BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 01:10 PM

"What it boils down to is that despite what is still politely requested - the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team simply does not WANT to do it. Good enough?" Shambles

Yep. That's good enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 12:35 PM

Too afraid to answer Shambles?

If setting a bad example isn't working, why do you continue to do it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Sorcha
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:48 AM

If you'd all just ignore him and let Joe deal with it........he's just another troll.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:21 AM

You judge

Here we go again. You want us to judge but call us judgemental when judgements do not agree with yours.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:12 AM

I think that a post should be marked to give a continuity
path if you know what I mean. If it isn't possible then fair enough.
Fieldvole

The only way around that is to post an explanatory remark in the message previous to the deleted one, and it gets complicated.
-Joe Offer-

So what is requested IS currently possible.

And what exactly gets complicated is not explained. But the reason why the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team does not want to do as requested - is as follows.

That being said, I DO insert editorial comments where there is a good reason to - but I don't often see a good reason when it's just deleting nastygrams from BS threads. It's just too tedious a process for the benefit it would provide.
Joe Offer

The main benefit it would provide is to a poster not knowing where their contribution had gone. They would then know if it had or had not been deleted.

Secondly, our forum would be able to see the true nature and current level of imposed censorship. They could then judge the judgement made in their name and be able to express an informed opinion on its proportionality - for the first time..........   

Frankly I do not now care how tedious the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team would find this - as this not a concern that should be very high on the list of concerns for our forum. There may be others willing to take his place - who may not judge that finding something tedious was
good enough reason to refuse a simple and basic request, such as this one...........

What all this boils down to is that: The current Chief of the Mudcat cat Editing Team can be seen to set the example of posting abusive personal judgements, call posters offensive names and incite others to follow suit. That he can be seen to place assurances in editing comments that he does not honour, impose special posting restrictions on selected individual posters. And insert editing comments where and when he chooses but refuse to do this when requested.

In fact the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team judges that he can do now exactly as he wants to with the contributons of others and despite personalising and blaming the whole issue on one individual - still expects to retain some credibilty and for posters to accept that there is no personal bias on his part in any of these actions.   

What it boils down to is that despite what is still politely requested - the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team simply does not WANT to do it. Good enough?

You judge. And perhaps by the same harsh standards that other posters are expected to subjected to.

Subject: RE: Review: The Dubliners - What's the big deal?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:06 AM

Yes I remember that one:

Im a free porn man of the travelling nation-

one of their best.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jacqui.c
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 11:01 AM

Roger. Your arrogance never ceases to amaze me.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 10:11 AM

You also ask people to judge from your "evidence" and then accuse them of jusdging when they do not find in your favour.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 10:08 AM

There are very few (if any) people I would consider myself qualified to imposed my judgement upon.

You never cease to impose your judgement on the volunteers here. ~It is part of your perpetual abuuse.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 10:00 AM

There are very few (if any) people I would consider myself qualified to imposed my judgement upon.

You may judge that my expectations of those who would feel qualified to impose their judgement on me - are high.

When their actions are shown in any way to bring question to the integrity of all in such positions - I would expect the individuals concerned to accept that they had become a liabilty and remove themselves from any position of privilege and responsibilty.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Alba
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 09:53 AM

Well Joe I will hand it to you, explaination after explaination when none is even required. My Hat is off to you. How many years is it now 7 or 8!! Holy Crap!

I have watched this fiasco unfold for, oh quite a long time now and in my opinion. I think that the anon poster known as Shambles can have a WHOLE thread all to him/herself to whine, moan, talk shite...for whatever and I mean quite literally A whole thread

For myself however, this is without a doubt the final time I will look into this or any other thread of this nature started by the above mentioned poster.
There comes a point where I realise that I am not helping this person, I am only enabling this person and by enabling causing the Administration of this Forum a moderating hassle.

You, Joe, and many of the Admin Volunteers, have supplied the answers to just about every question that has been asked and more. I caught a drift a looooooooooooooooong time ago.

