BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 02:14 PM

Here is the statement from the owner.

Since you are with us, you get to help us make the rules. Of late it seems that it is used for non-music related questions, comments, thoughts and stories. It may be like just a light conversation piece, or just killing time, or getting through a bad day, or anything non-academic (if you will). Or, just don't use it. It is what you make it. Don't sweat the rules, cause there aint none.
Max

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 01:27 PM

I just joined a new folk board. Here is the statement from the owner/moderator.

"We're gonna be very loose with the rules and minutia in the early days of this group, adding policy as we proceed and as necessary. We hope that this community can nurture its own culture and rules as we grow (in a collective manner), but as the moderator, I'll reserve the right to step in and nudge things along so as to ensure that the forum remains fun and useful.

For now, postings here MUST contain specific material that is FOLK MUSIC related. Down the road, if the group would like, we can create additional discussion areas for world events, politics, child rearing, religion or anything else ... but, for the time being, I'll be excercising my moderator's priviledges to keep the forum clear of non-FM tangents. We all appreciate your understanding on that front."

Shambles, please note that the moderator can "keep the forum clear of non-FM tangents" and that he will "ensure that the forum remains fun and useful". What chance do you think you would have of posting this crap there? Slim to zilch and slim just left town. By the way, it's members only. I have purposely not given the name of the site because I don't want some of the posters here going there and polluting it with pure and unadulterated crap. And, yes, I have become a member there and would do so here if it became mandatory to post above the line. I see no reason to join Mudcat just to post into this silliness below the line.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 12:52 PM

"You could always just ask him? "

And you Shambles could always just send a PM to Max and ask him about everything that you are repeating again and again. I'm sure that Max can tell you whether he supports the moderators' actions and what he plans for the future of the Mudcat. Why keep going on and on and on in apublic forum when a simple message to the owner will clear everything up.

Perhaps then you will have nothing to complain about. That would probably be bad for you, however, because then you wouldn't have anything to fill your days with. Please get a life...any type of life...find a hobby...read a good book...go drinking with your friends...anything to stop rambling on and on and on and on and on and on.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:40 AM

"That and to accuse me of lying and just about every wrong and to ignore the issue"

What?

You did lie when you presented that quote as representative of Joe's opinions NOW. You can't possibly know them as of NOW. And your next quote had nothing to do with the matter even if 17th September was NOW.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:36 AM

Shambles,

do you know these form letters you usually get when you have made a very specific complaint about a product or about an action of the government?

Dear customer, we are glad you have bought...we always try do our best to satisfy the needs of our customers...we are very sorry that you didn't find our product to meet your expectations (so far, not a single sentence had anything to do with your specific complaint)... we do not understand how the ...function did not operate the way it should when it is switched on following exactly the specifications in the manual. Are you sure you have...

You must know those letters that are full of words that are (mostly) completely irrelevant to the very specific complaint or (very few of them) only remotely related to your letter and do never actually respond to the specific point.

I do not know how your feelings are when reading such a letter but I feel that I am not taken serious at all. I tend to think that the other person has not even bothered to actually read or understand my letter and only reacts to some trigger words ("not happy" requires a sentence including the word "sorry" but without any admission of responsibility). Then some preformatted sentences (see above) are compiled to an (at the surface) extremely polite letter which does not address my question or my complaint.

It is a parody of real communication and I sometimes get so angry that I write a really nasty letter (including some not nice words) back just to see (invariably) that they still manage to be extremely polite without giving anything resembling a response one does expect from a human communicator (contrary to a dumb computer).

I hate these letters and I think most people hate them as well. But I wonder why you insist on writing such posts that never (or rarely) respond to specific questions or complaints. Your posts very often mimic such form letters and are a parody of any real communication.

I agree that you have a heavy work load here being forced to add at least one new thread daily, to repeat all editorial remarks in normal posts as a service to the readers, and to refresh all insults ever made to you once a month lest we might forget them. I also acknowledge that the wish to express simple things in a more elaborate language puts extra demands on your time.

