BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 03:32 PM

Ron - You are entitled to express your preference but as you are not (as far as I am aware) one of our moderators - those of us who have always been strongly in favour of our host's open invitation for the public's contribution to our forum to continue - do not have to worry that you may not be using your best efforts to make our host's open house party work or worry that you may have a vested interest in ensuring that his party does not work.

Is that better?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 03:41 PM

What is a sesh?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 03:42 PM

Well, at least it doesn't end as a question!! :)

I am still a bit fuzzy on what you are trying to say.

a. I am not a moderator
b. I have no "vested" interest in Mudcat, other than as a research tool, discussion forum, and a fun place to visit.
c. My opinions have no impact on the hosts decision making process - nor does your opinion, Mmario's, Giok, etc. We are all just speaking our minds and the host has the ultimate calls to make.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 03:49 PM

Ron - As you have now publicly expressed the preference you have - perhaps you may accept that IF you were a 'moderator' - those of us who have always been strongly in favour of our host's open invitation for the public's contribution to our forum to continue - WOULD have to worry that you may not be using your best efforts to make our host's open house party work or worry that you may have a vested interest in ensuring that his party does not work?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 03:53 PM

I think an assumption that a moderator has a vested interest in this becoming a member only site (if I am reading the Shambles' hypothesis correctly) is a fallacy. my opinion, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 04:01 PM

I note that my theory has proven absolutely correct! The symbiotic relationship between Shambles and Ron Olesko has resumed after only the briefest hiatus and has in fact exceeded the probability rates I predicted and is stabilizing at a level of 15.378219773502M, a truly stunning statistic. This is excellent. My life's work has been vindicated and the Nobel Prize will soon be mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 04:02 PM

I see your point now. I had thought you were accusing me of something by the way your posts read.

IF I were a moderator (and I can guarantee you that I am not - nor would I want to be one), I am not sure if I would make my opinion known in that fashion.

However, lets assume that I am a moderator and that I did express my preference publicly.    Sure, you probably should worry if your opinion was different from mine.   Sure, I could try to make it easier to implement my policy.   And before you ask the question - no, I would not stop posting and no, I the owner would not prevent me from keeping on with business as usual.

What are your options? You can continue to post and hope that others will understand your points (such as what happened with me this week).   However, getting back to the "party" analogy - our opinions do not matter.   The host and his appointed bouncers are running the show.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 05:25 PM

Ve haf ways uf making you comply!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 05:59 PM

Shambles,

since you have mentioned the idea to start birthday threads in this thread, may I ask you here to include the respective date in the title. That would make these threads more user friendly. Look how much more informative one of your birthday threads is now with the addition of the date by an unknown volunteer fellow poster for unknown reasons.

This is not a judgement of your worth it is just a suggestion how the worth of the birthday threads could be increased.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 02:29 AM

What is a sesh? has now been relegated to the BS.

This is not a judgement of your worth it is just a suggestion how the worth of the birthday threads could be increased.

Then rather that post here only to judge - please by all means place there anything that you judge would make those threads (and any other threads) more interesting and informative. I place only the little information I do to encourage others to post their contributions. I also learn a lot form this and also from surfing to find the information.

That used to be the postive way things used to work on our forum - before posters were encouraged by the negative example given ONLY to pass judgements on the worth of a thread or post or of the worth of the poster and to call them names. And encouraged to simply swoon with horror at the thought of seing the titles of more than one thread at a time.

If it is a thread with little information - why not encourage other posters to provide it?

If a thread is questionably music related - then add it and attempt to keep it there - rather only judge it and than ask that it be relegated to the BS.

These birthday threads were an idea to try and return some of the old spirit of shared fun and joint discovery that makes our forum different to those sites obbsessed only with order.   

To encourage the act of posting - not to find ways that CAN only inhibit the posting of reasonable discussion.

It is very telling what the reaction (from some) to these threads have been.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 03:54 AM

It has absolutely nothing at all to do with the fact that the main object of your scorn, has stated on this forum that he's not too keen on birthday threads of course, does it?
I suggest that all birthday threads regarding non-Mudcatters be allowed in BS only.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 04:36 AM

It has absolutely nothing at all to do with the fact that the main object of your scorn, has stated on this forum that he's not too keen on birthday threads of course, does it?