So it's TaTa from Alba to "Closed Threads and Deleted posts"
Which is truly a waste of bandwith and without a doubt a futile waste of precious, creative energy too!

Remember Folks Shambolitice is catching and carries a health warning.....!!!!!!


Roger, all I have to say to you from now on regarding this topic is.. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 09:45 AM

See how it goes, Fieldvole. An explaination for one thing is given so shambles picks on something else, in this case a comment made on 10th of August. We are supposed to forget everything else and carry on with whichever direction he chooses.

Shambles has only one consistancy with all of his requests and arguments and that is to find fault with Joe Offer and to a lesser degree the other volunteers. There is no desire whatsoever for any resolution (except maybe Joe resigns or Max sacks him).

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 09:29 AM

I'm puzzled about your charges of censorship. You constantly stress the importance of your topics - freedom of expression at Mudcat and the Public Entertainment Licensing in the UK - and imply that we are attempting to suppress information on these important topics. Nobody here disagrees with your position on these worthy causes. But no matter how worthy the cause, is it fair to flood us with megamultiples of your opinions, so that the opinions of others are lost in the deluge of your own verbiage?
Joe Offer

The above sounds all very noble but again - we see this concept of what is judged to be fair - being used to justify mean-sprited and selective editing actions that are not in the least bit fair.

Is it 'fair' for the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to be making assurances to our forum in editing comments - that are not honoured and still expect their words and actions to be thought credible?

And we have yet more examples of appeals from the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team, for support from the mob, for what are simply personally motivated judgements. For there is not and there has never been the slightest chance that simply by posting, that the opinions of others are lost is there? But it is a very emotive sounding call for yet more more personally motivated judgements to be made from the 'usual suspects' and sound justified.

When the only sure-fire way to ensure that the opinions of others are lost on our forum - is for our 'moderators' to get excited and subject them to anonymously imposed censorship for the slightest of reasons..... The same loss by this method, does not seem to be much of a concern to (some of) our 'moderators'. I wonder why?

The main concern for all this appears to be to ensure that our forum looks tidy. Are there not more important concerns and other more proprotionate ways to achieve this - without automatic 'silent deletion'?

Actions, they say speak louder than words. So as this is the only thread on the subject that is allowed to be open - it is clear that the subject of freedom of expression at Mudcat (which is further limited by him to the BS section) is not one that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is really very keen to see discussed openly on our forum.

As the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team has also recently closed a long-running thread on the subject of Public Entertainment Licensing in the UK is also clear that tidyness is now thought - by him - to be far the most important. consideration.......Perhaps our forum does not share this view?

---

I am unaware of any such thread that is closed. If such is the case, please direct me to the thread and I will review the action.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 09:29 PM

I'm usually quite open about what we do - but what I say gets lost in the huge volume of the discussion of Mudcat editing policy. The entire discussion centers on one individual who posts the same thing over and over again, ignoring the answers given to his questions.
It's like trying to have a reasonable, adult conversation in the presence of a child who's having a tantrum.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 09:20 PM

Fieldvole, as far as I know, this marking the threads one is a recent one in the years this business has been running.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Fieldvole
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 09:15 PM

As I said Joe, fair enough, that explanation covers it admirably.
If it had been explained like that in the beginning...well maybe
these threads wouldn't have come to this.

Thanks

Fieldvole

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,fieldvole
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 09:10 PM

Thanks for that Joe, I cross posted with you there, I apologise for that.
I/we do appreciated what you do for us! I realise that you spend a great deal of (unpaid) time deleting the stuff that none of us wants
to see and am very gratefull for that, but as I said, if it is at all
possible I think that a post should be marked to give a continuity
path if you know what I mean. If it isn't possible then fair enough.

Fieldvole

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 09:07 PM

Fieldvole, the way this forum is set up, it takes a lot of work to mark a deleted post, and it destroys our record of the post that was deleted. Max, Jeff, and I review those deletions to ensure that they are justified.
The only way around that is to post an explanatory remark in the message previous to the deleted one, and it gets complicated.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,FIELDVOLE
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 08:59 PM

Jon.

