 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 07 Dec 06 - 04:52 AM Good to see the same spinning happy, happy posts still going nowhere to somewhere in this thread!. Yes. Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 06 Dec 06 - 09:52 PM You really are a fuckin' mental case Shamby-Pamby....If you can corrupt what Joe actually said into what you think he said and believe it, here's a bat's ass to you. But you can't sell that tripe to anyone else. What an asshole you are! No one reads things you write and beleives them. Do you act this insanely in real life or is this your outlet for ignorance? And trust me Dickless.....I WOULD say the same things to your face at this point in time you pathetic wimp. Spaw And thanks for keep demonstrating the point so well for me - to our forum. Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship. So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely. -Joe- What I have politely asked is that ALL posters are seen to be treated equally. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Blowzabella Date: 07 Dec 06 - 05:18 AM To be fair, Roger, you have asked many things, including that people only do not seek to control what other people post and keep their noses out of the content of other people's posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 07 Dec 06 - 05:35 AM I think it's very considerate of Roger to cut and paste these posts by Spaw and others. It repeats their criticisms, and thus hopefully, more people will see them and enjoy them. There's also the added benefit that it saves people having to post it again ! Bet you never thought of yourself as a labour saving device before Roger! Giok ¦¬] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 07 Dec 06 - 09:07 AM Are you not a bit puzzled? Some of us certainly seem to be a bit confused. For when it was wrongly assumed that Max had actually stopped me from posting – the following (rather touching) plea to Max, for my re-instatement was made. As Max had not done such a thing - this favoured poster is then not prevented - but is seen to be permitted and encouraged by the Current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team to continue their insulting posting and name-calling on our forum. Seemingly in a futile attempt to drive me away. Only proving that every thing claimed in this threa, about the example set of unfair, inconsistent and personally motivated action and perferentual treatment by (some of) our 'moderators' is perfectly true. Subject: RE: From Max: State of the Union Address From: catspaw49 - PM Date: 12 May 06 - 11:15 AM >snip< My bad of course for messing with Roger. He doesn't see he's been messing with us for years, but.........And to some degree, your bad too. He's used an old quote hundreds of times and I know you'd like to have it that way (no rules) but it doesn't work once a site grows past a certain point which Mudcat has. Responding to Roger earlier might have saved some of this. I dunno'......So how about reinstating Roger and I'll agree to quit messing with him? Just ask him to back-off the campaign against Joe. No more censorship complaints. If he understands that we are all playing under the same rules perhaps......maybe he might........well its worth a shot isn't it? Roger has written some beautiful poetry and songs and staying in that vein, he needs to be a part of this community. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 07 Dec 06 - 09:18 AM Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Joe Offer - PM Date: 11 Aug 06 - 08:55 PM >snip< 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. >snip< |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 06 - 09:24 AM Shambles, How do you expect the moderators to treat you when you constantly post insulting comments about them and criticize the volunteer work that they do? Since they obviously can't ban you for whatever reason like they banned Martin Gibson it is only human nature to fight back by allowing nasty posts about you to remain. Yes, you do get special treatment. But that is only because you are the only one who criticizes, bellyaches and ridicules the people in charge of this web site. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 07 Dec 06 - 09:31 AM "Bollocks Ron. The moderators have gone as far as they can, ie. pretty much limiting this subject to one thread. Unless granted further powers, they can not go further even if they wished to. If you believe otherwise, you are buying into Shambles lies. Max could but we are told that even his powers are limited to the extent that attempting certain actions such as blocking, barring and presumably deleting on sight carry risks until the site is more secure. " Then fine - stop posting! If Shambles is limited to this subject on this thread, all the posts and arguements are keeping it alive. It takes two people to argue, or have a discussion. One person doing it by themselves is simply ranting and raving. For the moderators, anonymous trolls, and people like myself to continuely egg Shambles on simply helps him prove his case and turn Mudcat into a joke. Enough is finally enough. Buh-bye. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 06 - 09:47 AM I heard that one before Ron. You'll be back. Date: 07 Nov 06 - 01:06 PM I've stopped posting to this thread, but I've been observing. I hope others might try it and learn some of the things that I have by simply watching. No one wins, no one is right. I think we will be out of Iraq before this thread ends. Have fun! I'm outta here, again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: wysiwyg Date: 07 Dec 06 - 09:49 AM Shambles, you appear to be referencing this from Joe: full review of Guest posts to the music section before they are released to public view I believe that refers to an approach discussed in the past where a variety of people volunteered to perform that function. I don't recall it as ever having been idea Joe would be asked to see to personally. So in the following post, you mischaracterized reality: Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles - PM Date: 06 Dec 06 - 08:16 PM So, Shambles, where's the part where I said that I was going to "personally vet all the posts to the music forum." I don't recall ever having said that. -Joe Offer- --------------------------------------------------------------------- As has been demonstrated before in this thread - what you claim you can or can't recall informing our forum - tends to be a little selective. --------------------------------------------------------------------- ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 07 Dec 06 - 09:56 AM I don't doubt it "guest" - if that is your real name. Just like the rest of you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 06 - 11:05 AM Ron, Guest is my chosen name here. Same as any other person's Mudcat name. Unlike you, I prefer my real name not to be blasted all across computerland. To me, Guest is as good as Shambles, Catspaw, Blowzabella or any other fake name. I was just pointing out that you keep saying that you won't be back and then you post again. Unlike other who never make that promise. It was not a criticism of you because I do respect you from the posts of yours that I've seen. It was more a comment on the power of Shambles to draw everyone back into his web of silliness and constant complaining. Yes, it would be better if no one else posted here, much the way it was a few months ago when Shambles did his daily solo rant. Unfortunately, there are too many weak people, myself included, who feel that there is a need to respond to the rants and ravings of a looney tooney. I'm certain that you will be among us again soon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 07 Dec 06 - 11:46 AM Guest, if you used a name I could PM you privately. If you used a fake name that would still keep your identity secret and then allow for private conversation that would not waste space here. It would also help to differentiate you from other guests. I am certain I will be back too. I never said never. I never said I won't be back, I just say that I am out of here. When you visit with friends at a pub and you leave for the night, you say goodbye. The conversation is ended and there is nothing more to say. You may be pissed off and vow never to return, but you do. When you return, the tone of the conversation may have changed and you may wish to add something. When there is nothing new to add to the conversation I keep quiet. I have give up on repeating myself. If there is something new to add, then perhaps I will return. I do agree with you, although it is not so much the "power of Shambles" that draws me back, it is the comments made by others that usually piques my interest. I've been reading this tread, but I had no reason to post the same comments over and over. So, I'm outta here.... for now. If this thread simply becomes Shambles talking to himself then there would probably be no reason to return. If the conversation continues to add new facets, maybe I will be back. I certainly can't predict the future. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 07 Dec 06 - 01:10 PM I believe that refers to an approach discussed in the past where a variety of people volunteered to perform that function. I don't recall it as ever having been idea Joe would be asked to see to personally. To the best of my recollection the idea was first suggested by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team. This when it was pointed out to him by quite a few posters - that requiring the BS section to be members only - would negate its function as a buffer/filter/safety-valve for the music section. And would just mean that the music section would be subject to the sort of posting that a few get their knickers twisted about when these appear in the BS section. A rather obvious short-coming of this suggestion but one that seemed to have been overlooked. Sadly there appears to be no shortage of volunteers willing to impose their judgement on the posts of others and feeling themselves in some way qualified to do so. But I am quite sure that should such a change be introduced - the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team would be at the head of the queue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: MMario Date: 07 Dec 06 - 01:17 PM well - your recollection is wrong - since the idea of holding and vetting posts from non members was brought up prior to membership even being instituted on the forum - which predates joe's musing by several years. Again - it is Max's decision. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 07 Dec 06 - 01:22 PM "And would just mean that the music section would be subject to the sort of posting that a few get their knickers twisted about when these appear in the BS section. A rather obvious short-coming of this suggestion but one that seemed to have been overlooked." Not really Roger, all that needs doing then is, all non music posts in the music section: DELETED, easy peasy lemon squeezy as they say! No ifs ands or buts, they don't belong there so they go :o) Nice idea don't you think? Giok |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: autolycus Date: 07 Dec 06 - 06:00 PM Posters seem generally much much more prepared to say what they disagree with, and so much less inclined to say they agree when they agree. Ivor |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: GUEST Date: 07 Dec 06 - 10:49 PM That's because there aren't too many people who agree with our friend Shambles. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Peace Date: 08 Dec 06 - 12:07 AM Here ya go, y'all. FYI . . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 08 Dec 06 - 07:28 AM That's because there aren't too many people who agree with our friend Shambles. The worst effect of differences of opinion being made a contest between personalities - and of our forum being expected to support one individual or another - are the important aspects that, as a result of supporting one individual and villifying another- that posters find themselves compromised into supporting. Even seemingly sensible posters, who in other aspects of their lives would challange double standards - hypocrisy - unfairness - secrecy, open displays of bullying - insulting and abusive behaviour - heavy-handed general and petty pendantry - the encouragement minding of everyone elses's business - needless anonymimity and the introduction of any silly restrictions on the right of people to express their views freely etc - are compromised into being seen to be in support of such things being practiced on our forum. And being practiced in their name and on their behalf........... Seemingly in a desparate attempt to be seen to be seen on the right side (or the winning one with all the weapons) and whatever is said - never to be seen to be in any form of agreement with any view being expressed by another individual being identified (by the winning side) as being the wrong or (losing) side. Posters do not have to be seen to be in any form of agreement with me - to express general support for attempts to ensure that all posters can be seen to be given a fair shake and any 'moderators' can be seen to be protected from any accusation of personally motivated abuse of their position. Nor to accept (and comment on) that this is currently not the position on our forum and to post to suggest how it can be. For that would appear to me to be a win - win situation. I suggest it would be for all posters who claim to support our forum and wish it to thrive and evolve naturally to reflect the views of all of its contributors. Unless you really want our fine forum to be further limited, restricted and changed into the private members club that a few noisy posters already treat it as. And if you do wish for this - then why not be honest about this and go and form such a club? For it does not currently look as if Max is in agreement with the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team's - for the record statement. And about what he sees as the state of our forum and the suggestions contained in this, to further change our forum to better suit his requirements. If Max is intending to make such a change, in answer to this for the record proposal - he is taking a long time about doing so. And of even of informing our forum if this actually is his intention or not. Supporters of this, for the record proposal are posting now to inform our forum that this IS a decision for Max to make. Perhaps rather than trying to force his hand publicly and creating the escalation of this division - it would have been better if they had just left Max to make (or not) what they accept is his decision? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 08 Dec 06 - 08:40 AM Not really Roger, all that needs doing then is, all non music posts in the music section: DELETED, easy peasy lemon squeezy as they say! No ifs ands or buts, they don't belong there so they go :o) Nice idea don't you think? Possibly - if you think that having fellow posters spending their time judging, deleting and inhibiting posting (rather that posting themselves and encouraging others to post) - is ONLY what our forum is now to be all about. And if you really think it is that easy - when all the evidence shows otherwise. Max does not seem to see this - which is why non-music posts are encouraged to be posted from anyone who wishes to post them. And why the BS prefix and the later separate BS section was introduced to keep happy those who did not like seeing even the titles of non-music posts. Any sensible poster would see that as all posters are currently encouraged by our 'moderators' and Snitchers Corner -to complain about what other posters choose to contribute - any further (if well-intentioned) restrictions introduced on BS posting would only create more 'if and buts' and needless judgements for the usual suspects to complain about what was or was not a music post. Our forum is special (and just about remains so) because such nit-picking pedantry about what was or was not on topic - was not encouraged. Those who post (only insults) to say that 9 out of 10 sites they visit would not permit this or that - are simply demonstrating what remains special about our forum and why many of us remain loyal to our forum's (and Max's) original intentions and ideals. If they they really like such places - they are welcome to go to them. They are not welcome (by me at least) to try and make our forum as ordinary as these other sites. But this is crunch time for any poster who does see our forum as a special place and wishes it to remain so - as there seems to be a push to make it ordinary. Is this push for more limitation and restriction on posters, only from the noisy few posters that I think it is? If it is then perhaps it is time for other posters to be equally noisy (but perhaps more civil and logical and less personal about it)? If posting is to be encouraged rather than inhibited for the future of our forum - any further restrictions - badly need to be placed on our 'moderators' (for their benefit also) rather that any more limitations being imposed (by our 'moderators') on posters. For in response to any situation they only seem to evidence 'one-trick'. 