BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.

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

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

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

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

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

The inconsistancies are the same Peace.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mick

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

taken over from Max by Joe Offer.

(Against the will of Max that is)

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

Then why don't they ignore him?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Does anyone wish to actually discuss the issue?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Yes Mick, you do reiterate.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Giok

Captain Swing

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Does anyone wish to actually discuss the issue?"

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

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

bingo

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

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

Would you part company and get a better employee?

Or would you feel you had to change your product?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wolfgang

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We've been trying that for about 8 years Ron

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

What's the policy on overtime?

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

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

"And THAT'S the way it is,"

biLL

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

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

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

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:32 PM

No smart employer would jump to conclusions or build up walls simply because something did not happen "by the books".

It would probably not be a smart employer who allowed their employees to be seen to publicly bad mouth not only their product - but their customers.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:36 PM

Ron, you can see in these last few days a prime example of how this goes. This poster will post a flawed analogy, or create a flawed premise, and then get you all to debate it until you realize that you have been duped. This is one of the many behaviours that have been going on for years. You have also seen, and been the recipient of another of his unacceptable behaviours, that being his intolerance for any deviation from his absolute view of how things should be.

Here are a couple of more examples of setting a false premise:

.... they will understandably follow the example of posting behavious seen to set by our 'moderators'

This shows the lack of respect Shambles has for the intelligence of posters, as if they are led by us. Proof to the contrary is how some posters react when we post our opinions.

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

Of course I wouldn't agree. If the moderators didn't like our forum, in the main, they wouldn't stay. I can't speak for the rest, but I love this forum, but am very disturbed when someone bullies others, and covers it up with a phoney "nice" demeanor.

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

Simple. This is because the owner has not, as of yet, been able to take time from living a life, raising children, getting married, making a living, etc., to deal completely with this. Furthermore, he keeps this thing alive out of his own pocket, assisted to a small extent by contributions from some of us. But Shambles, locked in his little world, can't see that and continues to try and make this in his vision. He contributes nothing financially, very little musically anymore, and tries to tear down the structure that Max has in place which allows Max to keep it going. I know this is hard to see from the mental place that Shambles is locked in, but Max has other things in this world. Mudcat, on a scale of the most important things to occupy his time, probably finishes a poor 6th or 7th to the family and making a living, and if he weren't so committed should be about 20th. Shambles inability to see this, along with his being a self centered twit, is why I am so intolerant.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 12:59 PM

Why can't you ignore him?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 01:06 PM

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

You are welcome to your view and unlike me - you can still express this view in any thread you wish.

My view is the quoted sentence would not be judged an insult to anyone who is not scratching around trying to find one. Sadly some posters do not have to scratch around looking for insults they can own - these are only now too evidently encouraged on our forum.

Bill -I can show you what an real insult is in PMs - if you wish? In fact I would take great pleasure in being able to restore the balance.

No it it is not an insult. It remains a simple basic fact, if one, as a proud defender of the double standard of posting behaviour on our forum, you do not wish to accept.

Any new poster will assume from one of Micks best posts - containing only his self-confressed 'intolerant comments' - that if it is seen to be good enough for our 'moderators' on our forum - such posting is good enough for them also. Despite posts like the following.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick - PM
Date: 22 Sep 06 - 04:14 PM

I agree that if one uses personal attacks on Shambles, they will be eliminated. If they are responding to him, silly though I believe that to be, that will be allowed.

And if our 'moderators' are seen to take no action when favoured posters like Catspaw is in full scatological personal insult mode - a new poster could safely assume that no action will be taken and that it would be safe for them to follow this posting example.

And many have. But have not been eliminated........

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,jOhn - PM
Date: 09 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM

Shambles-you piss me off.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 01:07 PM

"It would probably not be a smart employer who allowed their employees to be seen to publicly bad mouth not only their product - but their customers. "

Not necessarily so. First of all, your label of "bad mouth" is simply your opinion. The quote that you have cut and paste numerous times is simply an opinion from Joe. Most "employers" would not disagree that an honest evaluation of pros and cons will actually help the image of the company and go far to improving. Companies need to be open and honest.

As for bad mouthing a customer, it is easy to say that it is a no-no. However in reality there are often circumstances where it is necessary and will actually build respect. A customer who tries to get away with behavior that disrupts my business needs to be dealt with. Hopefully things won't get out of hand, but sometimes they do.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 01:11 PM

wrong question. Why 'don't' you ignore him? Because he has for several years criticized the basic way the place is run, and made ridiculous insinuations about the moderators and various members, pretending that if he complains 'nicely', it excuses the incessant nature of it all.