Yes, point very much taken, as I said, my thoughts were written when
the first thread was only about a third of what it ended up as.

I do see your POV and know that this is how it COULD end up, but
on the other hand.....maybe not.

Incidentally I have been on another site this evening where I came
upon a post simply marked "deleted", looked good to me, and no, I don't know how much it would take to mark a deleted post, but if you are going to the trouble of deleting it it wouldn't be too much trouble to just replace the text. maybe I'm wrong in which case I
apologise.

I must admit that it still makes sense to me to mark a deleted post.

Best wishes

Fieldvole

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 08:55 PM

OK, Fieldvole, I'll tell you why there are no markers for deleted posts.

When we delete problem posts, we're usually dealing with people posting large quantities of problem messages. For many months, I spent an hour a night reading every single message Martin Gibson posted, deleting every one that had even a hint of combativeness. I read them off a list of messages from Martin's IP - I just don't have time to read them in context. If they need deletion, I delete them by clicking the "delete" button - I don't have the time to go to the thread and see if people have responded and if the missing message is going to cause a problem.

We have other situations where we get a troll who will come in and post a dozen messages and then leave. I handle those the same way. I work off a list of messages from the IP, read them, and decide.
Another thing - if I delete a message, it stays on a record I can see, but it's not visible to other Mudcatters - there's no way to put a marker in to document the deletion, unless I go to the previous message and add a comment.

That being said, I DO insert editorial comments where there is a good reason to - but I don't often see a good reason when it's just deleting nastygrams from BS threads. It's just too tedious a process for the benefit it would provide.

People make far too much a deal of this deletion stuff. Most of we delete is obviously suitable for deletion - leering sexual comments, overt racism, crude and repeated name-calling, outright gibberish, repeated messages, and non-music advertising/Spam. The people who post this stuff know darn well that their stuff will be deleted - they post lots of this stuff. Most Mudcatters never have a message deleted - and if they do, they're usually contacted and given a private explanation. But for the repeat offenders who post large quantities of objectionable messages, it's just not worth the effort.

And yes, there's another reason for not posting explanations of deletions - if we delete something, we don't want to bother arguing about it. We have our own internal system of review of editorial actions, and it's a pretty good system. Sometimes, we're not at liberty to publicly discuss the reason for a deletion. Most Mudcatters trust us to do an honest job, but there are a very few who make a lot of noise about a lot of nothing. They say that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, but we're not here to serve those few "wheels" that do nothing but squeak.

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: GUEST,Jon
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 08:35 PM

"Why all the hoo-ha for a simple request? It's not difficult to do."

2)You are not doing it...you have NO idea what it would take to both follow & edit and sort and explain.

Well I know what is would mean.

"This post was marked deleted as spam but are we to accept the word the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team that it was spam or might it have been deleted for some other reason? And how do we know who deleted it? Perhaps one of our unknown anonymous volunteer posters who consider themselves qualified to judge us on our made a mistake, or...."

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 08:33 PM

If setting a bad example isn't working, why do you continue to do it Shambles?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 08:21 PM

"if all that he wants is a marker on a deleted post...WHY NOT?..."
1) That's NOT all he wants. His list of wishes is unending.

"Why all the hoo-ha for a simple request? It's not difficult to do."

2)You are not doing it...you have NO idea what it would take to both follow & edit and sort and explain.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,FIELDVOLE
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 08:13 PM

Shambles.

Unfortunately I would say give it up, you aren't going to get through
to this lot here! Even if you are correct, or it is a good idea.

I do think we should at least have a marker of some description on
a deleted post so that the thread has continuity, it's hard enough
at times to read a thread given that the posts are quite often out of
chronological order these days. And why not anyway?