But could you please check before posting whether the preformatted text fragments you use (that's what I hope for you; you wouldn't be so stupid to type the eight words you use to replace the three letters J,O,E each time anew, would you?) to compile a post fit the points they claim to respond to?

If you don't spend that extra effort your posts give the impression of computerised responses that never address the points made. They may even look like a refusal of communication.

Do you remember the Dubliners exchange? I did write that one of your statements was factually in error and how you could proceed if you wanted to contribute to the Dubliners discussion. The adult human way of responding would have been at least to acknowledge the error of fact and to post a thank you for the recommendations how to go on with that discussion.

Or take for instance your preformatted word processor fragment that you seem to like so much, namely that some poster only posts to pass judgement about a fellow poster. Could you at least check whether for instance the word "only" is correct in the specific context. Or, though I admit that is much more difficult to discern, whether judgement is passed about a person (as expressed in a word like "asshole" or passed about one idea proposed by the person. I've seen you using that preformatted word processor fragment in situations in which the judgement you refer to was only a small part of the post or there was no judgement at all of you but only judgement of one statement made by you.

In such situations, posting the usual fragment including the word "only" gives the impression that you have not read or understood what you claim to be responding to. One could even get the impression that you are as much interested in a real conversation as the person compiling the form letter I have used as an example of false conversation at the beginning of my post.

I'm sure you do not lie when posting something which is obviously not true, I'm also sure that I can be sure you are not unable to understand what you read or, that's a bit more difficult I admit, to understand what you write. It is surely only some minor slip or omission which makes your post look like being not an honest attempt at real communication. If you'd give your posts in addition to your heavy workload that extra bit of effort of proofreading, they might look a bit less like those form letters that as we know only aim at ending the communication in a superficially polite way without addressing the issues.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 10:29 AM

With every passing day Shambles is growing more and more incoherent. His postings make very little sense and he cannot justify the points he is trying to make. Anyone who has the time to read through this thread from the first post to the last can easily see that he has a problem and none of the posters are helping him.

In the real world, if Shambles falls off the deep end and does himself or anyone else harm people are going to look at these public postings "for the record" and point to many of you for pushing him over the edge.

Your retorts are not doing anyone good. Shambles does not want to discuss the issue because in his view of the world there are no other options. You can tell him that the sky is blue and he will fight you. It is just his way. Those of you who continue to post are probably suffering the same issues that he has. Most people can judge that his disagreement with his treatment and the way this site operates is really based on minor issues and out-of-context readings of other posts. His grandious comparisons to Animal Farm shows that he is living in a fantasy world and fancies himself to be some sort of messiah.

Walk away from this thread for your own good! The cheap thrills that all of you get by posting and arguing with him will only cause greater harm.

It would be in the best interests of the owners of this site to block all posts and delete this thread before some real harm is done.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 07:48 AM

That was actually quite a long time ago. He's still around which is evidence that he has changed his mind. I suppose I could accuse you of lying when you use the word "now" but I wouldn't want to judge your worth.

You wouldn't? It appears that is only what you do post here to do. That and to accuse me of lying and just about every wrong and to ignore the issue?

But - just for the record. the current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team had not changed his mind on the 17th September. He may well have done now - but as he as yet to inform our forum of any change of mind - perhaps we can safely assume that he has not changed his mind - or his views of our forum expressed in his for the record statement?

Subject: RE: Please Delete Spam
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17-Sep-06 - 03:21 AM

Sorry, but I can't sift out all the Guest posts from the others, without messing with a thread more than I feel comfortable doing. I agree that the conspiracy-theory posts add nothing to the thread, and tend to stifle real discussion. guess that's a good reason for blocking Guest posts in the non-music section.
-Joe Offer-

You could always just ask him?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: JennyO
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 06:22 AM

Shambles, you DO realise my quotes don't come free. That one will cost you $5, thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 05:52 AM

"current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team who now informs our forum"

That was actually quite a long time ago. He's still around which is evidence that he has changed his mind. I suppose I could accuse you of lying when you use the word "now" but I wouldn't want to judge your worth.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 05 Nov 06 - 04:24 AM

To Shambles, I would say - please stop, unless you've anything new to say - but if you have, ask to close this and start an dnew one

If another can be started - what would closing this thread or indeed the closing of any thread achieve?

