.

Ron - The start and finsihing point is that you consider we both have the right to express our views for purposes of discussion.

Following on from that all that is required is for us to stick to the issue. Unlike yours - most of my suggestions and questions are largely limited to just that.

If you judge what I have posted to you to be an attack - then how would you judge some of the regular posts from the likes of Mick and Co? Which example - if I have to remind you - you were more than happy to follow - until you say you came to realise that my points were valid.

If my points are valid - I consider that any of my (many) personal short-commings are secondary to this discussion - as are yours.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 12:02 PM

I wonder if Shambles realizes how many people are laughing at him. I'll bet that he probably doesn't care.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 11:50 AM

"A conceit is a figure of speech which makes an unusual and sometimes elaborately sustained comparison between two dissimilar things."

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 26 Oct 06 - 11:43 AM

A lot of it reminds me of Professor Irwin Corey. Makes just about as much sense.