NOTE!!!! THE SECTION BELOW WAS WRITTEN BY ME BEFORE THE FIRST TWO
          THREADS WERE CLOSED, I DECIDED NOT TO POST IT AT THE
          TIME, BUT **** IT. YOU MAY AS WELL HAVE MY $1 AS WELL.

Snip.........................................................

When I first arrived here, (probably whilst looking for lyrics as a
lot of us do), I was so pleased that I had found you all, it was my
kind of place! And, as I have said before on other threads,
thank you ever so much to Max, Joe and the other people who run
the 'Cat, and the great people who post here with all their opinions
and knowledge.

At that time, the way I saw it was that the threads were pretty
much wide open, people said more or less what they thought and
gave their opinions freely.......nearly anything went.

It had a good atmosphere, the trolls and others were there, but the
main point was IF YOU DIDN'T LIKE THE THREADS, YOU DIDN'T READ THEM!
It was MY choice, to do so or not. I would open a thread, read a
few posts, then decide whether I wanted to read on or not.
I assumed at the time that the mod's were taking care of the real
crap and spam that came on to the board.

THEN THE WHINGERS AND WAILERS, MOANERS AND PC PEOPLE ARRIVED!!!!

Slowly it started......

I didn't like what you said about......

I don't like the comment xxxx made, can we have it deleted.....

This thread should be below the line, (this being the second post in
a thread started by a nice guest asking for help, by the way).

You mispelled this word.

Etc, Etc, Etc. Until you got used to opening a thread
and finding a good discussion peppered with posts objecting to this
that and the other or someone beefing about what someone else had said,
and in the process forcing the moderators to take actions that they
possibly might not have done.

And slowly all the good posters drifted off to lurk, and the 'Cat
became what it is today.

I agree with The Shambles that I too have read through threads only
to come upon a post which is objecting to an earlier (DATED) post,
I go back up the thread to find out what they have been talking about,
only to find nothing, I go up and down again, nothing again, I carry on
but feel a bit annoyed that I don't know what had been going on, even
if it was bad or flaming. if a "deleted" message had been left I would
not have looked further and assumed that the post was so bad that
the moderators felt that they had to protect me from it.

I remind myself. I AM AN ADULT, I *CAN* MAKE UP MY OWN MIND.

The same applies to threads. I have gone back to look for threads,
refreshed on three days, not there. Refresh on seven days, not there!
Refresh on fourteen and above days, not there! But nothing to say
that xyz thread has been deleted.

I really don't see why a simple "Post deleted" or "Thread xyz deleted"
cannot be put in it's place. No reasons given if you don't want.

If the people who keep objecting to things keep it up then the board
will continue to deteriate. If you don't like something, don't read it!
If you have read it and didn't like it, skip past it to the rest of the thread!
And if you don't like the rest of the thread....DON'T READ IT!!!

LEAVE THE MODERATORS TO DO THEIR JOB:

BUT......I repeat. I AM AN ADULT, I *CAN* MAKE UP MY OWN MIND.

We are mostly adults here, we can make up our own minds. thank you.
And please remember, I like the music that you don't....YOU like the
music that I don't. And the same applies to the threads.

I personaly think that the threads like "Are hamsters rubbish".......
"Are turtles rubbish"....... and all the "clone" threads should be
deleted. BUT I WOULD NEVER SAY SO, because it is not my place to
do so....and somebody else may like them. I just don't bother
opening them,

Why are we pandering to the moaners, pedants and PC people anyway?
we didn't seem to before and the board ran well. Now if you post you
have to nit-pick in case you upset someone. I would suggest that
Dave the Gnome, in an earlier post,
(23 July, if it hasn't been deleted without trace) is correct!

I too feel that the board has deteriated over the past few years,
but feel that this has more to do with people moaning about things
instead of just accepting that this is somebody elses POV and passing
over the post. Now they start a war over the item instead of just
ignoring it.

I can understand what you are trying to say Shambles, you tried
another thread on the help section where I was in agreement with
what you were trying to say, and I think that a lot of the time you
make sense, but as I said earlier, you won't get through, you'll
get shouted down by the very people who are making a mess of the board
with their disagreements.