In a rather small way perhaps it partly does. But it is no secret that on this issue the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and I will always have very different views.

It was Wolfgang's earlier post on the subject of birthday threads that gave me the idea. He suggested that birthday threads of musical worthies stayed on the music section. I thought this was partly a way of bridging the chasm that now seems to developed and is now firmly enforced by our 'moderators' - between music related subjects and friendly banter. To the detriment of both sections of our forum.

But the bigger picture is that in my view 'moderating' is simply enabling posters to post what they wish to to on our forum. It is not inhibiting posts which may not be to a 'modrators' personal taste.

But what you have again highlighted is the problem caused when 'moderators' are seen by our forum to have personal likes and dislikes. As Ron has stated here, in the following.

IF I were a moderator (and I can guarantee you that I am not - nor would I want to be one), I am not sure if I would make my opinion known in that fashion.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 05:10 AM

Big Stick's messages were deleted. They were just weird.
-Joe Offer-

The above editing was inserted into the following thread.

Amish shooting. Where will it all end?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 05:40 AM

Birthday Threads   From the Mudcat Help and Trouble Forum (otherwise known as Snitchers Corner).

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 05:57 AM

Joe Offer - Hijacker alert

The above thread has been closed.

Does anyone wish to have a stab at what the difference is between what is referred to as 'thread-drift' and that charged term 'hijacking'?

All they both describe is someone posting to a thread.

Perhaps hi-jacking a thread is a term best reserved for when some anonymous 'moderator' judges and imposes the various actions that move, alter, delete, close threads and prevent posting?

In the sense that these imposed judgements and actions prevent posters fron judging for themselves - and all ordinary posters CAN do is (try to) post - perhaps our 'moderators' are the only true thread hijackers on our forum?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 06:11 AM

Well Roger if anybody should know what the definition of hijacking a thread is, you should.
It is when you ignore the subject of said thread, and post one of your complaints/attacks, usually a repeat posting from several other threads, in order to bring your pet peeve to the notice of people you think just might have managed to avoid it!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 06:38 AM

Well Roger if anybody should know what the definition of hijacking a thread is, you should.
It is when you ignore the subject of said thread, and post one of your complaints/attacks, usually a repeat posting from several other threads, in order to bring your pet peeve to the notice of people you think just might have managed to avoid it!

Ah- it is as I thought. Hijacking is an intentionally emotive term to describe a post in a thread saying what you don't want a poster to say - but which no is forcing you to read or respond to and which you can easily ignore.

So by the same logic - thread drift is where a whole gang of posters are encouraged that filling a thread on this subject full of recipes or an any other subject - is great fun.

And hijacking is not of course to be thought as imposed action by some anonymous fellow poster who decides to silently delete an entire thread - complete with every poster's contribution to it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 10:10 AM

Shambles,

was your 05 Oct 06 - 02:29 AM post meant to be a response to my suggestions that you may add dates to the birthday threads?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 11:58 AM

was your 05 Oct 06 - 02:29 AM post meant to be a response to my suggestions that you may add dates to the birthday threads?

No.

It very clearly was a response to your suggestion that I may add dates to the (titles of) birthday threads.

http://www.mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=1848983

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 12:48 PM

Interesting. I have read nothing in that post which I could interpret as a reaction to my suggestion.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 12:55 PM

"What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach, so you get what we had here last week which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it. And I don't like it any more than you men. '

Strother Martin in "Cool Hand Luke"

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 06:41 PM

You deliberately avoid any real discussion, Wolfgang.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 08:09 AM

Another gem from The Mudcat Help and Trouble Forum.

Please delete personal attack

You can see from (some of) our 'moderators' current comments on that thread - that as far as they are concerned - the move to members-only posting is not a question of if - but of when.

When we see this changed being publicly pushed like this - is there any reason for those of us who have always supported Max's policy of the public's access to our forum - to feel that our host's vision is currently 'safe' in the hands of our current 'moderators'?

As far as I can see their best efforts are just to demonstrate how this change is the only solution to the many problems that our forum has had to deal with since its inception.