Why cannot all threads remain open, once they fall off the bottom of the index - as they once did?

Why would you think that my asking for this thread to be closed would be agreed to - when so little else of what I ask for is seen to be agreed to?

if you look back - you will see that this thread has already been closed once. As it was re-opened at my request and I now struggle to post my views anywhere but in this thread - even if such a request were to be granted to a thread's originator - it is highly unlikely that I would be making such a request.

And anyway - it has yet to be established if a thread's originator has much sway in such matters. For the usual double standard is seen to apply here also.

Once a thread is started - its originator can make such request - and if it suits them and our 'moderators' wish to close it - they will ingore any wishes of any other contributor to that thread and subject the thread to imposed closure.

If it does not suit them and our 'moderators' do not wish to close it - they will inform our forum that threads are a joint effort and the originator's wishes have no merit.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 04 Nov 06 - 02:48 AM

Surely there are better things to do with it?

If we are already seen to intentionally limit the things we do with our forum and it is proposed that we intentionally limit these things even further - should we be surprised if this is exactly what we are seen to be doing?

Are you suggesting that we should make some sort of pretence that we are doing something other than intentionally limiting the things we do with our forum?

After all, it was the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team who now informs our forum, in a for the record public statement, 'that Mudcat is no longer a pleasant place to goof off etc' - but takes no responsibilty for it.

Do you agree with this and his proposed solutions - which are yet further limitations?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 08:13 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Washing snotty handkerchifs
From: JennyO - PM
Date: 23 Sep 06 - 03:17 AM

It always amazes me, the people who come onto threads where the subject can be very clearly seen without opening them, just to read them and criticise us poor little plebs for wasting our lives on them. Obviously they don't mind wasting THEIR lives to do that.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Blowzabella
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 07:26 PM

If I were your mother, I would knock all of your heads together! You all need to take a long hard look at yourselves and imagine what this thread looks like to someone viewing the site for the first time. This is probably the one that attracts you to look at - Does it look as if this site is populated by intersting people who want to talk about music???

No.

To Shambles, I would say - please stop, unless you've anything new to say - but if you have, ask to close this and start an dnew one

To everyone else - I would say, please stop this

It is now making the whole forum look ridiculous. It's not big, it's certainly not clever or witty...what is it meant to achieve??? Is it just the Mudcat version of pitch and toss? A way to while away time? Surely there are better things to do with it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 01:24 PM

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-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wesley S
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 01:13 PM

Moderation n. 1 - The quality of being moderate; restraint; avoidence of extremes; temperance. 2. The act of moderating. 3. Without excess; temperately.

The Random House College Dictionary.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 01:08 PM

You have a very warped sense of values if you think that you could possibly compare Mudcat to Animal Farm.   Put your life in perspective!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 01:04 PM

It had come to his knowledge, he said, that a foolish and wicked rumour had been circulated at the time of Boxer's removal. Some of the animals had noticed that the van which took Boxer away was marked "Horse Slaughterer," and had actually jumped to the conclusion that Boxer was being sent to the knacker's. It was almost unbelievable, said Squealer, that any animal could be so stupid.

Surely, he cried indignantly, whisking his tail and skipping from side to side, surely they knew their beloved Leader, Comrade Napoleon, better than that? But the explanation was really very simple. The van had previously been the property of the knacker, and had been bought by the veterinary surgeon, who had not yet painted the old name out. That was how the mistake had arisen.

The animals were enormously relieved to hear this. And when Squealer went on to give further graphic details of Boxer's death-bed, the admirable care he had received, and the expensive medicines for which Napoleon had paid without a thought as to the cost, their last doubts disappeared and the sorrow that they felt for their comrade's death was tempered by the thought that at least he had died happy.