I can now see why Shambles has to keep on posting the same thing
over again in a different way....because he's not getting through,
if all that he wants is a marker on a deleted post...WHY NOT?
Why all the hoo-ha for a simple request? It's not difficult to do.

And if he wants to alert the board to what he suspects is over
enthusiasm on deleting post/threads then surely he should be able to
voice his opinion on that as he would on any other subject.


FINALLY:

WILL ALL THE WHINGERS, WHINERS, MOANERS AND PC PERSONS LEAVE THE
MODERATORS TO DO THEIR JOB AND SEE HOW IT WORKS OUT!

HOPEFULLY THE MODERATORS, IN TURN WILL NOT DELETE REASONABLE POSTS
EVEN IF THEY ARE LONG, COPY/PASTE OR NOT PC.

Snip.............................................................

Best wishes

Fieldvole

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: skipy
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 07:06 PM

&1
Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 06:58 PM

100!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 06:24 PM

In other words you intend to go round in circles again shambles...

Re:

No judgement by one poster of another's worth will change anything. And simply judging any reaction - without judging its cause - is just as futile.

shambles, I've read your comments, Joe Offer's, have my own eperience as a Joe Clone as well as as a poster here to go on, etc. The bottom line is how ever I try to look at things, what you say in trying to make "your case" makes no sense.

It points to other things but not what you seem to want to convince others about.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 06:13 PM

If setting a bad example isn't working, why do you continue to do it Shambles?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 06:02 PM

Well shambles, I'm afraid I consider your actions to be the least proportionate but perhaps if you can agree that some things are not really worth getting this excited about, perhaps you can drop things at least for now and give things another chance?

Jon - will how you judge my actions or how I may judge yours be of any real interest to anyone or change anything.

No judgement by one poster of another's worth will change anything. And simply judging any reaction - without judging its cause - is just as futile. But having one's posts censored remains a big deal and something to get excited about. Even if (some of) those currently imposing their judgement seem to have little understanding of this. Tending to only expect to be treated fairly by those they appear to show little fairness to......

Perhaps it is those who feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on the rest of us who perhaps should be considering whether the sort of things that have been getting them excited enough to impose the rather drastic 'silent deletion' on - are really proportionate.

Should posters be able to expect any assurance given by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - especially one given in an editing comment - to be honoured? It is is not honoured - should they expect an explanation why and some form of apology?

Rather than for it to be simply ignored?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 03:24 PM

If setting a bad example isn't working, why do you continue to do it Shambles?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 02:42 PM

Well shambles, I'm afraid I consider your actions to be the least proportionate but perhaps if you can agree that some things are not really worth getting this excited about, perhaps you can drop things at least for now and give things another chance?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 02:04 PM

(On the other hand we could just accept that people do get angry once in a while, etc. and it's really not worth getting over excited about)

Jon- I would agree that there are many things on our forum that are not worth getting excited about.

Sadly others do not appear to share this view now.

They would appear to get exited enough about them - to post only personal judgements of the poster.

Some attempt to justify their anonymous imposition of 'silent deletion', closing of threads and the the recent introduction of special posting restrictions that apply to only one individual poster.

Perhaps the reasons given for all this would indicate are not really things to get excited about and the reaction is not really proportionate?

Subject: RE: Review: National Folk Festival, Canberra, 2006
From: GUEST,Cartoon Porn
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 01:34 PM

Hi! Cartoon Porn presents the new Cartoon Porn Free Site. Visit our free cartoon porn site - http://cartoon-porn-blog.blogspot.com , to gain GB's of hot Cartoon Porn for free. [url="http://cartoon-porn-blog.blogspot.com"]Cartoon Porn[/url]. Your [url]http://cartoon-porn-blog.blogspot.com[/url] Site.