You could ask HIM whay he doesn't (or can't) accept how things are done and not keep this crusade going.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 01:26 PM

What Bill said. Or, I could answer you this way.

For the same reason you can't ignore me, or him.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 01:39 PM

I like the analogy used by Shambles. If I was another customer more contented with the employees I'd consider it extremely impolite if one customer not contented with the employees would complain loudly each day in the shop about the employees both for the customers and the employees to hear (we know this type of customer, don't we?). I'd think the adult way of action would be to bring his issue to the attention of the employer and if the action or inaction of the employer would not what he would like it to be to shop somewhere else instead of daily repeating the complaints in the shop for everyone to hear. As I said already I like the anylogy introduced by Shambles.

Just BTW, Shambles, have you ever complained privately at Max about his volunteer employees and if so, what was the gist of his response?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 01:58 PM

Wolfgang,

You should know better then to ask Shambles a direct question. He never, ever answers them. He only asks questions of others.

This is not a store, a business, a party or any other analogy that has been made. This is an internet message board. As such, it has its own set of rules and regulations. What is proper conduct here is determined by the owner of the board. It is not run to make money so it doesn't really matter if those who come here like the rules and regulations. No one says they have to stay or come back. The owner receives nothing for satisfying them and loses nothing if they are not satisfied.

This message board was founded to be a source of information on folk and related types of music. This is confined to the top of the line. Any other message board that I take part in enforces sticking to the theme of the board. There is not one other board that I know of that would allow any of the postings below the line here to stay on their board. These postings are not relevant to the theme of the board. Shambles, you should give credit to Max and the moderators for even allowing below the line threads. They are certainly an optional part of this board. As such, they can be run by whatever rules Max ALLOWS. By not stopping the actions of a moderator Max is allowing those actions to continue. It's his call and no one elses.

Go to any other themed message board and see if there are any posts similar to what appears below the line here. They are edited out and it is expected that they will be. You should thank Max for even allowing this foolishness to continue. Criticisms are certainly not called for. Where I come from you would be considered a bore, an ingrate and someone who should be kept from encouraging others to view the owner and his agents as negative influences. On any other board you would be banned for life. I know that you could care less what anyone says but that's what it is like in the real world.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:05 PM

Not necessarily so. First of all, your label of "bad mouth" is simply your opinion. The quote that you have cut and paste numerous times is simply an opinion from Joe.

Ron - you will accept that: The quote that you have cut and paste numerous times is simply an opinion from Joe is simply your opinion?

I will post it again so any posters new to this discussion can make up their own minds, if it was simply this? And to for them to be able to judge for themselves what its intention and effect on our forum was.

Even though the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team does not limit his opinions to posts or limit his editing comments to only where some action has been imposed - I have little doubt what the intention and effect of the following is.
And despite our best efforts, Mudcat is no longer a pleasant place to hang out and goof off or have a good discussion. It may be only my opinion - but it is one based on the facts rather than in spite of them.

First - it is stated to be For the record. and the use of the words 'our' and 'we' more suggests that the poster is speaking on behalf of like-minded other 'moderators' but it is not clear if these were even aware.

For the record, I have already asked Max to make Members-Only posting in the "BS" section, and I think membership should be granted only to those with verifiable e-mail addresses (you register, and then get a password sent back to you). So far, Max hasn't said anything about being ready to make the change
Joe Offer

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a long time, I opposed members-only posting, because I didn't want to scare away visitors or make Mudcat a closed, exclusive club. And yes, we have a lot of that exclusivity already - I feel like an outsider myself when I go into the "BS" section. But our nastiness has been too much, and it has gone on far too long, to the point where it's impossible to carry on an intelligent discussion on most non-music subjects nowadays. I have three Mudcatters on 100% review much of the time, and I have to do partial review on a number of others, and then I have to deal with all sorts of petty complaints about so-and-so saying this or that - and I deny about half the deletion requests I get, and undelete a fair number of messages deleted by JoeClones.

And despite our best efforts, Mudcat is no longer a pleasant place to hang out and goof off or have a good discussion. So, I think something has to be done. Ebbie's suggestion about putting Secret Santa in the music section is a very simple answer to one major objection I had to members-only BS posting - duh, why didn't I think of that?