Napoleon himself appeared at the meeting on the following Sunday morning and pronounced a short oration in Boxer's honour. It had not been possible, he said, to bring back their lamented comrade's remains for interment on the farm, but he had ordered a large wreath to be made from the laurels in the farmhouse garden and sent down to be placed on Boxer's grave.

And in a few days' time the pigs intended to hold a memorial banquet in Boxer's honour. Napoleon ended his speech with a reminder of Boxer's two favourite maxims, "I will work harder" and "Comrade Napoleon is always right"-maxims, he said, which every animal would do well to adopt as his own.

From George Orwell's Animal Farm

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 12:51 PM

Shamby Pamby, on any other bard as our Guest states, this would have been an acceptable practice of moderation because off topic and clearly crappola threads are just zapped....period. You may find that becomes more (and not less) common around here in the future. What you also fail to see for some reason is that you too will be around here less in the future unless you stop these attacks on Max, his site, his team.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 10:36 AM

Somebody wipe the dribble off his chin, and mop the flecks of foam off the walls of his padded cell please.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 10:13 AM

All of your posts in this thread would be deleted because you are attacking the internet board, the moderators and the owner. In most communities you would be banned from posting anything whatsoever. No other place would even give you one thread to bellyache in like Max does. You really have it good here.

And of course none of your posts would even appear on such sites - if you were not prepared to become a member of them. Unless of course you are a member of this one - who chooses for some reason to post here anonymously?

And in which case you (unlike others guest posters who post here but who are not members) would have nothing to fear from the changed proposed here to exclude them from posting here, made by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team in his (for the record) statement and whick would explain why you appear to support such a radical change.

Like others here - you continue to defend the principle of 'moderation' whilst ignoring the reality of what is actually happening in practice. Which is the obvious abuse of the principle of 'moderation' you defend.

Rather than ignore it - can you please address and defend (if you will) that - not for the first time - the two entire threads which were 'silently deleted' by some anonyous fellow posters when there were no grounds to and when no one but the 'moderator' concerned was aware of this action? Do you judge this to be an acceptable practical example of the principle of 'moderation'?

Or an abuse of it?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 10:01 AM

It's not important Shambles. Your constant harping has made your complaints void.   You are like the drooling village idiot who rants and raves about something or other on a street corner.   People pass by without noticing, or they stop and poke you with a stick. Whether you are right or wrong becomes a secondary story.   You do not matter to anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 09:22 AM

It is pretty obvious from the example that you posted that nobody cares. Autolycus was just asking a question. He did not seem overly upset.

"Again IF I'm right, all that's required is to post sensibly (?!),interestingly (?!), vaguely to the point, without pointless abuse, or libel."

In answer to the above, this poster and our forum was given the following assurance by the current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team. Which they and our forum may well have taken some comfort from.

No, nothing you've posted has been deleted. It takes quite a bit to warrant deletion - direct attacks on people, racism, stalking, or frequent multiple posts of the same messages.
-Joe Offer-

The fact remains that if, very shortly after reading this assurance - this poster had contributed anything at all to the following thread Winona Ryder's birthday thread(s) - their posts, along with all others would have been 'silently deleted' without the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team even being aware that such action had been imposed.

I have seen nothing since this latest incident that reassures me that any action is being taken to prevent this from happening yet again.

Nor any evidence that our 'moderators' will now take any more notice of any so-called and varying 'critera' laid down by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - than our forum should take of any public assurance given by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team.

Who may well be trying to be fair - but is now plainly not seen to have any control over the actions of his team - who are seen to openly ignore his assurances and critera. And more importantly - there is no indication given to our forum of any responsibility being taken or that anything will change as a result....................

The current Chief of the Mudcat Editing teams seems to expect to be shown gratitude by our forum for being seen to not only be unaware of the actions of his anonymous team - let alone in control of their actions.