Perhaps Max would be kind enough to finally inform our forum and our 'moderators' what his intentions are in this regard?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 08:15 AM

Shambles,

that echolalic language does not fit into a discussion between adults. The last time I could enjoy such a discussion was roughly 45 years ago.

If you know you're wrong in this particular point and just want to avoid admitting it I don't mind. I too have my weaknesses. Maybe next time I ask you something you choose to respond.

If you really think you are right here you have a problem that is not my business to care about.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 08:25 AM

Perhaps suggestions as the following from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - with such drastic potential consequences for all posters - should be placed for open discussion by them - on the music section of our forum - rather than for the benefit of the conspiratorial and 'faithful few' in Snitchers Corner?

Then our forum can be informed what such a change is thought to be the only way to deal with the very same problems that the our current set-up has dealt with for 10 years? Has there been any real change to warrant such a move?


Subject: RE: Please delete personal attack
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05-Oct-06 - 04:25 PM

I know, it's a tossup about deleting nasty posts. If we delete such stuff while they're here and watching, they just post it again. I've seen Shambles do it eight times in a row, and then post a dozen messages complaining about the deletions.
If we don't delete the nasty stuff right away, then a dozen Mudcatters respond to it. Seems like a losing battle. I'm beginning to think that the only way we can bring it under control is to have members-only posting in BS, and a way to screen non-member posting in the music section before it becomes visible to the public.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 08:36 AM

In time Max will of course let us know, in the meantime it is wrong of you to assume what he feels regarding members only posting either way. As far as I can remember the only clue available is in a post from Joe Offer saying that AT THAT TIME Max was not convinced of the need for this.
It's my guess however, that during the course of the many ensueing rubbish threads started by Guests, along with the nasty comments contained in other threads by them, he may just have changed his mind.
Members only also means that controlling the ingress of undesirable posters is a more exact science.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 08:39 AM

If you know you're wrong in this particular point and just want to avoid admitting it I don't mind. I too have my weaknesses. Maybe next time I ask you something you choose to respond.

Wolfgang you have played so many childish games in posts to me - for the benefit only of the watching crowd and your own brand of humour - that such high-sounding allegations from you can be safely dismissed.

You posted with a suggestion as to how you judged I should post - and explained your reasons. Feeling perhaps that you had some right to do this.

I could have responded by telling you that you had no such right and that how and what I choose to post was none of your business, But:

I responded with a suggestion as to how I judged you should post - and I explained my reasons. Feeling that as you felt you had the right to do this to me - that perhaps I had as much right to do this to you.

Hopefully the end result will be that those threads will be as interesting as posters wish to make them.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 09:23 AM

What crowd?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 09:45 AM

The In Crowd!

I'm in with the in crowd;
I go where the in crowd goes.
I'm in with the in crowd;
And I know what the in crowd knows.
Any time of the year, don't you hear?
Dressin? fine; makin? time.
We breeze up and down the street;
We get respect from the people we meet.
They make way day or night;
They know the in crowd is out of sight.

I'm in with the in crowd;
I know every latest dance.
When you'e in with the in crowd,
It's so easy to find romance!
Any time of the year, don't you hear?
If it's square, we ain't there.
We make every minute count;
Our share is always the biggest amount.
Other guys imitate us, but the original is still the greatest.
In crowd!
In crowd!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 09:55 AM

Gosh you are deluded aren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 07:37 PM

In time Max will of course let us know, in the meantime it is wrong of you to assume what he feels regarding members only posting either way.

It does tend to be the case that what the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team wants and rattles on about publicly on our forum - usually does happen.

What I have done for a good few years now is post to our forum on the basis that Max, our host - has been happy with the open invitation he has extended for the public's contributions. If that is an assumption on my part - then perhaps it is a reasonable one?

As Max has not changed it - he and many other posters still appear to be happy with posting on this basis and with our forum as it is. But this does not seem to prevent many of those who are not - from publicly groaning on about members only posting being the answer to all of 'their' problems.

As I have suggested before - those who think that members only posting is such a good idea - are welcome to go and start one on that basis. They are not welcome to keep publicly pushing in an attempt to turn our forum into the private members club that many already treat our forum as (to its detriment).

If our current 'moderators' are finding they cannot cope or control the posting of others to their statisfaction - (without asking Max to change the whole posting principle of our forum) - then perhaps there are others who can be asked and who would be willing to try?