Have a great Day! Visit my site - Xanax and Porn

Good Luck!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 11:29 AM

However - it is the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing who has set the example that the posting of such things is acceptable and who attempts to minimise this and provides many excuses and justifications - rather than ever simply provide an apology and not doing it.....

Perhaps Jon - this will prompt him to apologise to me for calling me a bufoon? Perhaps you could ask him to? As you are fully aware - my concern is NOT with the nature of particular name that I am being called - but the big issue is with who is doing the name-calling and setting the example that this is acceptable posting behaviour.

OK, shambles, I have looked into this business of calling people a baboon and at one other eample you quoted at me. I find you have recently supplied:

Subject: RE: Mudcat, Please organise these threads!
From: Max
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 04:01 PM

GUEST,Jon is right, there are many differing opinions here at the Mudcat. For instance, Jon's opinion is that his site is a "rival" to Mudcat. My opinion is that Jon is flattering himself with such status, and that he's an asshole.

Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 23 Apr 06 - 01:35 AM

Why should anybody bother with you, Roger? You're just a self-centered, puffed-up buffoon who has made a mockery out of himself. I wish it were otherwise, but you're really a sad case.
-Joe Offer-

From that, it seems clear to me that Joe's calling you a buffon comes sometime after Max calling me an asshole.

As a result, I will consider asking Joe but only if you ask Max to apologise, not to me, but to Joe Offer and all of his volunteers for setting them such a poor example for them to follow. I mean if the boss does that, how can you expect Joe to behave any better?

















(On the other hand we could just accept that people do get angry once in a while, etc. and it's really not worth getting over excited about)

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 11:21 AM

OK, Roger - I accept that. Disagree but at least accept your reasoning. Thanks for taking the time to explain. I must say that I think you are fighting a lost cause but if that is your wish who am I to stop you.

Good luck.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 11:02 AM

We all know by now that your issue is with both the poster and the policy. Why continue the silly naming convention?

When the assumption is made that 'we all know by now' is made - you then get the accusations - from the usual pedantic but noisy few, who seem to think their purpose in life is to judge and mind everyone else's business.

This is the case here - as it was with the PELs. But with a floating 'readership' everyone does not know - it is the same with TV news programmes. If you watch the morning news from 6 to 9 you will find it irritating to have to watch the same items again and again. But you do accept the reasons for this.

It is the same here. If by informing a new poster, this irritates the regulars - one hope that they will accept the reasons. And as threads on this subject are so readily closed - an attempt to include all the information has to be made.

If the other threads were not closed and we were allowed to have threads on different aspects of the same subject - accusations of duplication would be less of an issue. For it is only repetition to those who have been informed (and who can switch-off). The same thing will be 'news' to those who have not.

[What is folk music?]

Some new posters assume that what they of our forum now - is the way it has always been. Some assume that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is the site's owner. Some still assume that there is no censorship or anonymous censors.

Often it appears that this is the impression that the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team would quite like new posters to our forum to assume.......

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Sttaw Legend
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 10:41 AM

Moving swiftly on A Musical Interlude

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 10:30 AM

Warning: disapearing messages
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some might reasonably think a pesron who makes such a big issue over being called a buffon yet considers himself quite free to call someone a foolish, pedantic and judgemental dick-head... is practicing the sort of double standard one would expect from a hypocritical baboon.
Jon
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm puzzled about your accusations of "abuse" - as far as I can see, all I've done is to express exasperation and disagreement with your constant repetition of the same thing. Is that it - are exasperation and disagreement "abuse"?
Joe Offer

Yes you are perfect correct Jon. I apologise unreservedly to jeffp and our forum, if it looked as I was calling him a foolish, pedantic and judgemental dick-head.

However - it is the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing who has set the example that the posting of such things is acceptable and who attempts to minimise this and provides many excuses and justifications - rather than ever simply provide an apology and not doing it.....

Perhaps Jon - this will prompt him to apologise to me for calling me a bufoon? Perhaps you could ask him to? As you are fully aware - my concern is NOT with the nature of particular name that I am being called - but the big issue is with who is doing the name-calling and setting the example that this is acceptable posting behaviour.