So, short of members-only posting, what can we do to bring peace to this place? I'd rather have another solution, but I haven't been able to think of one.
-Joe Offer-
----------------------------------------------------------------------

No, I really can't defend our editorial actions, and I have no reason to defend anything to an idiot who can make such a big deal about the addition of three little words, "in the UK," to a thread title. We just try to do what we think is right, to make things run a little more smoothly around here. That's basically what Max asked us to do when he gave us editing buttons. And we volunteers don't pretend to sit in judgment over anybody here, as you so often contend. We're just here to deal with the problems.

If that's not satisfactory to you, so be it. Tough shit, in other words. Nobody named you judge and jury. And despite your four-year campaign, you haven't been able to convince Max to crack down on us volunteers, have you? Doesn't that tell you something?

-Joe Offer-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shambles, go whine somewhere else, or maybe we should start threads about you and the sheep or something.
Joe Offer
-----
But Shambles believes in this sort of thing, so I think that maybe this would be a good opportunity to smear his reputation. Shambles, I'm sick of you and your shit
Joe Offer.
------
Ah, Shambles - we make an exception for you, since you seem to think it's a good thing to have personal attacks. We want to keep you happy, after all. Your whining is so annoying.
Joe Offer
------
Yes, I think you may well be first on the list, my friend. It's time for you either to shut up, or to use a name and take responsibility for what you have to say. If you continue to refuse to use a name, you will be come a non-person around here, and every single message you post will be deleted.
Free speech is fine, but you're just a pain in the ass.
-Joe Offer-
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Give us a break - we volunteer editors don't get paid to do this work, you know. We're here because we enjoy being part of this community and we want it to be a peaceful, enjoyable place to visit.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:15 PM

Unfortunately for your premise, Shambles, cause and effect are reversed - as many, in fact MOST of your qoutes occur AFTER the changes that you claim came about because of the actions of the moderators.

Though I will admit it becomes bvery hard to tell just WHAT premise you are trying to defend, given the number of unrelated and irrelevant qoutes you include.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:15 PM

Go to any other themed message board and see if there are any posts similar to what appears below the line here. They are edited out and it is expected that they will be. You should thank Max for even allowing this foolishness to continue. Criticisms are certainly not called for.

I do thank Max for this. It is not me who is complaining about his posting policy toward BS nor is it me who is suggesting it should be changed to suit my requirements.

Or do you not consider the following to be the most fundamental complaint and criticism of our forum?

And despite our best efforts, Mudcat is no longer a pleasant place to hang out and goof off or have a good discussion.
Joe Offer

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:16 PM

And finally, Ron, you see another of his neurotic tools. When folks start to enunciate what is wrong, he will then cut and paste ad nauseum and try to overwhelm the conversation. This has been going on for years. He apparently cannot accept the fact that there are other views, and other logic. And he cannot seem to understand that this is just a message board, and not the center of the universe. It is attitudes like his, rather than Joe's, that make it hard to be a place of good feelings and discussion.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:19 PM

Ron - for everyone's sake - will you tell Mick what he wants to hear?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:21 PM

Rather than an analogy, I'll offer an actual event that happened with a person I knew. This person endlessly complained about a particular hair dresser in a beauty Salon that she went to. No matter how much the hair dresser tried to satisfy this person, she was always extremely critical after each visit. This person complained so endlessly that she finally succeeded in getting the hair dresser fired. There was so much upset in the beauty salon among the other hair dressers that the employer investigated the matter more thoroughly and discovered that the problem was the customer, not the hair dresser. The hair dresser that was fired was well-liked by her other customers.

The next time this person came to the beauty salon to have her hair done, the owner spoke to her and told her that she had caused so much trouble with her endless complaints that she was no longer welcome in the store and was told to take her business elsewhere.

This is not an analogy. The woman was a close friend of a woman I was dating at the time.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:21 PM

There ya go again Roger, calling it a discussion when it isn't!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:22 PM

Well Wolfie its been a long time since we tried that tack! But of course we have as you know. Shambolina is just going to go and on................Everything has been thoroughly hashed from every conceivable angle and the stupid shit still goes on and on..........

It will end.

When the new baby arrives and Jeff's troubles are passed, a time will come when Max and Jeff will invest the energy and hours/days in doing the updates around here that they have been hoping to accomplish. The crash stuff is finally cleared so when they get ready to clean up the rest of that, they'll make some updates which they have been wanting to do. Numbnuts has been told in every possible way that he needs to cease and desist or he will be non-entity when that time comes.