I suggest that the posters to our forum are the important ones and that their contributions deserve to be seen to be better respected and protected than they currently are.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 08:46 AM

The only thing that our moderators owe to the posters is to do as good a job as possible in editing out any posts that are not deemed appropriate, for any reason, to the betterment of the majority of the posters. This is the way that it is done on every internet board that I am part of. I'm sure that you belong to other internet communities. You have to know deep down that Mudcat is a lot more lenient then most others. Not one board that I subscribe to lists deletions. Posts, and sometimes complete threads, can be deleted because they are not applicable to the theme of the board (our entire BS section would never appear on most boards), they are insulting, they are spam, or for any of a number of other reasons. Never have I seen a reason given for a deletion. All of your posts in this thread would be deleted because you are attacking the internet board, the moderators and the owner. In most communities you would be banned from posting anything whatsoever. No other place would even give you one thread to bellyache in like Max does. You really have it good here.

I certainly don't need you to post any examples of anything. You've done enough. Moderators have only one person to answer to and that is the site owner. Max hasn't replaced them so he thinks they are doing a good job. This board is set up under Max's rules and not Shambles rules. You have a right to ask for something and a right to suggest changes. Obviously what you have asked for and suggested is not what the owner wants to do. Therefore, as a citizen of this community you should accept the owner's decision and shut the hell up.

If others were interested in your suggestions then others would place threads supporting your changes. The fact that most people are happy here and don't want changes means that Mudcat is running the way that Max envisions it. If you want a website to run as Shambles envisions it then start one. See if you can satisfy 100% of the people 100% of the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 03 Nov 06 - 08:07 AM

I don't know of any web site whatsoever that doesn't edit out posts that don't meet those criteria. The moderators owe it to the posters to make sure that decorum is maintained and that the website doesn't turn into a Wild West Show.

YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING!!! That is the usual case with you. You are great at asking questions but you never seem to answer any.

What has been proved and clearly demonstrated - yet again - is that poster's have no protection when their contributions in entire threads, are anonymously and routinely 'silently deleted' when these are seen NOT to meet any of the (ever varying) criteria.

And that it is the example set by our 'moderators' who indulge and encourge what you describe as a 'Wild West Show'.

Do you really want me to post some more examples of our 'moderators' methods of what you describe as maintaining 'decorum'? Or are you just happy to post your opinion despite their being no evidence to support it?

What harm would their be in our 'moderators' at least being seen be required to indicate in an editing comment, where they have judge any form of editing to be necessary and for editing comments to be limited to only where some form of imposition has taken place?

Do not our 'moderators' owe this to the posters also?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 04:41 PM

Hey Shambles,

I may not be as good at editing other people's postings as you are but here are some comments that have appeared in this thread this week. Not one single one backs up anything that you have to say.Give it a break. No one agrees with you. You are all alone in your feelings about Mudcat. You are the one who is wrong and you are the one who should go. Stop making things miserable for everyone else. It is you and not the moderators who is making this site not a lot of fun. BEGONE! You are beginning to remind me of King Lear at the end of the play. A totally nonsensical old man who talks and talks but says nothing of value to anyone.

Read what your fellow posters are saying


From: number 6

It has been unanimous amongst us all (and for some time now) that we all feel it should at least be members only posting in the BS. Lets hope we don't have to keep posting these posts in this thread the same time next year.




From: MMario


My stand re: members only posting is both public and in the record. I leave it as an excercise for you to remember what it is - as I have told you before, and quite recently.


From: John 'Giok' MacKenzie

I prefer a Members Only scenario, as it would then be easier to stop spammers, and to exclude those who's interests don't coincide with those of this forum.


From: jacqui.c
Personally, I would welcome a change to members only forum.

Personally, I think they should continue to be involved as much as they wish. I don't think that there is a problem here.

I AGREE WITH YOU RON - I have never had a problem with any of the moderators and, when they have altered my thread titles I have seen the logic in the change.