You may have missed the following editing commemt as it was inserted into an exsisting post and did not refresh the thread. This was inserted into my post - despite my request that this does not happen without my permission.

I use editing comments to furnish direct, factual answers to a question about Mudcat policy and practice that is posed in that particular message. I do my best to refrain from expressing personal opinion in such comments - my opinions go in separate messages. You will note that I use a line, an indent, and a specific font to separate my comments from the message. I also sign my name to such comments.
-Joe Offer-

If so - any assurance given in an inserted editing comment should perhaps always be honoured?

Perhaps if what appears in a post or any assurance contained in an editing comment is untrue - an apology can be provided.

This thread is to be kept open, so Roger can say whatever it is that he needs to say.
-Joe Offer-

It remains a fact that the perfectly clear assurance given above - was not honoured. As that thread was closed - as has every other thread on the subject (exept this one, so far).

liar: A person who has lied or lies repeatedly.

Many poster here could be accused of being liars - however, most of those do not claim any authority. But many (if they did claim some authority) would not simply post but ignore a situation when they were shown to be liars - and then still feel themselves qualified to impose their judgement on this or similar indiscretions of their fellow posters and still expect their integrity to be unquestioned.


It is now my turn to be puzzled. Why is it, when the suggestion is made that editing comments be provided to indicate where any form of imposed censorship has been judged to be neccesary - this is thought to provide a burden and not accepted? But when I request that editing comments not be inseted into my posts - this does not appear to present a burden at all?

I use editing comments to furnish direct, factual answers to a question about Mudcat policy and practice that is posed in that particular message.

If so - it should logically follow that where a particular message has been deleted - an editing comment to furnish direct, factual answers to a question about Mudcat policy and practice that is posed in that particular message? So why is this double standard supported?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 03:09 PM

If setting a bad example isn't working, why do you continue to do it Shambles?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 02:55 PM

Some might reasonably think a pesron who makes such a big issue over being called a buffon yet considers himself quite free to call someone a foolish, pedantic and judgemental dick-head... is practicing the sort of double standard one would expect from a hypocritical baboon.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 02:50 PM

Sorry Roger - Still doesn't make sense. Joe Offer is both a poster and the current chief etc etc. There is no need at all to differentiate between the two. We all know by now that your issue is with both the poster and the policy. Why continue the silly naming convention?

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying stop the campaign. Even if I disagree it is your right to stand up for what you believe. Your campaign on the new licencing act was very passionate and sucessful in bringing it to everyones attention. It stirred me to action anyway. But when you insist on using politcal terms to refer to a person everyone knows people will just see you as a polititian. Like Kim Howells. Remember him?

Carry on your thread by all means but save yourself a lot of typing and just put Joe.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 02:41 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Do you need to be censored?
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 28 Apr 06 - 12:43 PM

Hmmmm.
Name-calling?
As far as I can recall, the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is generally quite careful not to directly refer to anybody by a name.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Music posts by Guests to be reviewed.(2)
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 23 Apr 06 - 01:35 AM
>snip<
Why should anybody bother with you, Roger? You're just a self-centered, puffed-up buffoon who has made a mockery out of himself. I wish it were otherwise, but you're really a sad case.
-Joe Offer-

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I suggest that even the one such name-calling post like this would be enough to disqualify you from being able to impose judgement upon any other poster for the same offence without being lablelled a hypocrite.....Don't you? And there are more examples.

I'm puzzled about your constant statements about my calling you names - I recall "buffoon," once.

What you can and cannot recall seems to be a little selective.

It is just as well that it is all recorded or I suspect that rather than just trying to minimise and excuse it - you wold be tempted to deny it altogether.

I am glad that you can recall this at least. But you still make no apology for it - can you recall me ever calling you a buffoon?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 01:49 PM

So, Roger, I'm puzzled.