Until then, those who like Roger need to tell him the fight is over and it would be in his best interests to call it a day. Hell, I used to like Roger's poetry and songs but this vendetta kinda' kills off any good feelings. But once again let me try...............

Shut up Roger.

You've stated all of your opinions far too many times already. Your vitriol comes across as an indirect if not totally direct attack on Max. Enough. Focus in on the reality. Here it is:

FROM MAX--"Our priority number 2 is to beef up the back end security of the site so that we can confront such issues. I cannot currently effectively enforce a ban on the savy. It would be too easy for them to find a workaround and get back in, now angry. Trust me, this matter will be dealt with in time. Trust me, we working as hard as we can to make this happen as soon as we can."

He's talking about you. Can't you see that? Shut up now Roger and enjoy what this place does offer you. Just stop. I said once before that I would support you (not that you give a shit) if you'd just drop the vendetta. Stop.

But I know, or at least suspect, this all falls on deaf ears and you will continue to be the pain in the ass you take pride in being right up until you find yourself outside and looking in.   Go ahead and keep weaseling around. I truly love reading the way you can twist and modify virtually anything to your arguments. Your garbled syntax and wacko logic has become some of the most enjoyable stuff that many of us read here.   But it will end. Whether you believe it or not, it will end. Why not try and stop?

Nah.....Can't do it can you?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:31 PM

There you see another testament, Ron, to Roger's problems. When someone addresses someone other than him, it is bothersome. He will rail on, cut and paste, and try to shift the premise. I see that response as a lack of respect for both you and me. But that is OK, because the feeling on my part is mutual.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:32 PM

"Ron - for everyone's sake - will you tell Mick what he wants to hear?"

Sure thing.

Shambles has agreed not to say another word.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:34 PM

LOL.....Good one Ron!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 02:45 PM

Actually Ron, I would be happy if he would just contribute something positive and get off this incessant carping. But that would be like asking him not to breathe. It is not possible.

You should not worry about telling me anything about Roger. I am posting on this thread, simply to give you some background as to why things have gotten this way, and so you get something other than a one-sided view. I am quite certain you are plenty smart enough to draw your own conclusions. Agreement with me is not required, or desired. Guys like Peace disagree with me more than not, but I think the world of him. I know his motives are good. I cannot say the say for this poster.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 03:00 PM

Ron,

Better yet, will you tell Shambles what he wants to hear?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Oct 06 - 03:22 PM

I am not in a position to tell anyone what they WANT to hear. Just like everyone else on this thread, I am giving my opinion and reflections on what I see.

Since this thread has reached War & Peace proportions, let take the soapbox and sum up what I see.

1.) Shambles has some legitimate concerns about his treatment, and he also made some good SUGGESTIONS.

2.) Some of the comments made against Shambles are unnecessary. I sincerely suspect that most of the comments would not be made if you were face to face. If someone said some of those things to my face, they would be paying a visit to the dentist.

3.) Joe (as well as the other moderators)has done an amazing job as a volunteer on this website. Personally, I feel that he has said a few things publicly that perhaps it would have been better to keep to himself. That does not make him a villain, nor is it grounds for dismissal.

4) In my opinion (let me stress that), I feel that Shambles does not possess very good debating skills and he has a difficult time making his point.   He would have been better served to simply outline his gripes, bullet point his suggestions, and avoid responding to all the garbage thrown at him. If he kept more to his course, he might have been more effective.

5.) Life sucks and then you die. People are going to be people, and some thing are beyond changing. It would be nice to have civil discussions and for everyone to take the time to examine another view. It won't always happen. You do not have to like everyone you meet. You are not required to have a good time. You can ignore what you want, respond to what you want, and say what you want - unless instructed by the owners of this site to do something else.   

As long as we are allowed in the pool and given loose guidelines, we can do what we will. Unless there is a sign posted to remind us not to pee, someone will spring a leak.

6.) Some perspective and context is needed.   This is a folk music forum after all. No ones life is in danger. Civil rights are not being violated. Children will not go to bed hungry because of what we do here. Women will not lose the right to vote because of things we type. All this self-righteous anger (and I include myself in this) is not necessary.

So, we go on. I have already apologized to Shambles for statements I made earlier in this discussion. I finally saw what he was trying to say, and I agreed with some of it.    I can't agree with everything, nor can I agree with the importance he places on it.

Life is.