ANALOGY WARNING..................

It is rather like the employees of a brewery - after many years of making beer - telling the owner that they can't manage to make beer anymore but would be able to manage to make lemonade.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Wesley S
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 07:51 PM

"They are not welcome to keep publicly pushing in an attempt to turn our forum into the private members club that many already treat our forum as (to its detriment)."

Not welcome by whom Shambles? Got a mouse in your pocket?

I for one am all for members only posting. The best forums I go to are all run that way. And I'll express my opinion whenever I want to on the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 09:10 PM

SHAMBLES SAYS: "What I have done for a good few years now is post to our forum on the basis that Max, our host - has been happy with the open invitation he has extended for the public's contributions. If that is an assumption on my part - then perhaps it is a reasonable one?"

No Piss&Moanmeister, it is NOT a reasonable assumption that YOU should post to this forum on ANY basis. LOL....Are you mental? Can you not read? Try again:

MAX (Our Host) SAYS: "Shambles: I just don't care anymore. You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell."

Farewell to you. Don't let the door hitcha' in the ass on the way out!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jerry Craymore
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 09:18 PM

I find the tone of that last post offensive, and I demand an immediate apology from the insensitive clod who posted it! Have you no respect for your peers, sir? Fie! For shame! If you were in range I'd smack you in the face with my glove, you impudent swine. How dare you stoop to such divisive invective?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Peace
Date: 06 Oct 06 - 10:00 PM

"No Piss&Moanmeister, it is NOT a reasonable assumption that YOU should post to this forum on ANY basis. LOL....Are you mental? Can you not read? Try again:

MAX (Our Host) SAYS: "Shambles: I just don't care anymore. You press your point, time after time, until you press too far and then complain about the check. You do this purposefully to prove a point, but in the end, you are a distraction from the real point of this site. You too, should bid farewell."

Farewell to you. Don't let the door hitcha' in the ass on the way out!"

And as I said once before, if Max really wanted Shambles gone, he would have blocked his ability to post.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 02:51 AM

I for one am all for members only posting. The best forums I go to are all run that way. And I'll express my opinion whenever I want to on the subject.

Wesley S - due to Max's wishes, and as you are not to my knowledge a 'moderator' of this forum - you can express any view you wish and that view in particular without compromising our hosts current wishes to continue to keep our forum open to the public's contributions or confusing the many posters who have supported our forum on that basis for many years.

But why would you be supporting a change that has not even been proposed by our host? Is this not a little disloyal to Max? Is the fact that we are expressing different views on this issue needlessly divisive to our forum? Who has publicly proposed it - and who is constantly pushing the change?

And like others that express this view - do you not like our forum currently? Is this forum not thought by you THE best or even one of the best forums you visit?

If not - why do you visit. Why do you not stick with your other members only posting sites or form one of your own?

Our forum is the fine and well-supported forum it is now BECAUSE Max has encouraged the public's contributions over many years and despite the problems inherrent in this. He, our forum and that principle needs your support.

Most of the problems that (some of) our 'moderators' constantly moan on publicly about, blame posters and take no responsibility for - have actually been caused by their failed attempts to control and shape our forum to their wishes.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 12:23 PM

Hey Shambles,

You accused Wesley S of being disloyal to Max. Aren't you being disloyal to Max by constantly asking for the removal of the moderators that Max chose to monitor the site. I'm sure that Max reads what is on the site and knows what the moderators are doing. I'm also sure that he has read some of your postings and knows how you feel. If Max wanted to replace a moderator then he would have done it. Constantly asking for their removal is just as disloyal to Max as requesting that this be a members only site. Any comments?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 12:45 PM

"the many posters who have supported our forum on that basis for many years."

"Our forum is the fine and well-supported forum it is now"


Roger because it is not a Members Only posting site, you and MG and others, have been allowed to post drivel, and filth and downright rudeness on this forum mostly un censored .
Due to that this site is neither as well supported as it was, nor frequented by as many of the posters who used to support it over the years.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 01:48 PM

Shambles, I visit here mainly because I have become accustomed to doing so. It's a habit. It's an addiction. My experience of Internet forums is very limited, so I don't really know if this one is better or worse than the average, but I'd say it's pretty good as far as I can tell. It certainly has a lot of interesting characters.