Personally, I don't feel that there is any problem and Shambles is taking this out of context.

I AGREE WITH YOU RON - Joe does an excellent job, given the work he does on the site as a whole. I, personally, have no beef with what he does.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 02:57 PM

No Shambles,

It is pretty obvious from the example that you posted that nobody cares. Autolycus was just asking a question. He did not seem overly upset.

"Again IF I'm right, all that's required is to post sensibly (?!),interestingly (?!), vaguely to the point, without pointless abuse, or libel."

I don't know of any web site whatsoever that doesn't edit out posts that don't meet those criteria. The moderators owe it to the posters to make sure that decorum is maintained and that the website doesn't turn into a Wild West Show.

YOU HAVE PROVED NOTHING!!! That is the usual case with you. You are great at asking questions but you never seem to answer any.

You are going to have to look a little harder to find a post in this thread that shows anyone thinks the way that you do about the moderators, editing and Max's view of Mudcat (one that you should not be part of much longer).

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 02:47 PM

just worked up the statistics for another fourm I go to. The particular forum, judging by the complaints of the members who want MORE moderation, is very lightly moderated.

But over the past two weeks 5% of the posts have been deleted; 20% of the threads have been moved, edited or closed. No explanations given.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wesley S
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 02:17 PM

1500

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 02:08 PM

When will it sink into you brain that absolutely no one else cares about any of this?

It is pretty obvious from posts like the following to this thread -that they do care.

From: autolycus - PM
Date: 29 Oct 06 - 05:23 PM

Joe:-

I'm trying to be helpful at this point.

Can you tell me if anything I've posted has been edited out?

As far as I can tell, nothing has.

If I'm right about that, there may be something for posters to learn.

Again IF I'm right, all that's required is to post sensibly (?!),interestingly (?!), vaguely to the point, without pointless abuse, or libel.

If that is all that it takes to steer clear of being edited out, then this ginormous , for want of a better word, discussion just might evaporate.

Then they are given totally worthless assurances which they and our forum are expected to accept - like the following.

No, nothing you've posted has been deleted. It takes quite a bit to warrant deletion - direct attacks on people, racism, stalking, or frequent multiple posts of the same messages.
-Joe Offer-

For it is clear from these two instances alone - that in all truth the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team who is giving this assurance - would not even know if some anonymous fellow poster had 'silently deleted' this or any other poster's contributions.

That is rather the point with these 'silent deletions' - no one except the anonymous one who is imposing their judgement (based on criteria of their own) - is aware.

Except possibly the victim - who first has to estabish if it is a software glitch, their dexterity or their memory that is at fault. Or in cases like these two, where all the posts in an entire thread are 'silently deleted' - the victims.

Which is why it has been requested - and not just by me - that all these impositions are recorded in edit comments....

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 01:30 PM

Shambles,

Why do YOU think that no one else is complaining about all of this silly horse poop? When will it sink into you brain that absolutely no one else cares about any of this? Everyone else is pretty much satisfied with the job that the moderators are doing as a whole. Yes there may be a few instances that appear to be unfair but nothing in life works right 100% of the time. In other words, everything that YOU are asking for is a nonissue to almost everyone else. Things don't get changed to please only 1 person when 99.9% of the people ar happy. Why don't you go to another website that will give you greater pleasure if you can find one? Perhaps you'll find that they will toss your butt off of their site if you act as unpolite there as you do here. STOP TELLING EVERYONE WHAT TO DO! IF YOU WON'T FOLLOW MAX'S RULES THEN GO PLAY WITH YOUR OWN FOOTBALL!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 12:32 PM

No, nothing you've posted has been deleted. It takes quite a bit to warrant deletion - direct attacks on people, racism, stalking, or frequent multiple posts of the same messages.
-Joe Offer-

Could any state expect to be shown gratitude for judging and executing (on many occasions) the wrong person?

It may be expected that some responsibility is seen to be taken for these errors.