I'm puzzled about your linking to my post in the London Bombs thread - was there something wrong with that? Are you saying you agree with my post in that thread?

I'm puzzled about your constant statements about my calling you names - I recall "buffoon," once.

I'm puzzled about your accusations of "abuse" - as far as I can see, all I've done is to express exasperation and disagreement with your constant repetition of the same thing. Is that it - are exasperation and disagreement "abuse"?

I'm puzzled about you accusations that I have "threatened" you. When has that happened? Is it a "threat" if I say that if you post multiples, I'm going to delete or move some of those multiples - or is that just warning you of ther consequences of your action?

I'm puzzled about your charges of censorship. You constantly stress the importance of your topics - freedom of expression at Mudcat and the Public Entertainment Licensing in the UK - and imply that we are attempting to suppress information on these important topics. Nobody here disagrees with your position on these worthy causes. But no matter how worthy the cause, is it fair to flood us with megamultiples of your opinions, so that the opinions of others are lost in the deluge of your own verbiage?

Oh, and you aren't being "punished" for anything. We don't do that - we just use very moderate measures to control problems before they get out of hand. If there is no evidence that something is getting out of control, we make no attempt to control it, which is why you'll notice that we don't delete every over-length copy-paste or nasty comment. The problem, in your case, is your compulsion to flood the Forum with the same words, over and over again - there is strong evidence of that compulsion in this very thread. Thus far in this one thread, you have copy-pasted my "This thread is closed" comment four times, and my "this thread is to be kept open" comment a number of times.

But just answer the first question - I can't figure that one out at all.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 01:31 PM

Oh, Graham..now you will have him explaining that HE never 'called' anyone that,....that it was merely a hypothetical.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Grab
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 01:27 PM

The Mudcat Cafe - despite many efforts to reduce it to the level of most sites is NOT yet like 'most sites'

Too right. As Jeff says, most sites you'd have been banned years ago. The very fact of your continued posting here is a pretty good clue as to how much slack they'll cut people. Which begs the question - if they're *so* power-mad and *so* determined to keep authority, why do they let you stay? This is the major inconsistency in your story. If they were really the way you've painted them, you'd be out on your ear long since.

How many times should a poster be punished over and over for the same old alledged 'crime'?

"Punished"? Hardly. But prevented from doing it until they are willing to stop doing it? Sure. If Joe removed his restrictions on you today, would you go back to posting like that? My opinion is that you probably would. The opinion of Joe, Jeff and Max was that it was harmful to the forum, and they therefore took action to stop it. Since you don't believe it was harmful to the forum, chances are pretty good that you'd go straight out and do it again.

you are a foolish, pedantic and judgemental dick-head

Way to go with non-judgemental! ;-)

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 01:05 PM

I see you do not deny the spamming.

Rather you resort to childish name-calling.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 01:03 PM

If setting a bad example isn't working, why do you continue to do it Shambles?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 01:00 PM

A prime example of spamming is described here. That alone would get a user suspended or even banned at most sites.

The Mudcat Cafe - despite many efforts to reduce it to the level of most sites is NOT yet like 'most sites' and assuming of course that the one side of the story stated is the truth and you take no account of any other factors and you are a foolish, pedantic and judgemental dick-head.......And if you are - what are you doing here?

There are those 'most sites' where you would be far happier..

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 12:59 PM

Roger...you simply define ABUSE as what THEY do and 'reasonable' as what YOU do. And you have this distorted concept that it's not 'ABUSE' if don't call someone names!

It is abuse of the privilege (not 'right') of posting here to do what you have done for 6-7 years.

As I have noted before, you provoke response from others, then switch the issue to the responses....then to the editing that attempts to contain the complaints about the responses.

This leads to the infinite regress which we find ourselves in. If I were in charge,...........guess......

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 12:51 PM

The PEL threads were too much for the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team

The PEL threads were far too much for me too! The PEL topic was of importance to anyone who cares about live music in the UK but your handling of it was obsessive.