I agree that there are various people here who try to control other people's activities here, and it sometimes gets out of hand. I think that happens in any club or group of people after awhile. Those who have been members longer feel that they have more "pull" than newcomers, and they favour their friends and sometimes pick on certain people they don't like so much. That is the case in any organization.

More fun for some people than for others...

You've got to put in time and effort to gain (or lose) respect among a group of people who gather on a regular basis.

When a group fragments into several battling interest groups...well, then you have a mess on your hands! Like the American political system. ;-) Or any political system, for that matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 03:54 PM

I know, it's a tossup about deleting nasty posts. If we delete such stuff while they're here and watching, they just post it again. I've seen Shambles do it eight times in a row, and then post a dozen messages complaining about the deletions.
If we don't delete the nasty stuff right away, then a dozen Mudcatters respond to it. Seems like a losing battle. I'm beginning to think that the only way we can bring it under control is to have members-only posting in BS, and a way to screen non-member posting in the music section before it becomes visible to the public.
-Joe

Apart from the fact that it mentions me by name and those bits are totally misleading - am I really the only poster who reads posts like the above with concern? Especially with concern about the ability and will of those 'moderators' publicly expressing such views, to really been seen to do their best to continue to make work - Max's long-running and current open invitation for the public's contribution to our forum?

Does the use of words on our forum like 'we', 'they', 'losing battle', and 'control' - sound out-of-place, combative and devisive only to me? If our 'moderators' see their role to battle against posters to our forum in such terms - is it any real surprise if they then get this battle in return?

The object of having moderators is not surely to been seen to in conflict with posters and to attempt to control and inhibit their posting - but to enable and encourage posting? And for them to accept the current posting policy of the site's owner - rather than to be seen to find constantly find fault and be seen to keep trying to change this policy into something else?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 04:22 PM

You've got to put in time and effort to gain (or lose) respect among a group of people who gather on a regular basis.

Do you? Perhaps on a members only forum this would be the case but our forum has always been different (or perhaps a better word is special). There are those regular members you refer to - but because our forum has never been limited to those regular members - many of the 'intersting characters' you refer to have found our forum.

Many have left (for many reasons) but as long as Max's open invitation continues - others can find it and hopefully stay and refresh the mix. This has always been our forum's strength. It is only seen as a weakness by those who do not really accept the reality of what our forum is and who wish to limit it and already treat it as a private members club.

It may be the 'intersting characters' that attract you - for other posters it will be other things. I tend to be more interested in what people have to say - rather than who may be saying it.

But sadly perhaps very few seem to see Max's open invitation for the public's contributions as the main reason they like our forum. Perhaps this is taken for granted too much and not really valued as it should? It certainly has a down side but I suggest the trick is to encourage posters to accept these aspects - rather than to be seen to constantly fight them.

Poster will see things (at least in the thread titles) they would rather not - but rather than being encouraged to complain about this - perhaps they can be informed that it is the price they pay for being able to post what they wish.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 04:47 PM

Well, clearly my statement which you quote referred to members, not Guests. Only members in a club normally have the investment of time to gain or lose other members' respect.

But perhaps you can find an exception to that? I suppose a persistent enough Guest who always posts under the same name can do what a member can do in that respect...only...how do we know it really IS that person when they post?

We don't.

I could easily, for example, log out and pretend to be Gargoyle or Martin Gibson and post something to embarass them (assuming it's possible to do that...). Heh!

I'm not going to, but I could. ;-) So could anyone else.

This is one reason why it's a much better idea to post as a member than a (named) Guest. As for anonymous Guests, well, that's a different matter again. They take no risks and present no known face, real or imaginary.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 05:53 PM

This is one reason why it's a much better idea to post as a member than a (named) Guest. As for anonymous Guests, well, that's a different matter again. They take no risks and present no known face, real or imaginary.

Very possibly this judgement may be the case but posters do currently have these choices. And currently anyone who finds our forum can contribute there and then. Plus you can send a link to someone and they can respond directly the the thread - without becoming a member.   