They may be expected to demonstrate what measures are being taken to ensure that the same errors are not repeated.

On our forum, posters are expected to be grateful to the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team, when the same assurances (like the one above) given in editing comments by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team are seen once again not to be honoured. For it is clear that it takes very little to warrant 'silent deletion' of the wrong contributions - as I have maintained and demonstrated previously.

There is no gratitude to be had - for trying to be 'fair' when the damage has been seen to be done - only blame and responsibilty to be taken for allowing the the damage to once again be done, with this policy of unfair and anonymous 'silent deletion'.

Why cannot every 'moderator' or edit button holder be required to indicate via an editing comment where they judged any form of editing action was necessary and all editing comments be limited to where some form of action has taken place?

I am sure this would ensure that any poster would then know that any non-appearance of their contribution was not due to 'silent deletion'. If they did not see an editing comment to that effect - they would not become paranoid about censorship and could then look for other explanations.

This may also have the effect of limiting these actions and bringing them under the control that is cleary not evident currently.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 10:48 AM

support for the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team's (for the record) solution

A beauty from the long standing chief proponent of the present Mudcat Editing Team's dissolution.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 08:31 AM

"What is expected is that what is wrong is corrected so that it does not keep on being done wrong."

Hey Shambles, These are your own words. Your constant complaining and saying the same thing time afer time is wrong and should definitely be corrected. I guess that means that you should be banned from posting this persistent drivel so the moderators do not allow something to continue being done wrong.

It's time for you to stop...or GO!

By the way, did you notice all of the posts's to Ron's questions a few days ago. Not one single member agreed with you on anything. Everyone said it wouldn't matter if the below the line stupidity was limited to members only. You are irrelevant.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 07:51 AM

Shamby Pamby......Please note that NONE of your current postings have been "invited" by Max. His own last postings regarding yourself have been invitations to LEAVE.......not post. You cannot deny his words and there is NO SPIN you can put on them that has any other meaning except "You too, should bid farewell." Down the road, the choice will be out of your hands. Why continue being such a stupid shit now. Quit slamming Max (and that is indeed who you are slamming) and "perhaps"............

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 07:10 AM

Nobody loves him, everybody hates him.
Think he should go and eat worms!

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 02:12 AM

Any 'moderator' who really expects gratitude - is perhaps not being very realistic.

For if you don't show posters any public respect - should you really be expecting to be shown any?

Does a system that is shown to constantly and unfairly (by its own criteria) judge and delete poster's invited contributons really deserve to expect its victims to be grateful some such treatment?

What is expected is that what is wrong is corrected so that it does not keep on being done wrong. And that posting to demonstate these instances results in this - rather than being accused of not being grateful and being subjected to personal judgements and special posting restrictions. I am I expected to show gratitude to the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team for these also?

I am very grateful to Max for providing our forum. When the efforts of our 'modrators' are seen to be setting an example that is fair, open and proportionate - which can start by lifting the special restritions on my posting - I will be the very first to express my gratitude.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 11:30 PM

Joe, how can you expect gratitude from someone who abuses small animals......and possibly worse?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 11:15 PM

"The whole thing makes our forum look like a poor joke."

Shambles, Your constant repition of this stupidity and harping over every little thing that you don't like even though everyone else disagrees with you makes Max's forum look like a poor joke.

And you still haven't apologized to Ron for jumping on him after he apologized to you. That's certainly not the way to make friends and influence people.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: wysiwyg
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 09:07 PM

Deja Poo-- I think I've smelled this before, and it still smells bad.

Deja Roo-- This kangaroo has jumped past me before.

Deja Shoe-- This argument is still bootless.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 08:57 PM

...and if you expect gratitude from Shambles for trying to be fair, forget about it...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: number 6
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 07:43 PM

"Deja Vu - Remember this one? "

yup .... sure do.

We have all been here before
We have
all been here before
We have all been here before
We
have all been here before

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 06:55 PM

Deja Vu - Remember this one?

