 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Oct 06 - 12:07 PM The ones that you are calling "moaners" may have a legitimate gripe and would certainly do themselves a favor by finding another shindig. It would be no loss to them for leaving such an awful affair. If only that were the case. When the bouncers are the main ones setting the example of constantly moaning about and judging the worth of the host's invited guest - that rather sets the moaning tone and some of the guest think it OK to follow it..... But when everyone has been invited equally - everyone has a equal right to be there and enjoy themselves. If you find your fellow guests to be a pain - and the host is not seen to wish to throw them out - the only option open to you is to find another party. A 'moaners only' affair. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 09 Oct 06 - 11:16 AM The fact that my bouncers are too keen on moaning and sniping is WHY they are my bouncers. Pleasant, good natured, sociable people have a life to be getting on with and lots of parties to attend and wouldn't want to spend all their time picking crumbs up off my shag pile. Swings and rounabouts. But we just turn the music up and drown them out. Nobody takes them too seriously. And they keep the carpet clean. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 09 Oct 06 - 09:46 AM You make a good point about the moaners going home and letting the rest of the guests have a good time, but ultimately it is the host who makes the guest list and keeps the party going. You do make the mistake of assuming that the moaners are the one with the problem. Often a host will let an obnoxious guest run herd over the festivities. The ones that you are calling "moaners" may have a legitimate gripe and would certainly do themselves a favor by finding another shindig. It would be no loss to them for leaving such an awful affair. True, the host can't be blamed for having the party turning dismal, but they are the ones footing the bill as well as have the authority to make changes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Oct 06 - 09:32 AM It is really time to find a new party - the company in this one is starting to become very boring. No matter how much care they put into the preparation - the host tends to get the blame for the worst parties. Often unfairly as they can only do so much and making the party go well is really up to the guests. For the very worst parties are those where none of the guests make any effort and just moan about their fellow guests. When these moaners have gone home - the party often comes to life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 09 Oct 06 - 09:16 AM "Where is Ron Olesko?" I'm right here Prof. Lucy, watching with great amusement. I know we all love analogies, and the latest one that I can come up with is that this forum is starting to remind me of all the Star Wars and Star Trek fans. Ever watch these group of fanatics picking apart the minutae and telling the powers that be how things should be run? It seems that is what we have here. NONE of you have any impact because the management of this operation obviously enjoys sitting back and watching. If they aren't going to do anything to bring about change, then the die is cast. Whatever will become of Mudcat is due to their decision to either make change or do nothing. It is not Shambles or any of us. The host of the party has chosen to open his doors and let everyone run amok. It is really time to find a new party - the company in this one is starting to become very boring. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Partridge Date: 09 Oct 06 - 08:48 AM I'll give you spots on your apples, and hopefully a big yellow taxi will turn up! cheers Pat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 09 Oct 06 - 06:10 AM Thanks T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 09 Oct 06 - 05:48 AM The stalker's up early chaps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 09 Oct 06 - 05:14 AM You really are weird aren't you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Oct 06 - 04:23 AM Please delete spam The above is another gem from The Mudcat Help and Trouble Forum. In which the latest thinking behind the now hysterical and brave fight against spam on our forum is well demonstrated. Posters are now being encouraged to get spam deleted – by copy and pasting it all on to Snitchers Corner instead. In addition to the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team dumping it in this thread. But never fear – you will see that he has finally found the solution. Subject: RE: Please Delete Spam From: Joe Offer Date: 07-Oct-06 - 03:24 PM We get Spam in the Dubliners thread almost every day, so I finally decided to close the thread. It appears the Spam is being sent automatically. -Joe- The next step of course, following on from such logic – to solve all the problems our 'moderators' get their knickers twisted about – is to close the entire forum. Give me spots on my apples but leave me the birds and the bees PLEASE. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 09 Oct 06 - 04:06 AM The moderators are NOT, as far as I can see, ineffective. They sweep the crud out of this site as soon as they see it, or it is brought to their attention. They give people enough rope, and then let them hang themselves; sometimes I think they give them too much rope, but that's my personal opinion. Giok |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 09 Oct 06 - 02:27 AM As guest 'Partridge' indicates above, it has become really difficult to discern exactly what Shambles wants. Not if you read it - and not what other posters say that I want. Bill D - But what do you want? You appear to support anonymous 'moderators' - however ineffective and counter-productive this may be to our forum and no matter how much (some of) our 'moderators' then moan about the results - as part of the Max approved status quo. But you then point our the advantages of a change to members only posting - and ingnore that this is NOT the Max approved status quo. If you don't like Max's basic posting policy that our forum has always operated on - why have you stayed posting (and moaning) for so long and why do you not form your own private club? Why do you think you have some right after all this time, to impose your requirements on other posters on our forum? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 08 Oct 06 - 08:08 PM As guest 'Partridge' indicates above, it has become really difficult to discern exactly what Shambles wants. That is clear, it is Joe Offer out of "office" and probably the heads of a few mods. While he is reasonably consistant with his return to old times. Even those arguments will return to that point.