If the only way you could contribute to our forum was to become a member first - there would not be the same ease as there has been, in obtaining new blood. And many who do not now wish to have cookies or reveal their details etc (for many reasons) would be then excluded.

But as most the problems our 'moderators' seem to have IS with the posting of members - there would appear much more to be lost by their proposed change than there is to be gained.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 06:54 PM

Hey Shambles,

You accused Wesley S of being disloyal to Max. Aren't you being disloyal to Max by constantly asking for the removal of the moderators that Max chose to monitor the site. I'm sure that Max reads what is on the site and knows what the moderators are doing. I'm also sure that he has read some of your postings and knows how you feel. If Max wanted to replace a moderator then he would have done it. Constantly asking for their removal is just as disloyal to Max as requesting that this be a members only site. Any comments?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 08:29 PM

"Plus you can send a link to someone and they can respond directly the the thread - without becoming a member." Shambles

Unless I am misunderstanding, that statement isn't factual. A Guest (someone who is not a member)has no address that a member can reach, therefore said Guest cannot receive a link. Other than in the thread itself.

Am I mistaken?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 08:43 PM

Constantly asking for their removal is just as disloyal to Max as requesting that this be a members only site. Any comments?

Perhaps - if I had done this. But I simply do not understand why any 'moderator' would wish to continue carrying our the owner's policy - if they did not agree with it. Or why any poster can be expected to see their constant complaints about and their wish to change the status quo on our forum - as these 'moderators' best efforts to support the status quo.

So it is hardly my actions that are currently confusing our forum's loyalties - is it?

But (some of) our 'moderators' are constantly asking for my removal - perhaps that could also be judged as also being disloyal?

The answer to our divided loyalties would seem simple.

Those 'moderators' who do not like our forum being open for the public's contributions - as Max has wished it from the very beginning - can form their own private members club and leave the rest of us in peace. On their own new forum - if they cannot stand the heat of working in their own kitchen - they can moan about and throw pots and pans at and exclude whoever they wish.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 08:51 PM

Am I mistaken?

Yes.

You do of course need the e mail address. I have often sent a thread's URL in an email to enable friends and others who I think may be interested or who may be able to help - to directly respond to a thread or to a specific point in a thread.

If this proposal is implemented - they would not be able to continue to do this without first becoming a member.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 06 - 09:39 PM

If Max monitors the site, which we assume to be the case, then he knows what the moderators are doing. If he din't approve then he would replace them. Therefore, if you question the moderators that Max has approved and keeps track of then you are being as disloyal as Wesley S.

The moderators are asking for your removal because Max has previously stated that maybe you should leave. That is Max's policy and not the moderators.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Oct 06 - 03:57 AM

The moderators are asking for your removal because Max has previously stated that maybe you should leave. That is Max's policy and not the moderators.

Although our 'moderators' and their supporters would like to give our forum that impression - the issue here is never one single poster i.e currently me. The situation is exactly the reverse of what you suggest.

Because of all the fuss made and encouraged publicly by (some of) our 'moderators' and their attempts to prevent our forum from discussing this issue and my attempts to ensure that our forum could discuss the true nature and current level of censorship on our forum, Max made the public statement he did. I suggest you read all of it - rather that just the piece that my detractors refer to.

Just like I have done Max made a number of suggestions but his policy since then towards me has clearly been not to be seen to block my postings after all these years. But that does not prevent (some of) our 'moderators' from still publicly encouraging this course of action as some form of solution to their problems.

In exactly the same way and for the same reasons that since the public admission of failure and the proposals made to improve our forum on their behalf - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - (some of) our 'moderators' continue to push for this - despite there having been no sign of this change since then or no public statement by Max confirming such a change.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 08 Oct 06 - 06:13 AM

The good ship Mudcat currently has (some of) its volunteer crew sailing off - (Fletcher Christian like) in one direction whilst the ship stall attemps to maintain the original course under its Captain.

Perhaps it is only sensible for any current and potential passengers, to be informed of any change of destination - rather than to be seen and expected to take sides in open conflict on deck.

That such a situation would and is dividing loyalties on our forum is pretty obvious - and it is a situation not caused by any attempts to bring attention to this situation, discuss it and to end this division of posters loyalties on our forum.   

So that when the word 'we' is used - it will once again mean ALL posters to our forum.