- The title of a clearly titled music thread Do you support the Status Quo?
   has been changed without the originator's permission for some reason to In favour of/ Do you support the Status Quo - and has now been relegated to the BS section by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team. He has also seen fit to combine the deleted BS thread with this Music thread.

The following editing comment was inserted into an existing post which did not refresh the thread.

Threads combined. Messages above had been deleted, but I could see no justification for the deletions. Messages below are from a new thread.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: In favour of /Do you support the Status Qu
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 20 Sep 06 - 06:02 AM

The first thread was stupid, but I don't think that constitutes a reason for deleting it. I undeleted the messages from the previous deleted thread and combined them with this one.
But I think the "discussion" fits best into the "BS" category, where the original thread was located. I'll admit that's an arbitrary decision, but I had to pick one or the other.
-Joe Offer-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Big Stick's messages were deleted. They were just weird.
-Joe Offer-

These things were only judged as stupid or weird - lucky they were not judged as obnoxious by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team...........

Can our forum be informed if anything sensible is being done to prevent entire threads from again being anonymously deleted for no reason?

Surely if all of our 'moderators' were required to always provide an editing comment when they judge and imposed this judgement in any form of editing action - this may avoid this happening again? Avoid the need for posters to hunt around trying to establish the fate of their contributions and avoid the need for threads to be restored?

The whole thing makes our forum look like a poor joke.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: The Shambles
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 06:02 PM

OK, so I'm sure that somebody will want to know what are our criteria for deletion. Here's what was posted in the Help Forum:

Perhaps it is those anonymous ones who are supposed to be imposing this criteria who should first be informed what it is?


The following editing comment was inserted into the thread that was originally about Winona Ryder's birthday and which we are now informed was should not have been deleted.

Multiple threads combined, and the first thread was undeleted because I could see no reason for deletion.

Please remember that this is a thread about Winona Ryder, not about Mudcat Editing Policy.
That's it. The End. Finis. Schluss.
No further discussion of anything but Winona Ryder will be permitted in this thread.
-Joe Offer-

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps posters can be similarly warned to - please remember that this IS a thread about closed threads and deleted posts i.e. Mudcat Editing Policy.

But due to our now resident double standard, personal judgements, spam and the discussion of anything other than this thread's subject is seen to be activly encouraged here by our 'moderators'.

Subjects so far include jokes, recipes and we now seem to be encouraged to dicuss beer drinking....I would start a thread with beer drinking as its clearly titled subject to enable that discussion - but I suspect it would be deleted or closed.

The last edit comment inserted in this thread was the following:

No, nothing you've posted has been deleted. It takes quite a bit to warrant deletion - direct attacks on people, racism, stalking, or frequent multiple posts of the same messages.
-Joe Offer-

In the light of the entire thread that was recently 'silently deleted' but was then not judged to meet the required criteria - perhaps this editing comment needs correcting? As in all truth it appears to take very little to warrant deletion. All it takes is some anonymous fellow poster with an itchy finger on their edit button.

As this is by no means the first time this has happened – perhaps our forum can now be assured that steps will be taken to ensure that it is the last time?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 05:16 PM

No...

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 04:44 PM

Well, you don't wanna' be drinkin' beer out of it...........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 04:40 PM

Is the rubber hose what they used on me in my colonoscopy yesterday?
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: catspaw49
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 04:37 PM

Good question Mario. Does God have bruised dogs? Or Billy Graham? Or the Pope?   Did Bishop Sheen? Or Oral Roberts?

Have to check on each for beer brand and bruised dogs.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: MMario
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 04:29 PM

if the beer is the nectar of the gods, does it then incite religious violence?

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 04:19 PM

No argument there, Joe. A very nice brew indeed. You should try Otter Creek sometime if you can get it out there. It's brewed in Vermont, but the brewmaster used to live here in Maryland.

Subject: RE: BS: Closed threads & deleted posts.
From: jeffp
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 04:18 PM

The rubber hose works pretty well, doesn't it?