'Silent deletion' is not a proportionate response to every situation. And it is also foolish for our 'moderators' to pretend (or ignore) that there will always be a reaction from any poster who is subjected to such drastic action - especially when it is imposed to support one of the now far too many out of an increasing list of petty posting restrictions. This reaction may take an active form - but far more than likely it will be one that will not be seen - such as posters being inhibited - giving up and just going elsewhere. Neither of these reactions being really very disirable. What is being requested is that all imposed editing actions are recorded with editing comments to enable posters to know where their post has been subjected to any form of action. And for all editing comments are limited to where this has occured. This will then enable all posters for the first time - to be able to make an informed opinion and judge whether these actions - undertaken in their name - are in fact proportionate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: catspaw49 Date: 08 Dec 06 - 11:11 AM So just out of curiosity Dipwad, is there some reason you post the same damn thing over and over and over and over ad infinitum? You haven't posted a new argument in months! So......Have you contacted Max? My guess is no. But he reads this. Have you seen him post anything like agreement with you? Do you remember that the last thing Max asked of you was to LEAVE? So is this repetition doing you any good? Tell ya' something else Pamby.....I can't think of another site that would have put up with you and these kind of postings directly attacking the site owner and his admin people, let alone doing it many times over. Why not lay off the vendetta and hang around? Otherwise the day will come when that option will be gone. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: John MacKenzie Date: 08 Dec 06 - 11:38 AM Is this the right room for an argument? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: jeffp Date: 08 Dec 06 - 11:40 AM I told you once. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: MMario Date: 08 Dec 06 - 11:44 AM if you think that having fellow posters spending their time judging, deleting and inhibiting posting (rather that posting themselves and encouraging others to post) - is ONLY what our forum is now to be all about. You realize, don't you, that putting in the word ONLY makes this a whole different statement then if you left it out? And - as has been pointed out to you many times - having fellow anonymous posters fellow posters spending their time judging, deleting and inhibiting posting (to some extent) is common practice over much of the internet; and in fact necessary to prevent sites becoming cluttered with with spam, trolls, flames, etc. All of which is moot - since this is a private site and Max or the people he has delegated responsibility to have the right to delete, edit, move, change, etc anything posted here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 08 Dec 06 - 01:33 PM And - as has been pointed out to you many times - having fellow anonymous posters fellow posters spending their time judging, deleting and inhibiting posting (to some extent) is common practice over much of the internet; and in fact necessary to prevent sites becoming cluttered with with spam, trolls, flames, etc. And has been pointed out many times to you - when it is our 'moderators' and their favoured few posters who are cluttering up our forum with spam, trolls, fames etc - this double standard means they have no credibilty, when it comes to dealing with the very few others who do post such things. And more to the point, very obviously all these ever- increasing restrictions have had no effect in preventing our forum from becoming a place where he feels he cannot goof off and have a good discussion. As the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team judges in his, for the record statement. Sadly it is the many posters on our forum who do not post spam, troll, flame etc - who are most affected and limited by the activities of our 'moderators'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: The Shambles Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:04 PM Well, I used to give you equal treatment, Shambles - but you kept badgering me about that being repressive censorship. So, you got what you asked for. Catspaw can say what he likes about you, until such time as you stop your incessant campaign against the way we do things here. You are not a nice person, Shambles. Do not expect to be treated nicely. -Joe- So if I decide to agree with actions and restrictions being imposed on our forum, that I cannot ever be seen to support - will I too become a 'nice' person (like the example that Catspaw sets)? Will the special restrictions on my posting then be lifted? And as long as I am not seen to disagree with the 'way 'we' do things here' - like Catspaw and a few other favoured posters - will I too be permitted and encouraged to post only personal judgements, insults and be allowed to call other posters names? I strongly suspect that should I (or others) be seen to ever post or respond in kind, anything like those that certain 'moderators' choose to do and which certain favoured posters are seen to be permitted to do - that my posts would not remain on our forum for very long......... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts. From: Cluin Date: 08 Dec 06 - 02:21 PM I gotta admire your stick-to-it-iveness, Shambles. If stubbornness moves mountains, we should all feel the rumble soon. Now, where ya gonna put it? |
