BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.

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 - 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 - 08:25 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: 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 - 08:09 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: The Shambles
Date: 05 Oct 06 - 06:41 PM

You deliberately avoid any real discussion, 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 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: 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 - 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: 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 - 05:10 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 - 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: 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 - 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: 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: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 05:25 PM

Ve haf ways uf making you comply!

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,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: 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: 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: 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 - 03:41 PM

What is a sesh?

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: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 03:03 PM

I think you asked me 12 questions in that run-on sentence, and I apologize but I am not sure what you are actually asking me.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 02:53 PM

Again, it really doesn't bother me either way, but if I had a preference and a vote (which I don't), I would opt for members only.

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?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 12:52 PM

No, it does not appear to be our hosts intention. While I wish it were different, I can accept the decision and it won't bother me. My feeling is that SOME people might think twice before making a rude post. I don't buy the arguement that it would restrict discussion, most sites that I visit have similar arrangements and it works quite well.

Again, it really doesn't bother me either way, but if I had a preference and a vote (which I don't), I would opt for members only.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 12:35 PM

Not that it really matters what any of us think or suggest, but my opinion is that we should restrict to members only posting.   I know there is another thread on that topic so I won't sidetrack this discussion any further.

Ron - the subject matter on this thread now ranges from spam for porn sites to rice pudding recipes and all point between - so I this subect can be safely covered here.

I also think you will find that the thread you refer to has been closed long ago.

I note your preference and your provisos - but a change to this does not appear to be our host's intention for the party does it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 12:27 PM

Hear hear Ron.
G

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 12:24 PM

Not that it really matters what any of us think or suggest, but my opinion is that we should restrict to members only posting.   I know there is another thread on that topic so I won't sidetrack this discussion any further.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 12:16 PM

Chubby Checker's Birthday

Pitbull wasn't my term BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 12:16 PM

yes - you have missed it.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 12:12 PM

"I think it is time the pitbulls were muzzled for everyones well being and the doors were opened to D."


"Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie - PM
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:03 AM

d is not barred from participating in all the party rooms, merely from spreading gloom and despondency there, by sowing disaffection, and repeating complaints already voiced in other rooms.
d is quite humourous and intelligent when dismounted from his hobby-horse.
Giok"

I repeat it is only on one topic that d is prohibited from swamping the other rooms at the party [sic]
Or don't you read the sudden rash of birthday threads ?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 12:11 PM

I am vehemently oppossed to members only posting.

I am glad to read this. I am only surprised that I know this only because I asked you and you answered. Or have I missed you saying this before - in previous discussions on the subject?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 11:48 AM

I am vehemently oppossed to members only posting.

and BTW - "Don't worry MMario -I shouldn't take too much notice of my views.

You don't usually" is a totally false statement.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 11:45 AM

I am very confused - because the "party analogy" that everyone seems to be using recently is a concept that was rejected by shambles as having no pertinence to the situation when this whole mess started.

Don't worry MMario -I shouldn't take too much notice of my views.

You don't usually.

But perhaps you could tell our forum where do you stand on the members only proposal? Are you in favour of such a change or do you support Max' continued commitment to our forum being open for the public's contributions?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 11:28 AM

I am very confused - because the "party analogy" that everyone seems to be using recently is a concept that was rejected by shambles as having no pertinence to the situation when this whole mess started.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 11:22 AM

Ron I like the way d's status has elevated to D. Good move.

I think it is time the pitbulls were muzzled for everyones well being and the doors were opened to D.

I don't for one minute believe that the party host decided to restrict D. I believe over zealous pitbulls enjoy the sport, suggested the move (or not) and watch with tongues lolling and spittle drooling on the sidelines.

The only change is the pitbulls are now being watched very carefully and the viewing ain't pretty.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 11:13 AM

Only if you forced them to partake of your food and drink, or it was contaminated, apart from that they came and consumed of their own free will.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:36 AM

You better believe they are problems to me!   As I pointed out, if my guests becomes sick or gets in an accident, I am responsible.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:34 AM

Although of course, Ron, getting too drunk or eating all the food are problems to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:26 AM

Fair comment, Ron. I just hope that d is aware that this is the party host's decision and not the random act of performed by the pit bull like bouncers.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:16 AM

By the way... be sure to try the cheese puffs.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:15 AM

"But would you not agree, Ron, that it is somwhat unusual to have or allow one geust to be placed under special conditions for not being a problem? "

Not at all unusual.   The guest may be put off by the request, but as host is is my call. If I have a guest that I know drinks too much, I would tell them to stay away from the beer. If there is a guest who has a habit of attending parties and then eating all the pigs in a blanket, I might tell that person that they are off limits just to him or her.

Is it fair? It doesn't really matter what is fair since it is my house and my party. If I want the rest of the guests to have an opportunity to snack, I might restrict one person. You might not like me as a host, but that is something I have to live with. It is my responsibility and my decision.   If you don't like it, you don't attend.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:10 AM

Taxi for Mr D !
G ☺☻

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:08 AM

"d is not barred from participating in all the party rooms, merely from spreading gloom and despondency there, by sowing disaffection, and repeating complaints already voiced in other rooms."

How is that accomplished?   Has D been told they can't enter certain rooms and to stay away from the shrimp bowl?

If D has been given restrictions, then everyone would expect D to honor them. If D continues to fight them, then it is up to the host to make a decision - and the rest of the party goers to abide by it.

IF the hosts decides D needs to leave, he should call him or her a cab.

IF D is allowed to stay, with restrictions, then everyone should shut up and allow him or her to particpate as the host allows.

IF D is allowed to stay with no restricitons, then the remaining guests need to assess whether they want to stay and follow the rules that host allows.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 06 - 10:06 AM

But would you not agree, Ron, that it is somwhat unusual to have or allow one geust to be placed under special conditions for not being a problem?