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 08 Oct 06 - 04:09 PM There was a time I cared. That time is past. I will be a member when it's convenient to me and a guest when it's convenient to me. Both are allowed to post, so it's not an issue. Remember, two legs good, four legs bad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 08 Oct 06 - 04:03 PM Roger, you can't have it both ways. On the one hand you bemoan what the 'Cat has become and on the other you shout: Don't change it! Which is your true feeling? If it is not broke - stop keep trying to fix it and avoiding taking any responsibility for the results of this constant tinkering. This latest proposed change is a major one bur it is only the latest one - in a never-ending list of changes required by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team and (some of) his team and those who seem to blindly support them. And whatever changes they impose on our forum to judge and shape our contributions to their requirements - these still do not satisify them. My only reservations are about the need for these constant changes and the reasons behind them. Our forum remains a simple concept but one that (some of) our 'moderators' - by their constant need to publicly express their reservations and judgements and propose changes, have clearly never accepted or really understood. All these changes have unforseen complications but no responsibilty for these is ever taken by our 'moderators' - who continue to moan about and to judge and blame other posters. An example of posting set, that is not surprisingly followed. To the extent that now some posters are encouraged to think they have some right to post only personal judgements about the worth of fellow named posters, seems to be seen to be our forum's main purpose. My true feeling is that our forum is currently a reflection of the example of posting behaviour shown by (some of) our 'moderators'. And if they do not like our forum in this form - they must first take some responsibility for this. And be prepared to change this example before any more changes are proposed. Any 'moderator' should be required to be seen, by the example they set, to be committed to making Max's current posting policy work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Big Mick Date: 08 Oct 06 - 03:52 PM We tried it about a month or two ago, Bill. It was quite humorous to watch. Every morning Shambles would cast around trying to bait someone. He got more desperate as time went on. He was limited in his ability to troll to just this thread. He was not limited in others as long as he wasn't trolling for his campaign. He got quite panicky. I thought that experiment proved what many have said all along. He is a troll, and has a need for attention. Unfortunately, there are those that just can't ignore. It makes a very strong case for members only posting, and controls. Of course, my opinion is Shambles should leave, as he is the one so disenchanted. But he invites everyone else to leave. Shows how he has it all backwards in the convoluted way of thinking of his. Shambles, the mod's will continue to do the job they do, the way they do it. You are unhappy with that, then leave. Max suggested that you do that. I concur. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Bill D Date: 08 Oct 06 - 03:25 PM re: Members only. Shambles suggests that it would be somehow a problem...unfair, cliquish, restrictive, exclusive....etc. But, membership is NOT restrictive. Anyone may join. All "members only" would do is require one to show their card at the door in order to post. It would simply be a way to keep track of which members were posting when. It would **NOT** even require real names, or even identify where one lives....all it would do is reduce the confusion that occurs when 23 'guests' are all posting at once...(or is it one guest with 23 agendas?) It would also allow private responses to some issues when it would better if everyone were not reading the details. I suspect THAT is one of the major reasons many folks who take contentious positions don't join. I don't know what to say to those who just have a phobia against being recognized, even by a pseudonym! Note again the point..***ANYONE*** may join and participate....the only rule would be that NO ONE may do absolutely anything they wish. Management of a site like this always has the right to exclude anyone who is deemed disruptive, dangerous, or generally offensive. There have been only 2-3 of these in 10 years.....that is a pretty 'open' attitude by internet standards. (Martin Gibson was banned for repeated offenses, and even he was given the benefit of the doubt and warned many times first!) As guest 'Partridge' indicates above, it has become really difficult to discern exactly what Shambles wants. He doesn't want "judgments imposed", but even the oft repeated phrase "impose their judgments" has lost any clear meaning when he uses it to refer to ANY editing done. He certainly doesn't like having moderators, but he particularly doesn't like having any of them being unknown to Shambles....despite the fact that Joe has explained that 1) There WILL be moderators, and 2)that it may be best if some of them remain anonymous. This policy is approved by Max! In short, The Shambles crusade to have some idealistic "totally free & open" forum where everyone is responsible for their own posts and everyone respects everyone else is inviting anarchy. When 95% of all posts were music related, it was close to the ideal, but once we got 'found' by the general public, it was just no longer workable to be without moderation. One suggestion is to allow 'guest' posting in the MUSIC threads, and require ID to kibitz 'below the line'....I don't know how technically feasible that is, but it might be worth testing. In the meantime, we can either keep debating Shambles, just for the humor and practice, or we can ignore him, like he suggests. Would that it were possible! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 08 Oct 06 - 03:20 PM It depends on who has the edit button. Some people deserve to have it. Some don't. Those with agendas of their own should pack it in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 08 Oct 06 - 03:12 PM No Ebbie, shambles is reasonably consistant on that. He would like things back to older times. I think many would... Where we part on that particular issue is: I believe the slightly increased levels of moderations are a reaction to a higher number of "bad" posters. Shambles appears to believe that the removal of such moderation would improve the "general standard" of posters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Ebbie Date: 08 Oct 06 - 02:54 PM Roger, you can't have it both ways. On the one hand you bemoan what the 'Cat has become and on the other you shout: Don't change it! Which is your true feeling? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,Coerbeill Date: 08 Oct 06 - 02:05 PM Shambles, I am pleased to see that you are in favor of Guest postings such as mine. That speaks well for your general level of tolerance and compassion. You say to a member, "Then what are you doing posting on our forum and pushing to change it? Why do(n't) you just go and form one where you can exclude who you wish..." Oh my, yes! What a brilliant notion. Let's ALL immediately go and FORM an internet forum all of our own where we can each have everything just as we want it. Oh boy! Well, how does one do that? I wonder? How many people here even have the slightest notion of how to form an internet forum? Precious few, I would guess. Forming a forum is a lot of work. You have to know all the software routines and be able to build a website. It's more work than most people can be bothered with and most people don't know a thing about it. If one did form a forum where everything was exactly as one wanted, I submit that its membership would necessarily have to be restricted to an enrollment of ONE! (meaning, the person who formed it) That could get deadly boring rather soon, couldn't it? Is that what you are suggesting? If so, I think you are a nincompoop who says things he hasn't thought out properly. You just don't like it when other people disagree with you, that's all. In that respect you are no different from the other people here whom you are telling to leave and form a forum of their own. I bet they tell you to leave too, don't they? Wouldn't it be funny if you ALL left simultaneously and joined some other forum under new names...and after about 6 months of arguing suddenly reached the awful realization one day that it was all happening all over again? Ah...ha! ha! ha! What a farce. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,Professor Lucullus Chinchover Date: 08 Oct 06 - 01:49 PM Where is Ron Olesko? His absence is throwing doubt on my theory of symbiosis, as demonstrated by the back and forth postings between him and Shambles. Is this a deliberate attempt to discredit my work and deny me the Nobel Prize? If so, I shall take legal action, be assured. This is not a trivial matter. Ron, I know what you're up to. You don't fool me. Your failure to post in the last many posts is deliberate on your part and is aimed at me in a most malicious manner. You will pay for that, sir. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 08 Oct 06 - 01:24 PM "They would not be able to continue to do this without first becoming a member" And how difficult is that, Roger? And if the subject is so interesting what would stop you from copy and pasting pertinent parts and sending it to friends through email? The point of course is not that you can copy & post interesting bits to one's non-member friends - but that they can click directly on the to the thread's URL and contribute directly to the discussion. They may not have the time or wish to become a memeber to do this and may not make any contribution if they were forced to. After this easy way - they may even choose to become a member. It is a good way of our forum to get new blood - but this does not appear to be a concern to many posters. Who perhaps do not really want any new blood? I am in favor of members only. Then what are you doing posting on our forum and pushing to change it? Why do you just go and form one where you can exclude who you wish - rather than feel you have some right to change our forum to your requirements and force these limitations on other posters? Our forum is so much more that what many posters tend to see it as. The way Max has set it up - it is a way that you can see the whole world's views and it can see yours. The opportunities for all of us to learn are endless by this - so why limit it to the like-minded only? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Ebbie Date: 08 Oct 06 - 01:01 PM "Am I mistaken? " Eb "Yes." The Sham Huh? In what way was my assumption mistaken? You had not mentioned emailing. "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. " "They would not be able to continue to do this without first becoming a member" And how difficult is that, Roger? And if the subject is so interesting what would stop you from copy and pasting pertinent parts and sending it to friends through email? I am in favor of members only. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 08 Oct 06 - 09:02 AM What are you like in person? I ask this because having read this thread and some of your other postings you sound like a human terrier - once you get hold of something you never let go, you are very persistant. Can you understand that just repeating something doesn't make it true? I can't work out what it is you really want. If the forum was run the way you wanted it to be would you become a regular poster? For the purposes of contributing to our forum does it really matter what any of us are like as a person? I am just a fellow poster. All you have to do is read or not read - respond or not respond to my posts. It is as simple as that. I will try to respond to your views and questions - even if they are just repeating those that have been asked and asnswered many times before. But I have no wish to make personal judgements of your worth - based only on what you post? What point is there in encouraging one poster to post only personal judgements of another named poster? Or in your case an un-named one. Why do you not also ask your other questions of those who have just as terrier-like, pedanticly and persistently tried for many years to prevent my posts from appearing on our forum as posted? And who impose all these means to inhibit, restrict and prevent posts containing only reasonable discussion - and attempt to justify this as somehow enabling reasonable discussion? When you have your answers from them - ask me again about my reaction to this. In the meantime perhaps you could actually address the real issue and answer some of the questions that have been posed on this issue in this thread? As I have had a whole pack of terriers constantly nipping at my arse - you may not see the very best of me displayed. And to judge my worth from my attempts only to deal with these terrier's attempts to chase me away - without also judging the worth of the chasing pack - is perhaps a little unfair? I have found that those terriers who use such tactics as a first and only resort - do not appreciate themselves being on the receiving end of the same sort judgement and treatment that they freely dish out. They then consdider this to be unfair. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST,Partridge Date: 08 Oct 06 - 06:57 AM Shambles, What are you like in person? I ask this because having read this thread and some of your other postings you sound like a human terrier - once you get hold of something you never let go, you are very persistant. Can you understand that just repeating something doesn't make it true? I can't work out what it is you really want. If the forum was run the way you wanted it to be would you become a regular poster? I know you don't write in capitals but I can't help reading some of your posts like you were shouting! What you are trying to do clearly is not working and you seem to have caused a lot of ill feeling. I hope that you manage to sort out your grievances soon, because alot of us are very fed up with the constant moaning. C'mon, life is for living - get yourself a secret santa for gods sake! Pat x |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 08 Oct 06 - 06:30 AM Only members in a club normally have the investment of time to gain or lose other members' respect. The only respect that needs to be encouraged to be shown on a discussion forum such as this one, which continues to be open for all the public's contributions - is respect from all contributors to all contributors. All that has ever been required is the recognition of what our forum is and for all contributors to be able to accept that being seen openly to be able to agree to disagree - is about as good as such a forum can get. If anyone wants a private club - they can find or start one. Our forum has not been that place - is not now that place and Max has given no public indication of implementing the change that would make our forum such a place. |
|
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. |
|
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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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,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: 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: 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 - 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 - 09:23 AM What crowd? |